highdesertmesa wrote:
It’s crazy that neither Sigma nor Panasonic have made a rangefinder-style EVF M body. One could almost assume there is an unspoken non-compete regarding M mount bodies in order for them to be part of the L-mount alliance.
I would already be glad if Sigma or Panasonic had a more compact rangefinder styled L-mount body with an EVF...
According to the rumors the Panasonic S9 II might have an EVF... wait and see I guess...
highdesertmesa wrote:
It’s crazy that neither Sigma nor Panasonic have made a rangefinder-style EVF M body. One could almost assume there is an unspoken non-compete regarding M mount bodies in order for them to be part of the L-mount alliance.
Honestly, why wait for the M EV1 arrival? A third-party brand could've brought a Q-style body with an interchangeable M-mount to market a long time ago. Pixii basically proved the concept, except they chose a rangefinder over an EVF. Between Pixii or an independent operating outside a non-compete, someone could definitely deliver a camera like this. The major Japanese players (Nikon, Sony, Canon, Fuji) would never touch it because they're strictly committed to their own native mounts.
Abuttolph wrote:
From what I understand, Leica's manufacturing process is more labor intensive than that of other manufacturers, which adds to the cost.
Kaufman I believe once said something like a Leica and a decent lens should cost 2.5 times the monthly salary of an average German worker.
My understanding is that Leica more or less has always tried to maintain that ratio.
So, less driven by the actual manufacturing cost in my opinion, and more driven by what they believe they can realistically get for a premium camera.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Honestly, why wait for the M EV1 arrival? A third-party brand could've brought a Q-style body with an interchangeable M-mount to market a long time ago. Pixii basically proved the concept, except they chose a rangefinder over an EVF. Between Pixii or an independent operating outside a non-compete, someone could definitely deliver a camera like this. The major Japanese players (Nikon, Sony, Canon, Fuji) would never touch it because they're strictly committed to their own native mounts.
How about a Sigma-Panasonic-Voigtlander M Mount Alliance? Heck, include Pentax since they obviously have nothing else better to do.
pmeheut wrote:
You do not need it indeed. This is just less convenient making it harder to sell such a camera in a competitive market.
6-bit coding is archaic, and if I could buy new Leica lenses without it, I would. I hate how the Leica M11 handles coded versus uncoded lenses when swapping between them. It’s one of the most nonsensical and irritating things Leica has done with the M firmware.
highdesertmesa wrote:
6-bit coding is archaic, and if I could buy new Leica lenses without it, I would. I hate how the Leica M11 handles coded versus uncoded lenses when swapping between them. It’s one of the most nonsensical and irritating things Leica has done with the M firmware.
I agree, the way the current firmware operates is frustrating. But let's be honest...nothing is done by accident, and this behavior is exactly how Leica intended it. Why doesn't the camera default an uncoded lens to "Off" instead of sticking with your previous manual lens selection? Because Leica wants you buying 6-bit coded Leica lenses and avoid this annoyance. If you shoot modern Leica glass, you'll never run into this. If you want to use uncoded lenses, you either have to live with the manual switching or code them yourself. The real headache comes with lenses from Light Lens Lab or older Leica glass where coding (painting the mount) is much harder to implement by the user since the mount is completely flat and won't take custom 6-bit code paint.
I love how the M-D (Typ 262) firmware handles this: it sets lens detection to Auto when a 6-bit code is present, and automatically defaults to Off when it isn't. Simple and effective!
RoamingScott wrote:
I'm not surprised by Sigma/Panny for that exact reason, but...DJI? We need a Chinese stakeholder going for blood and cutting the legs out from Leica to bring them back to earth. Where are the modern-day Bessas?
I wouldn't put my bets on a Chinese made rangefinder camera - instead I would expect a Chinese company to develop a competitor to the EV-1 M which is EVF based. Easier to make and reduced cost compared to a rangefinder - plus with M-mount which has no AF. Very simple and basic MF aids, mediocre EVF compared to latest and newest EVF cameras on the market. Make it for $1K, and count me in.
That was my thinking, I think the interest in OVF rangefinders is insanely niche globally.
retrofocus wrote:
I wouldn't put my bets on a Chinese made rangefinder camera - instead I would expect a Chinese company to develop a competitor to the EV-1 M which is EVF based. Easier to make and reduced cost compared to a rangefinder - plus with M-mount which has no AF. Very simple and basic MF aids, mediocre EVF compared to latest and newest EVF cameras on the market. Make it for $1K, and count me in.
highdesertmesa wrote:
How about a Sigma-Panasonic-Voigtlander M Mount Alliance? Heck, include Pentax since they obviously have nothing else better to do.
Cosina could be interested in making a digital M-mount body (again) but they'd most certainly need a development partner (like they had when they made R-D1 with Epson) as I don't think they have all the necessary SW resources for digital camera development etc. on their own and it might be a risky project financially.
I don't think there's any motivation for Sigma or Panasonic to be involved as long as they are partners with Leica, and they want to sell their own lenses etc. so making and selling an M-body without making lenses for the system etc. would seem like a strange sidestep for either company.
Fred Miranda wrote:
If Leica puts the Q3/SL3 hybrid PDAF sensor in a future M EV2 or M12, a native green-box confirm for fully mechanical M glass is a software choice, not a physics problem.
Fred, you're omitting the second most important chip in the camera, the image processor. The M-series is one generation behind Q3/SL (Maestro III vs IV). That is where manual focus aid acceleration is implemented, and we don't know whether Maestro III is capable of accelerating Nikon-style aids. Firmware alone won't do it.
old-gregg wrote:
Fred, you're omitting the second most important chip in the camera, the image processor. The M-series is one generation behind Q3/SL (Maestro III vs IV). That is where manual focus aid acceleration is implemented, and we don't know whether Maestro III is capable of accelerating Nikon-style aids. Firmware alone won't do it.
Exactly. Which is why Nikon's expeed 7 multiplex demodulator image galactic translator processor makes it possible for the green box.
