Thanks for the earlier comments Malkovic. Looking forward to your Barcelona pics!
Thanks Ryan As to your question on the 75Lux, the lens seems alright, more or less the same size and feel as a 90Cron. The copy I borrowed from Steve was a German copy with the built in hood. It appears well calibrated and I was able to focus wide open fairly easily. BTW congrats on your 90 Summarit. How do you like it so far?
Ron, nice to see you back. Some super pics from your last few sets! Those tank shots are really excellent, I like all of them, hard to pick a favorite. Another masterclass on composition! The NYC street set is also excellent. Love the pic with the couple kissing. Classic shot and I like how you framed the composition!
Joakim, nice catch with the "mini" and the even smaller car! Have you sorted out the banding on your pics?
Gary, nice shots with the M8 and ZM35C.
Dierk, nice use of the 90 Macro Elmar for the still life shots. Excellent examples of what this lens can do. Also great use of the 0.95 for the still life, really nice shot!
Luka, the 75Cron shots you posted earlier seems "neutral" in rendering but the compositions are really superb, especially the set with the picture of the statue and hand. Also like the first two shots from your fog series.
Daniel, excellent shot with the ZM18.
Wozza, I like those ZM 50/1.5 shots you shared. Really nice.
Ajay, congrats on your M9!
Charles, wow, those recent beach shots are stunning! Compositions are really spot on and I really like the pp!!
Najibs, nice set with the kids.
Gregory, nice cloud formation!
------
Sunset over Bar Harbor Lighthouse, Maine. This scene has probably been shot to death by everyone else but it was my first time there 50 Lux ASPH
I just had a realization that I think will mean that there will never be a Leica M with live view. The problem is the full frame sensor and the short register distance. Such a camera would be the perfect platform for alt lenses, and a whole industry of adapters would immediately sprout up, probably decimating Leica lens sales in the process (and causing large price increases on all manual glass of any interest). Sorry to say it, but I don't think Leica would ever add live view to the M, even if it were possible to do so on a CCD sensor.
What it probably also means, however, is that Leica will have to add some other way to get very accurate focus with a higher MP sensor. The current system works up to 90mm, with some effort, but a higher MP sensor might bring that down to 75mm or even 50mm, so something needs to be done here. This is the consolation. Maybe then the 135mm lens will again be useful.
carstenw wrote:
I just had a realization that I think will mean that there will never be a Leica M with live view. The problem is the full frame sensor and the short register distance. Such a camera would be the perfect platform for alt lenses, and a whole industry of adapters would immediately sprout up, probably decimating Leica lens sales in the process (and causing large price increases on all manual glass of any interest). Sorry to say it, but I don't think Leica would ever add live view to the M, even if it were possible to do so on a CCD sensor.
What it probably also means, however, is that Leica will have to add some other way to get very accurate focus with a higher MP sensor. The current system works up to 90mm, with some effort, but a higher MP sensor might bring that down to 75mm or even 50mm, so something needs to be done here. This is the consolation. Maybe then the 135mm lens will again be useful....Show more →
Ehm.. I'm afraid that it doesn't add up for a couple of reasons:
1) Leica is price prohibitive as a general alt lens platform. Few people will shell out $7,000 for a digital body in order to use some odd alt lenses.
2) Nobody would buy a digital M10 if they were limited to live view - i.e no rangefinder coupling. And you can use non-Leica range finder coupled lenses on the M9 already (i.e Zeiss, Voigtländer and a bunch of other in M or screw mount).
3) One of the main reasons to buy a Leica camera is to use Leica lenses.
4) If you've looked at the latest financial report from Leica you'll know that they're not profitable when it comes to lenses. It's the M9 and S2 camera systems that carry them. The reason why Leica lenses are so bloody expensive is because they use very expensive exotic glass and their production line isn't efficient.
denoir wrote:
Ehm.. I'm afraid that it doesn't add up for a couple of reasons:
1) Leica is price prohibitive as a general alt lens platform. Few people will shell out $7,000 for a digital body in order to use some odd alt lenses.
2) Nobody would buy a digital M10 if they were limited to live view - i.e no rangefinder coupling. And you can use non-Leica range finder coupled lenses on the M9 already (i.e Zeiss, Voigtländer and a bunch of other in M or screw mount).
3) One of the main reasons to buy a Leica camera is to use Leica lenses.
These three points don't add up
1) I don't mean that lots of people would buy M10s to use alt glass, although I suppose sales would go up somewhat. I mean that lots of M10 owners would buy less Leica glass, because they could use lenses like the Contax 35/1.4 directly on the M10.
2) I don't mean that there would be live view only, but that there would be live view as well.
3) I know and agree with this point, but that would not stop me wanting to try other glass on an M10 with live view, and if I loved some of that glass, it would make me buy less Leica glass.
4) If you've looked at the latest financial report from Leica you'll know that they're not profitable when it comes to lenses. It's the M9 and S2 camera systems that carry them. The reason why Leica lenses are so bloody expensive is because they use very expensive exotic glass and their production line isn't efficient.
If it is really true that Leica makes no or little money from their lenses, then the financial incentive for holding back live view would not be there, granted. They might still do it for other reasons though.
1 & 2: You can't put on a Contax 35/1.4 if you are not willing to give up the range finder coupling and the optical viewfinder. It's not a realistic choice.
3) Go ahead, there is a huge amount of non-Leica glass already that you can use on an M-mount Leica. Some 50+ years worth of lenses. Non-range finder coupled lenses that you could only use with live view would be much less interesting than the alternatives that already exist.
The most important reason why an M10 may not have a CMOS sensor is logistical - i.e if they can find one and secure a supply. They'll have to redesign the whole electronics package as well. If they're lazy they'll use the S2's Maestro platform which is for CCD use as well...
1+2) I am willing to use live view to be able to use the Contax 35/1.4 on a high-MP FF sensor with no AA filter!
3) I am not a big fan of Voigtländer glass, with the exception of the 12mm, and with the possible exception of the 35/1.2. Zeiss ZM glass I am only mildly curious about. I might get one some day just to see how they are. The Contax 35/1.4 is a lens I would love to try though, but I can't on my Nikon D3, and I am not interested in Canon cameras.
And which Leica lenses do you think a non-range finder coupled huge SLR lens could replace? Do you seriously think somebody won't buy a proper M-mount 35 Lux in order to have the benefit of a big and heavy lens that would not work with the optical viewfinder? And if so, do you think that there can be so many of them to threaten Leica lens sales?
By the way, you probably don't want to use the Contax 35/1.4 on an AA-less sensor. It does show its age and a 5DII is already too much for it - you won't get any benefit for pressing it further.
Anyway, the bottom line is that I think your interest represents a vanishingly small minority among a vanishingly small minority and that it would not in any case affect Leica sales either way. A big SLR lens without rangefinder coupling is simply no substitute for a compact rangefinder lens that you can use with..well, the rangefinder.
denoir wrote:
you probably don't want to use the Contax 35/1.4 on an AA-less sensor. It does show its age and a 5DII is already too much for it - you won't get any benefit for pressing it further.
I'll take your word for this (while keeping in mind that I think you are more of a sharpness fanatic than I am).
A big SLR lens without rangefinder coupling is simply no substitute for a compact rangefinder lens that you can use with..well, the rangefinder.
It depends on use. For someone who wants to do work on a tripod it is fine. For anyone currently using a NEX, it is fine, those cameras with their native lenses also look like that. For street photography or compact travel use, you are right.
I don't know how large the market is for that, but I do not think that Leica would make this move in any case, simply because it opens the door to this. Leica has (always?) considered itself to be primarily an optics company. If they should ever get their lens production line under control, they could again stand to make significant money from lens sales. I hope that I am wrong.
On the other hand, what an awesome camera that would be. I could sell my Nikon and Nikkor AF lenses, and just have a single camera, which could take all my Leica lenses for street and travel, and all my SLR lenses for my other uses. A dream!
carstenw wrote:
I'll take your word for this (while keeping in mind that I think you are more of a sharpness fanatic than I am).
The Contax/Rollei 35/1.4 isn't a lens you'd want to primarily use for landscape photography anyway. IMO there's only one really awesome 35mm for that and it's the 35/2 Biogon. Stopped down it's almost the equal of the 21 Distagon.
No the 35/1.4 is something else - you use it wide open and sharpness isn't really relevant. It's the rendering one cares for - the fantastic sharpness-to-blur transitions in particular.
I'd pay Noctilux prices for a 35 Lux sized version of that lens, but I would not be particularly interested in mounting the SLR version on an M camera with live view. Simply put, handheld photography with live view sucks. It's for tripod based landscape photography that you want that feature and the Contax/Rollei 35/1.4 isn't a lens you'd use for that.
It depends on use. For someone who wants to do work on a tripod it is fine. For anyone currently using a NEX, it is fine, those cameras with their native lenses also look like that. For street photography or compact travel use, you are right.
Yes, but we get back to point 1) again - the price barrier. You might buy a NEX just to play around with alt lenses, but you won't spend $7,000 to do so. The number of people willing to do that would be very small. So the people in question would have to be Leica users that buy an M for what it is. And the percentage of those that would be interested in adapting SLR lenses must be vanishingly small. You have the intersection of two very small sets - Leica users and alt users. That can't be a relevant market segment.
I don't know how large the market is for that, but I do not think that Leica would make this move in any case, simply because it opens the door to this. Leica has (always?) considered itself to be primarily an optics company. If they should ever get their lens production line under control, they could again stand to make significant money from lens sales. I hope that I am wrong.
And they'll keep on losing orders of magnitude more potential buyers to Zeiss and Voigtländer. They opened the door when they made the M mount an open standard.
On the other hand, what an awesome camera that would be. I could sell my Nikon and Nikkor AF lenses, and just have a single camera, which could take all my Leica lenses for street and travel, and all my SLR lenses for my other uses. A dream!
Sure. With live view an M would become bearable to use from a tripod. I'd probably then make a full transition and sell off all my manual focus DSLR lenses.
I think there's a good chance we'll see it. The great thing about Kauffman as CEO is that he understands that Leica does not exist in a vacuum and that hardcore conservatives who think that everything has been going downhill since the M3 are not enough of a market segment to sustain the company.
He, unlike his predecessors that nearly killed the company by making it into an irrelevant curiosity understands that the Leica products must to some degree to be able to compete with what the other camera producers have to offer. From interviews that he has given it seems clear that he is perfectly aware that the current profitability is thanks to new M9 users, not old hardcore Leica loyalists. And most of those new users will go somewhere else as easily as they chose Leica this round.
Leica has to tread carefully to remain unique and distinct while at the same time keeping up with technological development. It is what they have been failing at since the 1970's until recently and it almost killed the company.
Fortunately the current management seems to be aware of it. So I have good hopes for the future technological development of the M line.
Rangefinder focusing has its limits. If M10 would have higher resolution, for critical work, fast apertures, close-ups - LV is very supportive. Plus great EVF.
There are several methods of focusing - shown in Ricoh and recent NEX'es.
Many people use M9 in a way, when traditional focusing is not needed - landscape, architecture, etc.
I treat LV as additional help, support, not replacing a rangefinder. It is more than welcome.
It is only matter of time, when 1st FF EVIL will appear. Sony does consider it, but not under NEX name.
NEX is E mount. E mount is not for FF.
Guys,
Leica strategy has changed. Leica already had FF EVIL prototype. Friend of mine already had it in hands in Solms... Several months ago...
But - they didn't decide to put it into production. For sure - marketing decision.
It was not M rangefinder! It was separate line being considered.
Now - they talk about at least APS-C version... Ehhh... Maybe due to costs. Or they are afraid of M line, I don't know.
And most probably sensor will come from Sony. Like X1.
Why do you think, 2nd generation of NEX'es has microlenses? Why color is to be better? Why they decreased base ISO?
Do you think that in order to compete with Ricoh only?
I doubt... I think during next Photokina we will see Leica APS-H evil with Sony sensor.
And NEX-7 is a trial for that.
NEX3\5 was a trial before NEX-7. A55 was trial before A77. And people paid for Sony learning process.
Of course nothing wrong in that. I am just saying about Sony approach.
LL, nice shot!
Luka, great shot! I agree, it is truly hard to beat the M9 and 50 Lux Asph combo
Robert, excellent set of shots! Love the composition of #1
For the moment, I am really enjoying the IQ from the M9 system, as I learn more about it. Only limiting factor is my own ability. The new NEX 7 system from Sony looks very promising, but I will reserve my judgement and see how the final IQ measures up. Having had the NEX 5 for a backup, it did not prove to be as good as I expected, even though it is a great camera in evolution.
Yes, I do feel Leica will need to evolve and keep progress with the development of a M10 and/or FF Evil to keep their niche market growing. There are obviously growing pains and this may be their most immediate priority.
Hi everyone,
It's finally ready for publication - delay entirely my fault, as I had visitors from out of town for the last week - Here's Luka's amazing interview! Thanks for agreeing to do the interview Luka - I've learnt a lot from you over these past few years - you're an amazing photographer.
50 Lux ASPH
