oceanphysics Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 In the unlikely event Leica lasts long enough to produce such a white elephant, it would certainly be the product that finishes them off forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_shriver Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Ellis, Kodak will make their current top-of-the-line sensors in any array size you want, but they all have the same pixel geometry. There's a lot of work in designing the base cell. It's going to take process improvements to be able to make a smaller base cell without noise problems. I do agree with you in that Leica could certainly have had a 24x36mm sensor from Kodak. But, look at the KAF-10500 data sheet, the light falloff is already very bad in the corners at 1.33X crop, and would have been catastrophic at full-size. Yeah, that 11 megapixel DALSA FTF4027C chip has less light falloff than the Kodak one. But it never mentions microlenses -- if it doesn't have them it might be rather slow. My light level math isn't good enough to figure out how "fast" that chip is, although they claim it's the "fastest". It sure has whopping strong IR sensitivity! Hmm, the Kodak chip has higher Quantum Efficiency, whatever that is. Sure, Kodak makes cheap sensors for cellphones and the likes with tiny pixels, but they're noisy as the dickens. They aren't even the same semiconductor process, and they really are from separate division. (The Leica sensor's division is really a company Kodak bought.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis l. Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 <i>"In the unlikely event Leica lasts long enough to produce such a <br>white elephant, it would certainly be the product that finishes them <br>off forever."</i><br><p> I'm sure people were saying the same thing 80 years ago when Leica invented <br>the format that drove the entire film/camera industy for almost a century.<br> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icuneko Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 The M9 should be the CL redux but with no swinging-arm meter sensor. Instead the regular pointing-at-the-shutter/film current version and a sturdier back and at least a .9x-magnification viewfinder. Drat...I just realized C/V beat 'em to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_Es Posted March 15, 2007 Author Share Posted March 15, 2007 I was imagining a Leica the way the Hexar RF should have been. But I guess that's the M8. Still... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aizan_sasayama Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 <i>Leica perfected the 35mm rangefinder camera with the M3. Everything since then has been a refinement of that perfection.</i> <p>or not. leica's history since the m3 has been characterized by a lot of floundering about. <p>it would be pretty neat if leica made a new film m. i'm not against metal shutters and motor winds. the current back door section can probably accomodate a swing open back like you find on p&s cameras. i'd drop the rear lcd, and something will have to be done about the controls for iso and exposure compensation. neither m7 nor m8 have a great design for these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aizan_sasayama Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 oh, and the battery compartment can be moved to where the base plate catch is. perfect! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_amos Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 I'd say Leica has tried to do pretty much what they should have. While I realize the benefit to some of the features Alex suggests, Leica realized that the less is more approach is what their customers want, as long as "less" is executed with uncommon exquisite quality, and maybe that's where some of the cynicism about the M8 arises, but I'd say the M8 is what everyone wanted them to make if they had been able to make it flawless from the start. Leica needs to work hard on repairing every problem M8 they can under warranty while quietly refining the models being produced until the M8 reputation fully achieves the status we all have in mind, and only then can they even think of introducing an M9. An M9 must be a further refinement of the M8 that offers something slightly different, but it can not be an utter replacement or the legacy chain of M bodies would be totally broken. For example, an M9 could use some different materials like carbon fiber to achieve a body that is lighter but maybe even tougher and with higher megapixels, but truly the same size as the M3. Thus, some people might prefer the all metal body feel of the old M8, but many would be willing to pay for the new M9 because it would retain the less is more approach with respect to operation, but its engineering would be further optimized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry_pfile3 Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 The idea of replacing the M7 with a M9 that has the M8 type shutter is a good idea. Surprised no one (unless I missed it), noted the 1/250 synch speed for electronic flash that comes with the M8 shutter. That's a plus. The M9 if so configured would be a better (i.e. more capable) film camera. Manual winding for film advance and shutter cock would have to be retained. You can always buy a motor winder. Not enough juice with the current size and technology restriction on the batteries that the body can carry. I suspect any 'enhancements' to the hardware of future M8s will be noted as M8-xxxxx. Firmware/Software changes will be noted as v.whatever. How many so far in 6 months of production? 4 or 5? Stay tuned. The purists can always buy a MP or MP3, or any one of a million + used film Ms floating around out there. Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustafa_umut_sarac Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 I think Leica must develop a cheap but high quality film camera with scanner unit added. 30 years ago , there was kodak strech and it was excellent. With new plastics , aspherical geometry and with Leica fingerprinting on plastic lens would make happier thousands. I fear , they will think that they would not need to make high quality lenses if they stick to digital cameras . As you can not understand the stradivari quality at mp3 , same is the digital cameras except 30000 usd cameras. To record an image 3 times at a molecular level and expertise is still too far from the ccd. I fear about this , losing of lens designing art. I think leica can put a digital camera to the viewfinder and body is a film camera. Or there can be film in front of ccd and you can switch film if you will take poster size image . There would be a metal slide for to protect the ccd from dust and thats all. And I think when the computers start to make 100 times faster computation , we will simulate the Dagor , Cooke or Tessar on our pictures. It is now possible also but to change the psf of a very small picture consumes hours. Integrating lens design ... paper of patrick maeda from stanford can explain it to you. You have to master zemax or code V , matlab , ISET together. Mustafa Umut Sarac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christian hilmersen www. Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 It should have live view and histogram. Cannot see why it could not be done, all you need is to incorporate a stripped down digital compact. Preferably this should be a tool that could be inserted into the hot-shoe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graham john miles Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Film? What's that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Didn't the Hexar do everything you propose for the M9? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 " I'm sure people were saying the same thing 80 years ago when Leica invented the format that drove the entire film/camera industy for almost a century." You're sure? Vas you dere? In any case, Leica invented something that struggling photographers could afford from the beginning, actually NEEDED, and they kept Leica-branded cameras that way up until their recent focus on fetish products (involved their near-deadly fling with bizarre ownership). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Leica wasn't always a strictly luxury brand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuyeah Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Digital Cheap thing out. Period. Digital don't hold value, don't last through time... Leica isn't made with concept like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dankapsner Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 No, but maybe it's time for Zeiss to offer a digital RF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Who cares about value? Even Leicas are stupid investments. Better to buy gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary e Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Nope. M9 - M100 will most likely be digital. Why? The M7 & MP are as good as you can get, the M3 is all you really need and if you really want a new M with a motor drive or higher shutter speeds you'll have to wait for the new Sony Hexar RF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_mogerley Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 Maybe the could make a digital M I could afford, I love my M bodies and think the Idea of a digital M is something I could have fun with but 5 grand is way too much. I can see leica going either way though, If the M8 stay populer I can see the M9 catapulting off of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_davidhazy Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 I'd like to see a stripped down M8 or rather, an MP with digital capture. If it were as simple and pure as the MP, then I might actually go digital. No LCD screen, no delete button, no histogram, etc. Just a connector, battery, shutter speed dial, release, and meter. Though I'm not very familiar with the technology involved in capturing a quality digital image, I would imagine that with time and further advancements, we could rely on the image quality from a digital sensor, just as we currently do with our film. I'd like the digital capability to be able emulate different film grain and characteristics, as many of the digital pics (M8, etc.) that I've seen are much too pristine and "cold" for my taste. Anyway... I can't imagine anything better than the form and function of the MP as it is now, EXCEPT if there was only an easier way to digitize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now