Leica s Sensor Strategy ???

[Paratom]

......
Leica SL ...this appears to be the video platform of the future for Leica and it is a brilliant design . But the files are not as robust as the Nikon D810 (I use converted Leica R lenses and Zeiss ZF.2 ) . We could debate OVF/EVF ,size and weight,availability of AF lenses etc etc . But what bothers me the most is the files aren t any better than my M240 and the system is huge in comparison . The sensor could easily be 36MP but my understanding is that Leica did not want the SL to become a lower cost S .

Leica M ....this is my favorite system ...having been shooting Leica M RF since I was in high school (that was a long time ago ). The new M will be at least 4 years since the M240 ....I am hoping it will be worth the upgrade in both time and money .

....

Roger,
I agree with you about the SL. I own them all (T,M,S,SL) and I am steel not sure if I really need the SL.
When using primes the M is just as good (I even might like color better) but much smaller.
Now one reason for the SL is speed and flexibility. However the SL C-AF is not up too a 1Dx or 5d.
The 2 excellent zooms for the SL could be a reason for using this system.

The S...blows me away again and again with its IQ, and I can use it just like a FF DSLR.

The M with the 50 APO or 35 Summicron (or FLE) or 75 APO is for me the "purest" way of photography and probably my favorite camera. I am not even nervous about a new M because my M262 is allready so good that I dont miss anything.

If in 1 or 2 years a better TL2 comes, I might get rid of the SL.

On the other side the SL with its very good EVF just delivers, it also does 4k movie, and the 24-90 is very flexible.

 

[JorisV]

If in 1 or 2 years a better TL2 comes, I might get rid of the SL.

That's precisely the problem that is being discussed...

Leica will never deliver a better 24MP TL2 if it could negatively impact SL sales.

They are perfectly capable of doing that today if they wanted to but they have chosen to re-introduce the good but dated T under a different name...

Same with the SL. That should have been 30MP or 36MP at introduction but it could (and probably would) have impacted M and S sales...

 

[JohnBrew]

Thank you, Roger, for starting this thread.
No problem with the S files. Very good color and excellent bw conversions. There is no way I can hand-hold this camera or do any street shooting with it due to the weight. Oh sure, I've done it, but it's simply not a good camera for a day trip somewhere as I have tendonitis AND tennis elbow in the right arm. There are many photographers who record their wonderful adventures shooting all over the world with the S. I had to buy one to find out for myself as there were none to rent. Well, that cost me big time.
For some of my landscape photography the two minute maximum exposure was a hindrance - anyway, enough of that. The S is for sale.

For what it's worth I rank the S glass as the best I've ever shot, maybe the best that has ever been made for the pro or amateur consumer. Too bad Leica didn't put the best materials into a bullet-proof AF. There should be no excuses with the price of S glass.

I think I formed some kind of anti-Leica stance this year. I spent $8K for a M240 last year and gave up my cherished M8.2 to do it. What a mistake! I disliked the so-called "improvements" and never got on with the thumb grip and extra buttons and the shooting experience just wasn't the same for me. So I tossed in the towel. Too much time spent on forums and maybe a touch of GAS.

I just don't understand what's gotten into Leica lately. They keep producing small cameras which take advantage of the Leica name but there seems to be so many similar models now I can't make head or tail of them. In this respect they have become a boutique item and a fashion statement - of course it's what the user makes of it that counts, but still...

Back to the subject at hand - sensors. Keep the 6 micron pixel pitch first of all. It's been a winning decision beginning with the M8. IMO, Leica merely needs to scale up the sensor size and put the body and lenses on a diet, perhaps a carbon fiber body and mirrorless, but keep the OVF. They should lead instead of follow.

 

[glenerrolrd]

I've grown tired of buying cameras/systems for specific tasks. I wanted a camera/system I could use for my tripod based architecture work - interiors and exteriors - as well as my handheld travel/street work. Because I'm often shooting in adverse conditions any camera would also have to be compact and comparatively lightweight. Above all I value simplicity.

I bought into the M240 precisely because it can be all things, at least all things to this photographer. The M240 offers me the flexibility of rangefinder or EVF which is virtually unique and is the reason why I find myself here on this Leica forum. My wish is that Leica continue building on this flexibility by offering a far more sophisticated optional EVF on the next M body together with the necessary additional processing power.

I'm not interested in building a portfolio of cameras, I am interested in building a portfolio of images.

You can t argue with this strategy . The Leica M is my system of choice and I ve used it for every type of photography . Street ,travel and family are all pretty much the sweet spot for an M photographer . It takes real work to learn to focus both quickly and accurately ,to estimate distances for pre focus and to frame /compose thru a RF . You need both great eyes and excellent hand eye coordination ....but the payback is unique . It accounts for about 70% of my images .

However .....and this is a big one .....its not all that good at capturing motion . I worked hard at using the M9 for tennis and I was able to achieve some success . It was also a good exercise in improving my response to movement . The images were beautiful especially with the late afternoon light . Its depressing when you miss focus because of subject movement .

The EVF implementation on the M240 is a disaster ..totally kills any hope of developing a rhythm due to shutter lag ...

Now compare that to the Nikon D5 ....the very best AF tracking system....I shoot Polo,Surfing and Tennis ..none of which anything made by Leica can handle at the professional level .

But you can t argue that staying focused and doing a few things well ..is a decent strategy . Excellent photographs !

 

[Bernard]

Same with the SL. That should have been 30MP or 36MP at introduction but it could (and probably would) have impacted M and S sales...

If they had gone in that direction, they would have lost some of the speed and low-light capability of the SL. In other words, it would have been a different camera aimed at a different market. They probably would have had to compromise 4K video performance as well (as Canon demonstrated with their 30 MP 5Dm4).

 

[vieri]

Thank you, Roger, for starting this thread.
No problem with the S files. Very good color and excellent bw conversions. There is no way I can hand-hold this camera or do any street shooting with it due to the weight. Oh sure, I've done it, but it's simply not a good camera for a day trip somewhere as I have tendonitis AND tennis elbow in the right arm. There are many photographers who record their wonderful adventures shooting all over the world with the S. I had to buy one to find out for myself as there were none to rent. Well, that cost me big time.
For some of my landscape photography the two minute maximum exposure was a hindrance - anyway, enough of that. The S is for sale.

For what it's worth I rank the S glass as the best I've ever shot, maybe the best that has ever been made for the pro or amateur consumer. Too bad Leica didn't put the best materials into a bullet-proof AF. There should be no excuses with the price of S glass.

I think I formed some kind of anti-Leica stance this year. I spent $8K for a M240 last year and gave up my cherished M8.2 to do it. What a mistake! I disliked the so-called "improvements" and never got on with the thumb grip and extra buttons and the shooting experience just wasn't the same for me. So I tossed in the towel. Too much time spent on forums and maybe a touch of GAS.

I just don't understand what's gotten into Leica lately. They keep producing small cameras which take advantage of the Leica name but there seems to be so many similar models now I can't make head or tail of them. In this respect they have become a boutique item and a fashion statement - of course it's what the user makes of it that counts, but still...

Back to the subject at hand - sensors. Keep the 6 micron pixel pitch first of all. It's been a winning decision beginning with the M8. IMO, Leica merely needs to scale up the sensor size and put the body and lenses on a diet, perhaps a carbon fiber body and mirrorless, but keep the OVF. They should lead instead of follow.

Hello John,

interesting point you introduce re: boutique item and your reaction to this modus operandi, this is a point that definitely stimulates thinking and a point that I have been mulling over for quite some time as well. To me, this is something that we Leica users definitely need to clarify in our mind in order to avoid frustration like what I read into your post (and I am sorry if I am wrong on this count). The way I see it, Leica follows what I think we might call a "double path" when it comes to product releases. Let me explain. On the one hand, during these last 10 years IMHO Leica has been innovating like no other maker on the market. They developed:

- The digital M, bringing the venerable and unique rangefinder photography into the digital present (and, hopefully, future);
- The S, creating a MF system from scratch with a new mount, new line of lenses (amazing glass, AF issue apart), and a body comparable in size and weight to those of professional FF DSLR cameras; a system that can use pretty much all MF glass from other manufacturers as well, with adapters, in most cases retaining full functionality or even better functionality (think Has H glass), with great UI, weather-sealed, and so on;
- The T, a charming mirrorless APS-C system with great design and very good IQ in a great, sexy body with a modern interface;
- The SL, a FF professional-oriented system, still young as far as native lenses go, but the best way to adapt pretty much any FF lens ever mad for any system onto a single, very performing platform (including the great S glass, btw), with the best EVF on the market, great UI, weather-sealed and so on;
- The Q, a great fixed-lens camera.

They also have been visionary and bold enough to build monochrome digital cameras, and digital cameras without a screen to peek. Of course, they also developed lenses for all these systems, most of which are state of the art, best in class, or which definition we'd like to use. While they have been doing that, they managed to keep making film M cameras as well, while almost everyone else ditched film altogether. All this, while being a relatively small operation if you compare them with any of the Japanese manufacturer.

Is their product line perfect? No, but nothing is. Can their existing products and product lines be improved? Definitely. For one, real long exposures for the S are a must, and - to me - so are real long exposures for the M. Sensor is another issue where they took a clear stand, a stand that elicit a hot debate as we can see in this thread; we can agree or not with their choices, but there definitely is a rationale behind them, whether we like it or not. Would I enjoy a high-res SL? Most definitely, I think it would be great to have the existing SL sided by a SL-R (R for resolution), slower but with 40-50 Mp. But this is me, and I speak for my needs Truth is, give me clean enough 30 minutes long exposure on the S (007) and I can definitely live with the 37.5 Mp given the amazing IQ of these files. Of course, if you ask someone else they might have a list of wishes that differs from mine; still, the current offer is pretty solid, and one can work with the M, S and SL professionally for most kind of photography (not sport, definitely, and probably not nature unless you adapt long lenses to the SL, but pretty much everything else).

At the same time, as you very correctly point out, they also built many special editions, duplicates, cameras that differ from one other only by aesthetics or by a couple of minor features (TL), and so on. While this can definitely be frustrating, we all know that they build on their luxury item status, and while I have no access to any solid data except those publicly available, I am pretty sure that their bottom line is very much helped by all these limited, special, numbered editions. Which, as long as they keep building up their "regular" camera lines, is just fine by me. Leica will continue to follow this dual path to product releases, there is no doubt in my mind; we just need to discern what we need to use from what someone else likes to collect, which not always coincides (if at all). Does this disturbs me? Setting GAS aside, not really. I hope they'll give me what I need for the S with a FW update, and what I'd like to see in a SL-R in the future. I'll probably see the former, and probably will not see the latter, but I am still able to work with my Leica system as it is in the meantime.

Just my 0.2 of course.

Thanks again for the stimulating post! Best,

Vieri

 

[Vivek]

OMG Vieri!

How can you say Leica and "innovation" in the same sentence while giving examples that are compltely false!

Epson RD1 = digital RF innovation.

Sony NEX-5N = "invented" by Leica several years later. It did take them years to machine the mono block body as they showed in their boring video.

The only "innovation" or at the least a bold initiative that I thought the Leics did was the MM. but they screwed up the sensor in that camera.

It is a company that has lost its credibility by their own major screw ups time and time again.

Please! Have mercy and desist from posting such false claims so that my blood pressure will remain under control.

 

[JohnBrew]

Thank you, Vieri, for your considered post.
Let's talk about the resolution thingy. As many have said the existing resolution is plenty enough. I agree up to a point. I shot the same item (license plate on my car) with the S & S100 f2 versus a Hasselblad H5D-50c & 100 2.2. I think I used f5.6 but can't be sure as I trashed both files. At first look - sure the S file looked better on my monitor and maybe would print better. Not sure on the dpi or overall size. However, zoomed into at 100%, even though the Hassy isn't in the same ballpark lens wise it did have better resolution showing details of the holographic printing on the plate the Leica could not realize. So, yeah, 37mp vs. 50mp is no big deal and you could probably print a billboard with either file, but there is a difference. Nothing to get excited about and probably just an exercise for the pixel peepers and I'm not even sure I give a u-know-what. But wouldn't all of us like to throw that great S glass in front of 50 or 60mp? I'll bet that would get some serious attention!

 

[JorisV]

If they had gone in that direction, they would have lost some of the speed and low-light capability of the SL. In other words, it would have been a different camera aimed at a different market. They probably would have had to compromise 4K video performance as well (as Canon demonstrated with their 30 MP 5Dm4).

Perhaps... The other alternative would be, as also mentioned by Vieri, 2 versions of the same camera, one with 24MP and one with 40-50MP. Perhaps an idea for the SL2...

 

[Godfrey]

Oof, these are nice photographs.

Indeed.

My selection is the M-D for rangefinder and the SL for EVF. I have an M-P but find I only rarely use it in preference to the other two. I honestly no longer care what comes next. These two cameras will satisfy me for a very long time to come. For me, they outperform any Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, Canon, or Nikon.

That doesn't mean that I would not enjoy a larger format camera ... an X1D for my wide-angle work, or a CFV-50c back for my Hassy system. But there will have to be a compelling reason, it must demonstratively go beyond what I can achieve with the Leicas.

G

 

[Jay Emm]

...The S 007 was a disappointment to most all my friends that use the S system. How could they not increase the MP ?...

I don't care at all, I'm too busy making money with mine. In fact I had to think about how many MP it even has when I read this.

 

[fotografz]

I've grown tired of buying cameras/systems for specific tasks. I wanted a camera/system I could use for my tripod based architecture work - interiors and exteriors - as well as my handheld travel/street work. Because I'm often shooting in adverse conditions any camera would also have to be compact and comparatively lightweight. Above all I value simplicity.

I bought into the M240 precisely because it can be all things, at least all things to this photographer. The M240 offers me the flexibility of rangefinder or EVF which is virtually unique and is the reason why I find myself here on this Leica forum. My wish is that Leica continue building on this flexibility by offering a far more sophisticated optional EVF on the next M body together with the necessary additional processing power.

I'm not interested in building a portfolio of cameras, I am interested in building a portfolio of images.

Excellent images as usual Keith, and a good "sound bite" (i.e., I'm not interested in building a portfolio of cameras, I am interested in building a portfolio of images.)

However, in the process of making the M all things to photographers like you, it became less of a M to photographers like me ... who, until the M240, used a M in a 40 year long unbroken chain starting with a M4. IMO, it has become to big. Trust me, I am not alone in this observation.

It is not because of the add-ons ... Leica has always had things like the Visoflex and a myriad of odd do-dads. but those older add-on didn't increase the size of the M4 or M6 the way the internal needs of current add-ons have. The notion that "digital capture and a LCD" is the reason the size increased is refuted by the existence of the Sony A7 cameras. Or that the need for a OVF rangefinder makes it bigger is refuted by the Leica CL or even the M6 (the last decent sized M IMO). Heck, I didn't even like the M6TTL because adding TTL made the camera bigger.:facesmack:

Personally, there were many years when the only camera I had was a M. I could have used the add-ons like a Visoflex etc to cover expanding needs, but as Roger mentioned, there were other solutions much better at those tasks than a cobbled together M.

Now as those expanded needs diminish, I had always thought I'd eventually return to a M as an exclusive kit (maybe supplemented with a basic DSLR for what little action work I may do). The rangefinder way of thinking and seeing has always been my central passion ... and full-filled these days with a MM.

Were it not for the sensor rendering and dog's breakfast menu of my Sony A7R-II, it could easily be the "jack-of-all-trades and master of ALL of them" many seek these days. I just acquired the AF adapter to use M lenses on it, and am delighted how well it works ... who would have thunk it? AF with M lenses.:bugeyes:

No current 35mm camera: rangefinder, DSLR, or hybrid can do what my S(006) and CS lenses does ... so it stays for as long as I use lighting. I do not care in the least that it cannot shoot higher ISOs because I'd never apply it to such circumstances. Not to mention that ultra smooth, grainless imagery is rarely my objective outside of commercial studio work. Often I add noise or film like grain before printing anyway.

- Marc

 

[KeithL]

Excellent images as usual Keith, and a good "sound bite" (i.e., I'm not interested in building a portfolio of cameras, I am interested in building a portfolio of images.)

However, in the process of making the M all things to photographers like you, it became less of a M to photographers like me ... who, until the M240, used a M in a 40 year long unbroken chain starting with a M4. IMO, it has become to big. Trust me, I am not alone in this observation.

Hi Marc,

I'm not for a moment suggesting that the M240 can be all things for all photographers, but rather that it is, as I said, for the moment at least, all things for this photographer. It's far from perfect, but nothing that a decent EVF and processor couldn't fix.

There's simply nothing else out there at the moment that meets my need/desire for a simple rangefinder that has the option of using an accessory EVF. Long may Leica give us this option.

Keith

 

[KeithL]

I should add, many thanks to all for your comments, they are much appreciated.

 

[doug]

As many have said there are a lot of factors to consider, pixel count among them. For myself, most of the time 24MP is fine OTOH over-sampling to reduce moire in my feathered subjects would be welcome.

... I think its more important for Leica to improve their service in the US...

This is my biggest complaint. It's been seven months (and counting) without an estimate for repairs of my 280 APO. There is absolutely no more Leica equipment in my future as long as the US service is like this.

 

[glenerrolrd]

I don't care at all, I'm too busy making money with mine. In fact I had to think about how many MP it even has when I read this.

But you might care if Leica continues the S line (as I do ) . While 37.5 MP s is certainly enough for most all applications ....it may not be in the future for either fashion/advertising or fine art . Taking care of my needs(probably don t need more MPs) means taking care of the market needs ..who exactly is raving about the S 007 ? A lot less than when the S2 was being shipped .

Even Leica admitted that the SL sensor strategy might have been handicapped to avoid direct competition with the S line .

So I want the S to stay competitive in a crowded market ...that is getting more crowded as Fuji,Sony,Nikon,Canon all improve their sensors (both larger and better).

I also would like the S ..to get out of the way ....so that the SL and M can become the best that they can. This is why I labeled the post ..Sensor Strategy and not why hasn t Leica given the S more MPS.

I would also like the next S to be so good that its a compelling upgrade for all my friends still using S2/S 006 bodies.

Its good to hear that the S has been a money maker for you and that for your needs its very competitive .

 

[JorisV]

On the one hand, during these last 10 years IMHO Leica has been innovating like no other maker on the market.

Hi Vieri,

I don't disagree that Leica is bringing unique products like the S and the T to the market.

What I do notice however is that after the initial release Leica IMO fails to keep the momentum up, subsequent releases (like the TL) are quite frankly often non-events, and systems like S and T don't seem to go in a direction that makes them reach their full potential.

It is probably too early to tell what will happen with the SL and the Q but when I read the SL2 wish lists on the Leica forums I am very concerned. If the S and the T are any guidance these people are going to be bitterly disappointed...

Thanks, Joris.

 

[JorisV]

What would make me consider a new S isn't resolution (50 meg maybe, but that wouldn't be an earth shaking bump that'd move me). What would be of interest is improvements in line with the purpose of the S ... like some sort of Image Stabilization, and moveable AF point ... or something like Hasselblad's True Focus which was a major improvement in the H system even when the meg count stayed the same.
- Marc

Hi Marc,

Good points and I personally agree but not at a $17K price point...

Leica can only keep that price IMO if they raise the number of MP, otherwise they need to lower the price.

I would be more than OK buying the S007 at below $10K price. The current price is in IMO way too high.

Thanks, Joris.

 

[Godfrey]

...
The notion that "digital capture and a LCD" is the reason the size increased is refuted by the existence of the Sony A7 cameras.
...

Um, no.

The current M 240/246/262 are about the same length and width as late model film Ms (M6TTL, M7, MP). The body depth (lens mount to back panel) is different and that's because of the necessities of the lens mount register and diameter, and the thickness of the sensor stack. The difference is 4mm or so, at the baseplate, and the LCD adds another mm or two.

Sony was not attempting to include use of a 60 year history of Leica lenses, so they created a new body with a 19mm lens mount register. When you add a mount adapter to allow use of Leica lenses onto the Sony A7 body, it becomes as thick—flange to LCD—as the M. Of course the body is differently shaped elsewhere, but it's no thinner.

From some of the sneak photos posted of the alleged "M10" follow on model, you can see what might be an attempt by Leica to 'thin' the body by separating the lens mount and release button onto a protruding flange pedestal, about 3-4mm thick by the looks of it. This lets the rest of the body be 3-4mm thinner without changing the basic look. A nice job if they do it, but it doesn't change the fact that the bottom line is they MUST provide an RF mount with a ~28mm register and a certain diameter in order to be compatible with the M lenses.

Personally, I could care less*about that 3-4mm thickness, the digital Ms actually fit my hands better than the thin film Ms... I don't really need a half-case on the M-D in order to hold it without fatigue for a long period of time, like I do on the M4-2 (because it's a little too thin) and the M-P (because the leather case gives me a little bit more surface area to grip).

The problem with the M/M-P typ 240 to me isn't the thickness of the body, it's the fact that the LCD and button controls consume so much of the available gripping area of the body that I find it awkward to hold. This isn't a problem with the SL model as its minimalistic controls and slightly larger body surface gives my hands plenty of room to work with, and it's also not a problem with the M-D typ 262 because its lack of LCD and control buttons on the back allows much greater body surface area than the M-P and lets me work with it exactly the way I work with the M4-2: there's simply plenty of gripping space.

G

 

[vieri]

Thank you, Vieri, for your considered post.
Let's talk about the resolution thingy. As many have said the existing resolution is plenty enough. I agree up to a point. I shot the same item (license plate on my car) with the S & S100 f2 versus a Hasselblad H5D-50c & 100 2.2. I think I used f5.6 but can't be sure as I trashed both files. At first look - sure the S file looked better on my monitor and maybe would print better. Not sure on the dpi or overall size. However, zoomed into at 100%, even though the Hassy isn't in the same ballpark lens wise it did have better resolution showing details of the holographic printing on the plate the Leica could not realize. So, yeah, 37mp vs. 50mp is no big deal and you could probably print a billboard with either file, but there is a difference. Nothing to get excited about and probably just an exercise for the pixel peepers and I'm not even sure I give a u-know-what. But wouldn't all of us like to throw that great S glass in front of 50 or 60mp? I'll bet that would get some serious attention!

John,

I completely agree with you on resolution. A 60 Mp S would be great, and would be nicely complemented by a 42 Mp SL-Res on the side of the 24 Mp SL-Fast, keeping the M at 24 Mp which I think is a sweet spot for what the M does. Now THAT would be a killer lineup!

Best,

Vieri