Leica is “worried” about the huge NEX lenses.
Image on top: The biggets of all ENX lenses, the 18-200mm.
Alfred Schopf (chief executive of Leica Camera) had an Interview with Asiaone where he reveals: “his reticence to follow the design route taken by Sony with its compact mirrorless NEX cameras“. He literally said: “They have compact bodies and huge lenses in front. I feel a little bit stressed by that design, to be honest.” He also confirmes that they will make a mirrorless system (non rangefinder). There were rumros saying that Leica would use Sony’s APS-C sensor for the system. I would be happy if Leica would go a huge step further and share the same E-mount. I am just dreaming I know…
P.S.: Meanwhile you can use manual M-mount lenses like the one I am using, the Nokton 35mm f/1.4 (Click here to see it on eBay) if you need compact fast lenses!
Related Posts
Via Leicarumors
Share
Recent comments
Comment from Frank: Except most people who will buy Leica le...
Comment from Matt: As a Sony Nex user, I understand the con...
Comment from tonyk: We don't need a NEX FF. APS-C is a great...
Comment from SonyAlphaLab: I really don't mind the large lenses as ...
frosti7
8 months ago |Want smaller NEX lens? help yourself and others by singing NEX pancake petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?NEX30mm
Please state in comments the specs of your dream prime lens (as long as its compact and affordable)
zacao
8 months ago |Isn’t Leica a partner of Panasonic? Or a member of M43?
Daemonius
8 months ago |Strictly business. And its member of 4/3s, tho Fuji is too and still they made X100. Tho I think Leica should do full-frame, another APS-C mirrorless isnt worth it.
matgay
8 months ago |leica is just totally freaking out that NEX7 can use all m-mount lenses, with m-mount adapter. all lenses made for the leica m9 can be used on the nex7. now if the nex9 full frame comes out, it would absolutely steal sales market share from the leica m9. imagine if nex comes out without software lens correction modules that can adjust the raw files for the leica lens’ 6 bit encoding. then who would buy a leica body when you can have 5 nex7/9 bodies for the same price point? remember that leica really sucks in electronics, where sony really excels. sure leica made a ccd full frame kodak sensor, but at ridiculously high costs. if sony made the same sensor as kodak, it would cost half as much for the same quality.
deniz
8 months ago |m9 is not just a mirrorless full frame, its a mirrorless full frame rangefinder. it counts for something.
Daemonius
8 months ago |Apples and oranges.
Sony and Leica have only thing in common and thats producing cameras, otherwise they are as much different as its possible. Leica doesnt need to fear Sony.
And Sony most likely wont make full-frame NEX, cause E-mount is APS-C only, and they would need to come with new mount, which is something they wont make. At least not in any time soon.
Sure you can use M lens on NEX body, but it doesnt work so well cause NEX doesnt have microlens aligned for RF lens. M lens works great on m4/3s and Ricoh M-module, but not on NEX. And they wont improve this, cause E-mount.
Leica doesnt sux in anything btw. And price for their cameras and lens is perfectly ok, unlike other manufacturers you will get exactly what you pay for.
Hiep
8 months ago |I beg the differ. M4/3 actually has more problem with M lenses than the NEX system. They don’t even have any microlens to speak of for the smear corner and color shift (Sony, with the C3 and 5N, does). The Ricoh module, however, is really good for M lens. Such a pity, that the sensor performance is not too good (noise even at base ISO).
And if you believe that Leica is perfect (get exactly what you pay for), then you need to spend a bit of time on rangefinderforum. They have their fair share of problems. I guess you don’t see the Leica shooters complain as much because they tend to be older than the average DSLR/MILC users.
Sadly, I do agree that Sony won’t likely to make any NEX FF. Whoever came up with the mount did an half ass job, just design one of the shortest mount registrations with a bigger throat mount. And the E-mount FF lenses are going to be HUGE.
Frank
5 weeks ago |Except most people who will buy Leica lenses for an NEX are probably buying their lenses off the secondhand market and hence aren’t part of Leica’s target audience.
Stefan
8 months ago |Oh come on guys can you not see where this is heading? In 6months we will all be talking about leica’s brand new micro 4/3rds body and lenses which will be compact and based on Panasonic tech.Leica have already designed lens for the Micro 4/3rds system and have a very close working relationship with Panasonic This statement basically mirrors what olympus, panasonic and nikon have said about large lenses on small bodies and if im honest i think that they have a point. Sony needs to work on getting some smaller, better quality lenses out fast because the ones they have at the moment are still a little on the flabby side.
Zstan
8 months ago |I doubt Leica will go anything smaller than APSC….
Stefan
8 months ago |Why? They have a popular full frame pro photographer system already in the M system. Any new system with a big sensor is likely to take sales away from the high margin M system. If i was Leica i would be looking to fill gap between that and my low end Panasonic derived compacts. A replacement for the X1 if you will. Micro 4/3s actually fills that gap quite nicely and gives you access to a potentially huge lens market (which is where the money and Leica’s real expertise is). 4/3rds sensors are now at the point where for most uses they are perfectly fine its good digital glass that people want.
Forbes
8 months ago |Because Leica had already indicated that they would not join m4/3, long ago. Even more, Leica have directly stated that they will use at least an APS-C 1.5x crop sensor. It could be bigger. In any case Leica has always stated sensors have to be big in order to make good use of their lenses.
Daemonius
8 months ago |Cause “Leica” is about quality.. m4/3s no matter how convenient it is format isnt quality.
twoomy
8 months ago |Sorry buddy. I think you’re totally off on that.
ieR
8 months ago |ROTFLMAO!!!
4/3 design was NEVER meant to go digital, it was design in film era to “SAVE” film. that it… it was SMART during the FILM ERA and because their lens was designed 4/3, entering digital age they have no choice to hire the best marketing member to help market the dead-end 4/3 “digital sensor”. the M43 roadmap was is right decision, since camera can be made smaller, but sony kick its arse by making APS-C as small as possible.
Carl
8 months ago |Half-frame film cameras have roughly the same film size as the APS format, not 4/3.
Four Thirds was conceived by Olympus as a digital format, back in the era when larger digital sensors where prohibitively expensive. The 17x13mm format was certainly larger than the compact sensors that prevailed in the late 90s (eg. the 6.4×4.8mm sensors of the Minolta RD3000), but the 23x15mm sensor that Canon came up with ultimately won out.
robdel
8 months ago |Leica has already said they won’t go smaller than APS-C. If you do a search on leicarumors.com, there are several references to it. APS-H perhaps to match the crop on the M8?
zstan
8 months ago |Lol. What makes you think if they announce a new system that it will be cheap?
Anon
8 months ago |Leica badges LX5s as their own. They could go smaller, to protect the M series.
Forbes
8 months ago |Protect the M series from what? The Leica M has no competition. There are a few cheaper alternatives like Zeiss and Voigtlander, but as far as digital rangefinders go Leica is on its own (counting the Epson as a niche within a niche).
The new system will not be a rangefinder and thus not easily attract those who have the cash for an M9(-P).
E
8 months ago |Agree with you Stefan.
This is just FUD and market preparation for their own system to come.
So, somewhere down the line Leica will release a mirrorless with more compact lenses.
OR, a new line up with lense for the NEX , but in pancake and small diameter form.
Remember, some of the lenses for NEX is just remakes of DSLR lenses.
/E
Leslie
8 months ago |I guess you meant to write:”The biggest of all NEX lenses, the 18-200mm”. ; )
Gunnar
8 months ago |i think the only thing they feel stressed about is loosing market share
Leica has nothing to do with Sony, i guess the main thing that worries them is that soon every Leica M9 user will have a Nex-7 as backup and soonafter will leave their Leicas at home 
Gunnar
8 months ago |sorry, i read the article now and the quote here is wrong.. at no point he says something specific about Sony but about M4/3.. ->
On Micro Four Thirds devices, Mr Schopf said: “They have compact bodies and huge lenses in front. I feel a little bit stressed by that design, to be honest.”
Helena
8 months ago |Touché!
robdel
8 months ago |If you buy a M9, and then a NEX7 and leave your M9 at home, it has no impact on Leica’s bottom line.
The fact is, if you can afford a M9, you can afford a NEX7, and you will likely purchase a M10 as well.
Carl
8 months ago |Leica is currently selling lenses at the fastest rate it has in the company’s history. I don’t think loosing market share is its worry.
More like they’re worried they’ll end up just a de facto 3rd party lens manufacturer.
Clyde
8 months ago |No doubt.
Daemonius
8 months ago |Which wouldnt be bad.. I want more 3rd party lens manufacturers like this.
Now only if they start doing fully-automatic zoom lens for other manufacturers. Imagine 24-70mm f2.8 zoom lens from Leica for Canon.
Though it does get bit bitter taste when you imagine price..
Carl
8 months ago |Oh, I agree. I’d love for Leica to do something similar to the Zeiss ZF/ZE range.
Mock Rockwell
8 months ago |No he is actually is worried that the balance between camera and body shifts to the lens, also that the weight of the lens may damage the lens mount too.
Look I am huge fan of the NEX in fact I think of myself as a fanboy of Sony nEX cameras because in terms of quality of electronics used, features and image quality there isn’t a single mirrorless camera that can touch the NEX line at all, however their choice of camera shape and how the balance between the body and some lenses doesn’t feels right.
Also to be honest the M9 is in a whole different league of its own and they don’t have to worry about mirrorless cameras, because being sincere someone who doesn’t has the budget for Leica isn’t going to be a potential buyer from them at all.
DirtHerder
8 months ago |Here’s the thing…
OK, so we have the SEL18200 on the NEX side of things, and it isn’t a pancake… but then again it’s kind of silly to compare an 18200 with a pancake lens (or even a prime or a kit zoom). So then… how does it compare to something comparable on M4/3?
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09030314panasonic14-140mmhd.asp
Oh… wow would you look at that. It’s pretty much the same size. Who woulda thunk it.
Also interesting to note (for those that complain about the SEL18200′s price) it pretty much costs the same as well… in fact it lists for more than the SEL18200.
Stefan
8 months ago |http://eggy.egloos.com/3436069
If only that where true
DirtHerder
8 months ago |Alright, I should have been more specific.
For all intents and purposes they are the same size (that is what “pretty much” means).
Which those pictures you linked to actually do a pretty good job of illustrating.
When you take into consideration the body size + lens size… there isn’t really a big difference (except for the fact that the NEX has a superior sensor behind the lens).
Vlad
8 months ago |I have no idea what “pretty much” means, but the NEX 18-200 is 14% heavier and 39% bigger in volume (if my calculations are correct) than the Panasonic. And then you have the Olympus 14-150. No matter how you look at it, the m43 lenses are smaller and overall you will get a lighter system.
DirtHerder
8 months ago |If all you did was use a lens in a vacuum (ie: without a body) then sure, but like the pictures in the link so helpfully demonstrate, when put into practical use they are “pretty much” (“pretty much” is pretty much self explanatory) for practical purposes the same. The m4/3 lens is a bit narrower, but does that make the difference between one of these being pocketable and the other not? Or even a NEX with its 18-200 not fitting in a bag that can hold an m4/3 camera with its 14-140? Not likely on either of those counts.
And so, “pretty much” the same.
Vlad
8 months ago |I wonder where this “pocketable” reference for everything comes from – it’s either big or pocketable, like nothing exists in-between.
m43 is lighter and smaller like it or not. Same like NEX is lighter and smaller than a DSLR system. For me, even 100 grams make a difference. And when you actually buy several lenses the difference will only get bigger.
And then, what about the Oly 28-300?
Dr. Tom
8 months ago |Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t a smaller sensor (m4/3) or a point and shoot sensor allow for smaller lenses since they have a smaller sensor. I thought that was the reason pocket cameras could get away with smaller lenses with more magnification?
DirtHerder
8 months ago |PS: You seem to have missed the point, which is that large lenses (like superzooms) are large lenses regardless of whether they are on m4/3 or NEX.
DirtHerder
8 months ago |Vlad, you’re totally missing the point (again).
The point of “Pocketable” in my statement wasn’t about stating that one of those setups was pocketable and one was not (clearly neither of them in that configuration are). Please give it another read if it wasn’t clear the first time around.
The point is that in their respective (and comparable superzoom) configuration the size difference is for practical purposes non existent.
Anyway, I’m not really going to bang on anyone for choosing one system over another. For some people size is more important (even if the difference is measured in mm), and for others the sensor size is more important (which in the case of APS-C is going to mean larger lenses). Different strokes for different folks.
It’s why Nikon and Pentax have released their respective CSC/ILC cameras with even smaller sensors. They are banking on people wanting smaller cameras over ones that have higher performance features such as lower noise high ISO (such as from the NEX). M4/3 falls somewhere in between. It will probably perform better than the Nikon/Pentax offerings, but can’t quite compete with the NEX (though the M4/3 does offer lenses that on their own are smaller… though in some cases, like their super zoom, not appreciably enough to make that big of a difference).
I will say that it is interesting to read blog postings from people that have converted from m4/3 to NEX.
Allan
8 months ago |Yeah I would be worried too if i were Leica … the Nex-7 is coming !!
and a Sonnar 24mm 1.8 … I would be scared because of price range !!!
don’t worry too much for Sony !!
Nikon was the first to fall (J1 & V1) !!! hehehe
Stewe
8 months ago |Lol. Even if Leica will release their lenses on e-mount they still will be cost a fortune.
Gunnar
8 months ago |Leicas lenses are there for E-mount already.. just use the M-mount adapter, they are Manual only anyways
Stewe
8 months ago |I mean true e-mount, without any adapter. And even with the adapter, how much it cost?
Arnold
8 months ago |Leica did confirm that their EVIL will AT LEAST have an APS-C sensor.
For me it’s impossible that they use the E mount,
they will of course make it with M mount !
It will be unveiled in 11 months at Photokina !
fs
8 months ago |It will have to be autofocus. Otherwise, there’s just no differentiation from the rangefinder style. Given that, I’m not sure that it will have an m mount. Definitely will be usable with an adapter, but I would be surprised not to see a new mount.
NEXfive
8 months ago |I did not understand this Leica statement as an announcement of being able to build smaller lenses than Sony. I guess they simply cheated against the design aspect of putting comparatively big lenses in front of an extremely minimised body.
I doubt there’s much room for smaller lenses anyway. Samsung is doing a little better than Sony with their NX lenses, but one has to accept, that serving an APS-C image circle properly there’s much more glass needed than with μ4/3 or cell phones.
All I want from Sony right now is Firmware 05 for NEX-5/3 with Lens Compensation and next year that damn beautiful white NEX-5N in Europe bundled with the SEL-50F18 or the forthcoming G Series Standard Zoom Lens…
Forbes
8 months ago |I guess you have never seen the size of full frame covering M-mount lenses.
Brandon
8 months ago |I guess you’re still learning. It is not merely the sensor size that determines lens size. The distance to ‘film-back’ differs between mirrorless and rangefinder, even mounts. Still more importantly the Leica lenses benefit drastically by having no sealing, and no autofocus, no IS/VR/OSS. Leica lenses will not be any smaller once an outer-barrel is added to accommodate such things. Anyone who thinks Leica lenses are somehow smaller via just ‘good design’ doesn’t understand lens design. The new Leica lenses will be big, just like many others throughout their history that we seem to forget…
Forbes
8 months ago |I never said it is merely sensor size that decides lens size. Leica will simply make different choices from Sony in order not to end up with the imbalanced body/lens combination that is “stressing” them. They might chose to release only prime lenses, leave out IS, opt for a thicker body, even in-body AF is possible. The point is to create the balance missing from most m4/3 and NEX options. Think the same thickness as a NEX-7 with 24 Zeiss, but a slightly different balance between body and lens size.
NEXfive
8 months ago |I guess you have never really held a NEX-5 with the standard kit zoom lens when you call it an “imbalanced body/lens combination”, which only looks this way to dummies about sensor sizes comparing to typical pocket cameras with similar sized bodies.
Additionally still having a Leica R4 here I don’t remember this company even caring about making their cameras and lenses light weight and small – they always enjoyed to be the Mercedes tank in the photographers’ hands.
Forbes
8 months ago |@NEXfive,
I have tried a NEX-5 and I did feel it was imbalanced.
I find it a bit odd that you bring up the R4 in a discussion about mirrorless cameras. At least talk about the Leica mirrorless they already have, the M. As the comments coming from Leica have been confirming for months now, the new mirrorless that will sit between the X1 and M9, will be aimed at showing Leica’s take on a smaller system camera. The obvious dislike of Leica for the way m4/3 and NEX have gone, should be ample to suggest they will seek a differently balanced camera/lens combination.
NEXfive
8 months ago |Well, Forbes, you were the one triggering into confrontation instead of arguing to the topic and now you’re complaining about odd impressions. Imbalance is definitely not on my critic list concerning my NEX-5 – no problems with that, since we’re not talking about the tripod mount here. But even Leica’s X1 and M9 are more Mercedes tank than tiny, nevertheless I more dislike their retro style. Don’t know what’ll come from them soon, but I really hope they don’t do something like Nikon 1. Unfortunately simply cheating against “stressed” Sony design does not sound promising, since I still doubt they’d really be able to build smaller APS-C lenses than Samsung NX.
Forbes
8 months ago |Don’t know where you get the confrontation-thing from, but the fact is that Leica M lenses are small and full frame. The Leica M9 is still the smallest full frame camera around and combined with the lenses the combination is relatively easy to take along. It depends on where the emphasis is being put on by the manufacturer.
Fact is that Leica is working on a system camera with a 1.5x crop or larger sensor, compatible with M lenses and they aim to produce a different balance than m4/3 or NEX.
Also, remember a NEX is compatible with M lenses and results in a more compact lens/body combo.
Brandon
8 months ago |Unless your statement was nonsensical that is exactly what you implied. You insinuate that there is room to make these lenses smaller because ‘Leica done it’. And that assertion is flatly incorrect. Leica lenses are smaller only because they are rangefinder lenses lacking the same registration-distance, lacking AF, lacking IS, lacking sealing, lacking zooming… If you’re now going to claim that we should build such lenses for NEX you are definitively not asking for non-pancake (when has Leica ever made a pancake?) smaller versions of what we have, smaller versions of what the community wants (fast primes) or smaller standard system lenses…you are asking for minimalist lenses that sacrifice all of this just to be 70% the size (mainly where it matters least–barrel diameter).
DirtHerder
8 months ago |The NEX 5 is actually very well balanced (the grip goes a long way towards contributing to this).
There is actually a video that is currently circulating on Youtube showing a Russian photographer holding a NEX 7 + 18-200 lens one handed. Some of the response on the forums was disbelief that this was the 18-200 because it “looked” smaller than expected and because the photographer was maneuvering it one handed with ease. Some even went as far as to speculate that this was a new zoom lens. But no, it was in fact the 18-200.
Granted that is an extreme case, and I concede that wielding any NEX with the 18-200 one handed for an extended period of time would be tiresome, the fact is the camera is balanced well enough to manage. Handling the NEX with the smaller lenses is trivial.
Brandon
8 months ago |‘E’ is saying they could make the barrel past the ring size smaller… Again this extra gained space is not only marginal (we are talking about a slight reduction in diameter only) , not only where it least counts (the thickness of a lens is usually much less a problem than the length), but it is merely virtually unusable negative space to begin with. This is not a practical point from which to argue for smaller lenses, this is particularly ill fitting to this conversation considering most Leica lenses likewise exhibit uniform or nearly uniform diameter along their length, and this is utterly beside the point of the stated design choices that allow Leica lenses their pony-sizing (it ain’t the uniform barrel).
Meanwhile embrey is complaining, rightly, that this limits, for example, Zeiss from *increasing* the size.
Forbes
8 months ago |@Brandon
It’s not that I disagree with what you say. You are right that features such as AF, aperture control, IS, etc., take up space. Neither am I trying to say that Sony should make its NEX lenses smaller. Sony has made their choice.
What I am saying is that Leica does not agree with the Sony NEX choice. Leica will chose differently.
I’m not expecting them to do the impossible, but there are two important advantages in favour of Leica when it comes to lens size. They are less restricted then Sony is when it comes to their target audience. Many Leica photographers will accept, even favour, manual aperture control, manual focus, non-automation. As far as I know, Leica has said nothing about the level of automation on their future system camera.
The other thing is budget. Leica simply has more room for technical innovations due to the high price point. Obviously optical quality will take up most of that, but they might chose to invest some of it in the reduction of lens size by means that for Sony would not be expedient.
Again, the things you mention are choices. While I think the NEX-7 with 24 Zeiss is a great camera, I am still waiting for a company to give more control back to the photographer (Like decent manual focus).
Thom Hogan
8 months ago |Sealing, autofocus motors and IS don’t necessarily explain why so many modern lenses are the size they are. Look at the Sony lens designs: they tend to be “barrel equal in diameter from front to back.” They don’t have to be that way, it’s just simpler for them to do that and there appears to be a design ethic to keep lines simple. I’d guess that it’s cost that’s driving the size of the lenses, not design issues.
For example, consider the collapsing lenses (e.g. Olympus’s, Samsung’s, Panasonic’s): those lenses are folding back big elements in front against smaller elements in the middle (focus/IS usually). If the motors and mechanisms you envision as making the lens so big at that point were really doing so, you couldn’t collapse back into that space as several makers are doing.
I’d argue that Sony’s lens designers are taking a dirt simple way of designing a lens: front element determines diameter, focal length using telecentric back focus determines length, now just make a tube that size and fit everything into it. It doesn’t have to be that way. But non-tube lenses don’t look “modern.” They’re more difficult and costly to make.
Brandon
8 months ago |That argument works against the Leica comparison, whose designs have remained, put nicely, ‘conservative’ or ‘traditional’. The point is that taking a Leica-designed lens (not an innovation from a competitor) you’d have to admit they remain small not through design but through lack of said features. Adding said features does exactly what is claimed regarding size-increase. Now perhaps Leica will surprise us all by changing their design, but then that would make references to current diminutive Leica lenses irrelevant.
Ignoring all that, collapsing-state and operating-state are not synonymous, and the subject of storage size is an altogether different one from that discussed: namely balance and operating size.
Beyond the glass there is no greater lens component, in regards to size, than the inclusion of the named features…That’s obvious regardless of design.
Brandon
8 months ago |As a side-note: When a lens is designed without a consistent diameter along its length…the increased negative space is typically useless. It does help locate one’s grip, but then that’s what textures are for. For the detriments: it exacerbates the potential for weather-intrusion (sealed or not), it makes for a potentially unwieldy handhold, and it creates a typically awkward resting position and storing-shape. There are times when it helps, but they are rare indeed. One example would be the Pentax 77mm 1.7 limited: the decrease in barrel dimension gives the street photographer the impression of brandishing a smaller lens, which is less likely to offend.
E
8 months ago |Agee with Thom,
Size of Sony lenses is a design choice, not because they couldn’t do them smaller.
I’d be very surprised if we ever get to see Sony E-mount lenses that have a smaller diameter then the outer mount diameter.
And it is a design choice only.
/E
c.d.embrey
8 months ago |Sony has decided on a 49mm filter ring for all the e-mount lenses, except the 18-200. The 16mm and the 55-210mm Zoom Lens both use the 49mm ring. So does the Zeiss 24mm f1.8.
Could Zeiss have made a f1.4 lens if they had been allowed a 52mm ring? Probably, but that would not go with Sony’s style rules. This is a pity, trading good looks for good performance.
Sony is a consumer electronics company, not a camera company. So don’t expect a “form follows function” design from people who design Walkman. Ain’t gonna happen.
Carl
8 months ago |Size can be reduced by using higher refractive index glass, but that costs money of course.
A lot of Leica M lenses use some of the highest n glass around, which partially explains their high prices.
c.d.embrey
8 months ago |When I first saw the NEX-3/NEX-5, my reaction was ho-hum, nothing of interest here.
When I saw the NEX-3c with peaking focus, may reaction was hmmm looks like Sony may be on to something.
When the NEX-5n arrived I bought one to use as a POV video camera, instead of a GoPro. I’m impressed with the picture quality (great color) and will get the EVF to use it as a stealth camera. There were no body only available when I purchased mine, so I got the 18-55 kit. The lens has been setting in a desk drawer since I un-boxed the camera, I have no plans to use it. BTW the 16mm f2.8 is a better lens than I expected.
With the coming of the 24mm f1.8 Zeiss, 30mm f3.5, 50mm f1.8 the only other lens I want is a 85mm f1.8.
I have no use for any zooms, especially a 18-200. I wouldn’t use a 18-200 on a DSLR. YMMV.
The NEX-7 sounds interesting, but I’ll wait till I can actually hold one, before I make up my mind. I don’t look at the NEX-7 as a Leica replacement. I see it as a replacement for the Contax/Yashica film P&S cameras that Terry Richardson and Juergen Teller used to shoot fashion, back in the 1990s. Small, light and with high quality lenses.
If it feels right in my hands (something I want to hold for eight hour days), it will replace Canon DSLRs, not Leicas.
Carl
8 months ago |Leica doesn’t need to make a new mount for it. Make it M mount, and make it affordable, and it’ll fly off the shelves.
Steve Jones
8 months ago |Couldn’t Leica just produce a version of M-Mount enhanced with electrical connections to allow for AF etc.? It would have to be backward compatible for manual lenses too of course.
I’m not sure that Leica could continue with using FF CCD sensors rather than CMOS if they are to include an electronic viewfinder. I don’t think large CCD sensors are very good at high-speed refresh.
However, I think CCD has an advantage for large formats and relatively short register distances. The CCD has much more of the semiconductor area sensitive to light and consequently it’s microlens design can be more tolerant of light rays with higher incident angles.
Carl
8 months ago |Leica, believe it or not, was one of the pioneees in autofocus technology. The company was just so poorly run back in those days that they never managed to convert the ideas of their researchers into a sellable product.
I doubt they’d want to make an M10 with AF, as the whole point would be the rangefinder, but on an EVF mirrorless camera, the proposition would become much stronger.
pancanikonpus
8 months ago |they can sue everyone then in the market! and stop everyone selling product with AF in everywhere -Steve Job ultimate
lol…
Kevin
8 months ago |Actually Minolta is to be credited with the invention of the AF.. Leica may of had an idea but that don’t count in the world of invention.. Second is the first to finish last !!!
Carl
8 months ago |If they invented it, Honeywell never would have sued them.
Konica made the first point and shoot with AF, and Pentax showed the first prototype of an SLR with AF. Both occured during the 70s.
Steve Jones
8 months ago |Minolta did indeed introduce the first PAF system into an SLR, but unfortunately they were deemed to have infringed Honeywell’s patents (which cost them a lot of money).
There were other attempts at AF before using active techniques – ultrasonics was one of them.
Carl
8 months ago |Leica’s original system used contrast detection. I would imagine it would have been extremely slow in those days.
The allure of Minolta’s system was that it was fairly snappy, even in the first generation.
jasona
8 months ago |lower incident angles
KaKtusSs
8 months ago |Alfred’s a funny troll : take a leica lens, add autofocus, add OSS, remove a few registration millimeters, cut the price in 10 pieces, and there you go, you have a NEX lens !
Ok, Leica makes legendary (legacy) lenses, I’d love to own one, but it’s just not something you could sell as a NEX kit lens. It’s just like comparing a pro bicycle to a mini, they both have wheels, but the comparison ends here.
JohnOliver
8 months ago |We notice that Eastman Kodak is on very delicate financial grounds and may be on the verge of bankruptcy. So,where does Leica turn for their sensor/imagers? But better yet, where does Leica turn in the face of the NEX-7? Which would anyone buy: an M9P with all of its problem electronics (memory buffer overloads causing SDC cards and camera to fail, poor quality JPEG’s, camera not recognizing full battery charge) at roughly $8K OR, an NEX-7 at $1.2K.
Perhaps Sony will provide Leica with the internal electronics for, say, an M10? Better yet, why not Leica skipping all those stops and providing their sublime optics with a Sony e-mount
Forbes
8 months ago |If I had the money, I would buy the M9-P over the NEX-7 in a heartbeat. Without putting the NEX-7 down (it certainly is very nice), it simply is not an M9-P.
Daemonius
8 months ago |Its APS-C, then its Sony. And M9 is full-frame and Leica.
Not sure from who will Leica get sensors, but Kodak isnt only one producing sensors. Phase One is getting sensors from someone too.
And Nikon is going to get sensors from someone else than Sony too. Canon is producing their own sensors. Samsung too.
Yea and dont think Panasonic cant make full-frames..
A lot of choices.
John Koelsch
8 months ago |An M9P is already suffering from “digital rot” just as will the NEX-7. But, why spend $8k for an already problematic antique? Why not $1.2k and with the $6.8k savings buy a Leica lens adapted to the NEX-7? Lenses aren’t subject to “digital rot.”
By the way, have you ever tried to do micro/macro photography with a rangefinder camera?
Finally, your “If I had the money” speaks to me and every other photographer trying to make ends meet; are we rich shutterbugs with fancy cameras or are we more of the ilk of Edward Weston trying to get the best image with what little we have?
Forbes
8 months ago |Your questions are certainly interesting. Why spend $8k on a digital rangefinder? Because it is a digital, full frame rangefinder, and there is no alternative.
Micro/macro, tele, etc., is the realm of DSLR’s, as far as I’m concerned, and my 7D will do that just fine. For me, Sony NEX, Leica M and such are about photography up to 90mm equivalent.
I am curious if an adapted rangefinder lens (could be a Zeiss, which I love as much as Leica), will work on the NEX-7. From what I have seen from people who use such lenses on the NEX-5, it is not a perfect solution. Maybe it will be on the NEX-7, but somehow I doubt it.
In any case, it would still cost towards $2.5k (euro’s in my case) to get a NEX-7 with an adapted Biogon 25 or 35mm. I probably would be more tempted by a film rangefinder instead, or simply use the 24 Zeiss and forget about manual control.
Vromopodarix
8 months ago |I remember a few years ago Leica that it was impossible to get a full frame censor to work good with their lenses and were not going to make a full frame M. A few months later the M9 was unveiled.
I still hope for a Leica m43 even though it does seem highly unlikely. By then I will have a full NEX system along of my existing m43 so the Leica mirrorless will be difficult to impress.
I think the best idea would be to build APS something with an excellent EVF (or even better a hybrid like Fuji) and make the system manual focus only. Imagine Leica manual focus lenses for APS size sensor, they will be minuscule.
Fants
8 months ago |Yes, Leica said it was impossible, and they did it anyway…and loads of wide-angle lenses perform horribly on the M9 as a result.
Carl
8 months ago |I guess they figure the framelines only go down to 28mm anyway.
Clyde
8 months ago |Jealous that Zeiss got to NEX before Leica did… and now they’re stuck with M4/3 whilst we can still chose Leica glass if desired. But why would anyone want to do that when there are stunning retrofocus Oly Pen F lenses available that are just as small without the deep throat?
pancanikonpus
8 months ago |Anyone comes with the 1st cheap FF mirrorless compact (~USD1500) will ultimately pawn all rivals and straight own the game regardless is a rangefinder or not
Daemonius
8 months ago |Only if it wont be rangefinder (cause rangefinders need coupled lens). Regular mirrorless FF will win no matter what quirks it will have, if it will be cheap and working. Cause range of lenses it could use is near infinite..
pancanikonpus
8 months ago |Halo Andrea,
i was waiting for local dealer to sell the a77/nex7 but so far still have to wait for sometime, estimated will be nov. that is pretty close to 2012. Just wonder do you have any Rumor about cheap FF in 2012 from Sony (i do remembered your early SAR told have 3 FF) <$2000?
Kevin
8 months ago |Leica worried ?? sounds a little overboard to me.. But then when I see the quality my 5N puts out maybe they should be…
I can’t wait to get my m42 adapter and slap some huge lens on the front of it..
loempoer
8 months ago |Everybody always talking about NEX-9 with full frame sensor, I’m just curious is that E-MOUNT even designed for fullframe sensor? And all those E-MOUNT lens is a FF lense not DT/apsc?
Just curious hehe, it will be very cool if emount is fullframe ready..
Fants
8 months ago |Any mount is “FF-ready” as long as there’s enough physical space for a FF sensor. Sadly, the NEX’s tiny flange distance means that any reasonably-performing FF lenses are going to have to be even bigger than the current (big) NEX lenses. Rumor has it that the 24/1.8 and 50/1.8 are already FF lenses… and I gotta say, I wouldn’t mind the huge size of the 24 if it were indeed FF.
loempoer
8 months ago |thx for the reply fants,
physical size is what i’m worried about, because there are very small space left in the sensor place inside e-the mount ring.cek this image
http://teenagephotographer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/fullframevsapc.jpg
and this is current e-mount with aps-c sensor
http://photorumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/sony-e-mount.jpg
i doubt it will fit in, without some redesign or even different mount…
hope i’m wrong,i’m not doing any math measurement anyway..
hope sony engineer make some magic in there hehe..
thx
Don Cox
8 months ago |The Exakta lens mount has an internal diameter of 32mm, and the lenses cover 35mm film.
The E-mount has a diameter of 42mm. I think the designers wanted a mount that could be used for a future full frame camera if the market justified it.
The E-mount is bigger than it needs to be for just APS-C.
That doesn’t mean Sony will bring out a full-frame NEX in practice – it depends on whether they think they can sell enough. It would be an expensive camera. (But having flagship products is good marketing if the prestige increases sales of the cheaper products.)
E
8 months ago |The size is chosen to enable adapters to almost any other mount out there.
matgay
8 months ago |sony can take the easy option and make a sensor just a little smaller than full frame, but much bigger than apsc. why couldnt sony do that?
canon sensors are an unconventional undersized aps-c-junior and also an oversized asp-h. but still much below full frame.
should sony commit to full sized full-frame? or can they take a shortcut whilst satisfying the fanboys with full-frame-junior? in a nex9 e-mount?
T.J.
8 months ago |I don’t think leica should be worried. Seeing as many of these lenses are not built for the small body but for the e-mount, the lens roadmap is trying to cover a slew of backgrounds and photographers. its not just a niche or segment but an umbrella. the fs-100, the nex-5n and nex-7 are different targets, from videographer, to point and shoot step-up, to pro-consumer street art. If you want a small lens, get a leica and adapt it onto your nex. Let leica make the lenses its been making for years small amazing quality. I use nokton and zeiss on mine
zstan
8 months ago |http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of0xRJJOCis&feature=feedu
Video recorded totally with a77
Clyde
8 months ago |http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of0xRJJOCis&feature=feedu
Video recorded totally with aDeutchebag.
Sören
8 months ago |Well. I don’t understand the antipathy against digitalrev TV by Sony users.
Essentially, he is right in most he sais.
He critizised the slowness of the a77 EVF and showed that the one in the 5n is faster… Well, its ok to blame Sony for that.
Also his statements regarding AF are correct. It is ok, but not top of the notch if you compare to Panasonic and Olympus.
In addition, he mentions all the positive things.
For me, these reviews are of high value, mentioning the strenghts and drawbacks of each camera.
www.MilosJanata.com
8 months ago |Highest rated comment on YouTube proves that even YouTube crowd can see some silly things:
“high ISO noise test in bright light… xD”
btw: he said You get noise free images even in ISO 25 000 that information could seriously confuse some consumers…
Clyde
8 months ago |Hey I’m simply quoting what he said about himself… He said “I’m a Deutchebag” in that vid.
Sky_walker
8 months ago |Leica has m4/3 inclinations, Sony has relation with Zeiss (who also have rangefinder system in fashion similar to Leica – the Zeiss Ikon), so I hardly see Leica joining the NEX system.
Miracles happen, but this would be a huge one… but if, IF Leica would join NEX than of all the mirrorless systems Sony NEX would be the winner in quality on all fronts.
Sören
8 months ago |-sorry, wrong reply-
Vinh
8 months ago |Leica ‘ve never been good at making a sensor, but they re good at making a camera, maybe they will use Sony sensor and make a better and exotic camera like what they always do.
Carl
8 months ago |I don’t think they’ve ever made a sensor, so they can’t be good by default. Their sensors have come from Kodak (DMR, M8, M9, S2) Panasonic (D-Lux range) and Sony (X1).
Björn Utpott
8 months ago |Leica’s reputation rests on the quality of its lenses, so it will need to produce good lenses that cover the APS-C sensor without resorting to such tricks as software distortion correction or accepting significantly reduced corner performance. That may mean other compromises like less ambitious maximum apertures if they want to keep the lenses compact.
acolyte
8 months ago |Umm peopleeeeee slow downnnnn – where in the article and in Andrea’s post does it say that Leica is worried about Sony getting the market share?
Leica is ‘stressed’ about the design – which means that ‘why is Sony taking an ugly route where camera/lens design is going’ – not about Sony doing well! It’s saying that big lenses on small cameras defeats the purpose.
Please read the post/article carefully… Shooting off comments that is not related to the post lowers the quality of this site :s
I know a lot of you likes to be noisy – but when 1 comment leads to 80% of the comments going on the wrong direction.. then saying that SAR lies for telling false rumor – even though it’s just the readers misinterpreting the news..
Hiep
8 months ago |LOL, and the funny thing is that he didn’t even talk about the NEX system, instead he specifically mentioned the m4/3 system.
acolyte
8 months ago |Geh. You’re right. It’s about m4/3.
Billy bob
8 months ago |Leica is NOT worried about Sony and the amateur users they have.
It’s a stupid headline to grab people’s attention.
While all the Sony fanboys and soccer moms are in this forum, the Leica users are out producing print and museum quality photos.
Mr M
8 months ago |You probably didn’t realize we are in a century where photography has gone to the masses . I bet you there are more canon fanboys out there who doesn’t shoot beyond auto mode. I have seen people shooting with m9 taking ages to focus until the girlfriend walk away in frustration .
No doubt leica is a premium brand but it can decide if it wants to stay niche or ride on the mass photography wave . At the end of the day it’s about dollar and cents and who are the customers that are willing to pay for their products.
Brandon
8 months ago |Even work from P&S cameras can warrant a gallery show at the finest locations. Leica no more distinguishes the skill of the photographer than any other brand. Indeed, because so many work off that assumption there may be a disproportionate number of unskilled wannabes trading on Leica pomp.
derek
8 months ago |oh my god, I worry too. what should we all do?
Todoke
8 months ago |It’s great that even on the weekend something’s going on here ^___^
Lessob
8 months ago |I am “worried” about huge Leica lense prices.
The only interesting thing here is that Leica feels the need to talk about Sony. They’re certainly only worried about the potential success of their own “mirrorless” system.
Alfonso Cuitiño
8 months ago |Hey guys, I haven’t been much up to date with news. I’m thinking of getting 5N, is it available worldwide already?
Solo
8 months ago |http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=nex+5n+availability
Robin Edgar
8 months ago |I do not think that Alfred Schopf is “worried” about large NEX lenses. He said that he was “stressed”, which is a bit different. Personally I think that all he meant was that he disapproved of such large lenses on a “compact” camera because they negate the goal of a *compact* camera. . .
BTW I expect that Alfred Schopf might be a bit “stressed” by just how much shutter noise the NEX 5N & NEX 7 emit. They are surprisingly loud for “compact” cameras and are FAR from competing with Leica in that regard. There are DSLRs with moving mirrors that have much more discreet shutter noise than the NEX cameras. . .
SonyAlphaLab
8 months ago |I really don’t mind the large lenses as an option, but we definitely need way more pancake style lenses!!
Jay
tonyk
4 months ago |We don’t need a NEX FF. APS-C is a great format, and the NEX is a great little camera. We just need Sony and others to improve their range of e mount lenses.
Matt
3 months ago |As a Sony Nex user, I understand the concern about the apparently large lenses on the Sony. Before getting a Sony Nex 7 I thought they were huge, based on pictures I had seen on the internet. The simple fact is, the 18-55mm is smaller than all of the other APS C 18-55mm lenses on the market, and it balances perfectly on the Nex 7, as does the 50 and 24mm which I also use. If they were smaller the camera operation would be diminished as it would not handle as well. The little pancake lens idea is nice for one or two pocketable lenses ( if their performance is good), but I wouldn’t go rushing off to change the size of the existing lenses. They work quite nicely. Really getting tired of all the blather about the over sized lenses. Their small in comparison to their direct competition (APS c lenses for DSLRs and perfectly sized for easy operation of the Nex 7. Not to mention comparing the whole thing to a ridiculously overpriced german rangefinder is ludicrous on so many levels.