S2 and R10: BJP News

[TimF]

clicky.

I'll believe the hoped for January launch of the R10 when I see it, but fingers crossed.

[parisian]

Good morning Tim, I hope the delay is simply to avoid a 'Kodak' moment.
They do seem to be concentrating their efforts on the 'S' system which is sensible if their market research suggests that this is the way to go. Certainly the quoted (ball park) price of 20,000 Euro will put it in direct competition with (say) Hasselblad.
I do wonder however if Leica have the R&D and manufacturing capacity to work on three 'top end' cameras at once.
That the 'M' will continue to evolve is a given as, it seems, is the 'S'. Does this leave the 'R' - which surely has to be be full frame - as the perennial Cinderella? under funded, under prepared and eventually doomed

[Mark_Norton]

Leica's track record of predicting availability dates is not the best and we've seen the S2 slip from mid-summer (maybe even April at one point) to late-summer to early autumn so it will be at least a full year since it was shown at Photokina. I think the idea that the R10 could come along in January is hopelessly optimistic. A launch at Photokina 2010 sound more likely and us M users will have to wait until Septemver 2012 for a new M body. Maybe.

[parisian]

M users will have to wait until September 2012 for a new M body. Maybe.

Maybe not Mark. There is a thought that a full frame 'M' body may well be too difficult to engineer while keeping the essential Leica size and shape. Addressing the higher ISO issues may well be the way to go and if we paraphrase Barnacks own statement 'Small film (read sensor), big print' then perhaps the 10 megapixels could well be enough for all our needs.

[Clive]

M users will have to wait until September 2012 for a new M body. Maybe.

Maybe not Mark. There is a thought that a full frame 'M' body may well be too difficult to engineer while keeping the essential Leica size and shape. Addressing the higher ISO issues may well be the way to go and if we paraphrase Barnacks own statement 'Small film (read sensor), big print' then perhaps the 10 megapixels could well be enough for all our needs.

You are so right, Peter: I think those of us with the 12mp FF Nikons would concur so strongly. In an ideal world we would also have a FF 24mp job, where the balance is towards ultimate quality at lowish ISO settings. But if Leica went for the ISO capability on,say a 10mp M, then I feel they would have a success story similar to the D3/D700 especially with those lenses.

Even, perhaps, an 8mp sensor may be the answer: I don't see the rationale for packing in the sensors if it compromises the higher ISOs.

[Mark_Norton]

Well, the M8 currently uses a FF sized shutter unlike, say, a DX Nikon such as the D2x which uses a shutter set to the frame size. It would be possible to put a FF sensor in there, there's space, I've done the meaurements, they'd have to fix the battery compartment intruding into the lens throat and the camera would need a higher level of electronic integration which we're seeing in the S2.

It might mean the body is taller with the batteries installed along the bottom but the only real FF issue as I see it is the pesky light angle issue which shows up when you put wide-angles on it. Come up with a pixel design with wider angle of view and we'd be set.

The case for a FF M to my mind is that the sensor will capture nearly twice as much light in a single exposure; how they choose to use it depends on the trade-off between resolution and noise. One issue with the D3 is that the lower spatial sampling frequency imposed by big chunky pixels makes moire more likely and requires an aggressive LPF. Increasing the pixel count doesn't give you the noise advantage but gives you higher resolution and allows you to (in Leica's case) remove the LPF completely. The M8 image quality at low ISO comes not just from the glass but the missing LPF.

As it is, D3 images are just slightly soft with that crispness lopped off by the LPF.

There's an exact analogy with digital audio where a brickwall (low pass) filter is required to prevent aliasing (moire). Increase the sampling rate by oversampling (pixel density) and you can use a much less aggressive filter or none at all.