For anyone that is interested, Leica is in partnership with Panasonic to develop digital photo equipment. I received this information via the Leica Newsletter received today.

http://www.leica-camera.com/unternehmen/presse/data/02224/index_e.html

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), July 24, 2001

Answers

Thank you Al. Now, can we hope a digital back for our lovely M ?? Wouldn't it be nice? and frequently required by customers on the Leica customer forum? Regards, Alain

-- alain.besançon (alain.besancon@chu-dijon.fr), July 24, 2001.

Hmm. I an not sure that it will produce what Alain is after - I think that more Digilux-type cameras are more likely to be in the pipeline to tap into Leica's most successful revenue segment - compact, more consumer-oriented, cameras.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), July 24, 2001.

Leica has been dropping hints about a digital camera back for sometime now. I fear it will be unbelievably expensive to build a rangefinder focusing camera with a full size digital pickup. Maybe 5 years from now it will be common, but right now Pentax showed a 6 meg full size pickup SLR body for $7000.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 24, 2001.

The other hurdle will be to keep the size and weight down-not easy to do when you figure all the extra stuff that needs to get packed in there. If they came out with a camera that made an M5 look compact, it would be a hard sell to Leica M owners..

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 24, 2001.

I'd accept a camera which had a flat "film" extension up from underneath (possibly attached as a back door replacement), from a motor-type housing mounted as current motors are that would contain the digital guts. Given that there are high-quality digital cameras similar in size to the Leica motor, that doesn't strike me as implausible, especially since such an addition would negate the need for a motor.

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), July 24, 2001.

The Leica / Panasonic relationship has been ongoing for some time. Leica supplies lenses for the premium quality video cameras that are produced by Panasonic

-- David Page (pagedt@attglobal.net), July 24, 2001.

I'm not so sure they couldn't fit it into an M5 sized body. Remember, these digital SLR monster-sized cameras are that way because of the batteries. If you forego autofocus and shutter, and use these up-and-coming organic displays (which consume considerably less power than the current LCD screens), could the batteries be made small enough? Also, I don't think that a traditional shutter is really necessary (just strobe the CCD), so with all that space freed up, maybe they could put the necessary electronics in. I agree it would have to be a full-frame camera to be successful though, and I assume by the apparent delays in the already announced Pentax and Contax full frame digital SLRs that there are production problems with these new 6 Megapixel CCDs. Time will certainly tell...

-- Dan Kreithen (dkreithen@mindspring.com), July 24, 2001.

I don't really see this as good news. I gave up on Panasonic products several years ago because the only things worse than their dismal quality and reliability was their service and attitude toward customers.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), July 24, 2001.

I really don't see the point in a digital M. An R definitely. But the whole idea of the M (IMO) is fast street shooting and available low light work. Now if I'm out on the street in a fast moving situation I sure am not going to be shooting, checking my LCD screen to see if it's a keeper, then saving the image or dumping it. One of the big advantages to digital is film cost savings. But at the same time, if you're not dumping the bad images on a regular basis, at full res it doesn't take long to fill up a 1 GIG compact flash at $500.00. And the lowlight capability of the current sensors in no way approaches the capability of a film like TMZ or Fujicolor 1600. One other thing. The suggestion of the bottom load sensor (which would be much like the digital film insert for sale now) is no solution either. The digital film has a 1.1 magapixel res - enough for a great quality 4x6 in print. Just what I always wanted from my expensiv

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), July 24, 2001.

Just because digital film is that way doesn't mean Leica has to emulate them :-)

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), July 24, 2001.

From the Leica Press release - emphasis added.

"About Leica Camera AG Leica Camera AG, Solms/Germany, is a world-wide renowned manufacturer of precision optical products for WORK AND LEISURE. The company employs 1,450 employees and recorded sales of ¬ 157.8 million (some US$ 135 million) in the fiscal year 2000/2001 (March 31). Leica Camera shares are listed at the Frankfurt Stock Exchange."

How would each of you classify your Leica - work or leisure?

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), July 24, 2001.

Bob:

But the whole idea of the M (IMO) is fast street shooting and available low light work

Actually, on my street, I would have to walk a half mile to find the next house. The camera is great for other things too.

I don't really think it will be a viable idea until they have a 24 x 36 mm chip which can be afforded [otherwise can you imagine a 9 mm Lux]. Just my opinion.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), July 24, 2001.

The full 24 X 36 chip has to become affordable, and the resolution of the pickup needs to be double or triple of what is currently available. Otherwise it won't make much difference whether a Leica lens is focusing the image on it. That's why I was thinking we may be 3 years away from the technology needed to make it a reality. I was also wondering how they would get arround the fact that out Leica M lenses have a manual diaphram. If there was to be an LCD panel on the back somewhere, it may be very dark when shooting with the lens stopped down.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 24, 2001.

Hello M lovers,

Of course, I agree with everybody: it was (is) a dream; a removable digital back for my M, even without any screen. In fact, a simple digital film for my wonderfull machine ! Best regards, Alain

-- alain.besançon (alain.besancon@chu-dijon.fr), July 25, 2001.

The M body could be the ultimate digital camera. It's strengths are the rangefinder, the build quality and the glass. The quiet shutter would be quieter if there was no shutter. If no batteries is important you can still have a film body as a backup.

The rangefinder is almost completely self-contained in the top plate, leaving all the rest of the body volume for the sensor, battery, drive bay, circuit cards, and back LCD. Here is a camera which solves one limitation of digital SLR's, that the LCD only displays the image after the shot. This would also offer two options, rangefinder viewing with its inherent focussing accuracy, or LCD viewing with accurate framing.

Film is only a different kind of sensor. Good lenses perform better than poor lenses in front of any sensor. You need a very good sensor to challenge the sharpness of a summicron, but there are plenty of poeple using T-MAX 3200 handheld with Leica, because sharpness isn't everything. They still benefit from low distortion, contrast, low light fall off, and that look (bokeh). If you bolt your M to a heavy tripod and shoot Tech pan, you will have to wait a little longer for your digital sensor.

You don't have to use the LCD if you dont want to.

The number of images on a CF card is a much smaller limitation than film. Today 1 GB microdrives will store a couple of hundred 6mp images. Remember what a 1 Gb hardrive for your PC cost 10 years ago. Project what a 40Gb CF card will cost in 2011! Film comes in 24 or 36 exposure rolls last I looked, bulk load it and you might squeeze forty images on the roll.

If your preferred work flow is shoot Velvia or Techpan and pour over images on a light table through a 10x loupe to the tiny hard core of like minded "Photographers" then you will be able to boast of "better quality" images until CMOS, and CCD sensors of maybe 10mp become available. Replacing a slide show is not so easy.

If you final product is a color print which normal people will appreciate, todays 6mp sensors are already competitive on quality. Film has improved continually, but look at the rate of improvement in sensors and regardless how high your standards are, the curves will cross somewhere this decade.

I agree that a full frame sensor is desirable. More so on the Leica M, as wide angles are the heart of the system.

The non-retrofocus design of the M lens line up could give sensor manufacturers differculties due to the angle of light falling on the sensor.

The cost question can be answered by taking a look at your film processing costs. If you shoot a couple of hundred rolls of Velvia a year, a $7000 digital body is pretty easy to justify. But look at the price curve for pro digital cameras. The M shutter has to be an expensive item to produce. Full frame sensors will just keep getting better and cheaper.

If you bulk load Tri-x, and love your darkroom, enjoy the glut of cheap top quality darkroom gear flooding the second hand market.

If you prefer the workflow of film/darkroom, this will always remain a valid process, capable of images of breathtaking beauty, but a cost effective light jet printer which can expose conventional B&W papers will be a final nail which will close all talk of "quality" and "better".

I hope Leica doesn't rush in and built some half-arsed M body based on the first full format sensor on the market. Having sat out AF and various other advances, they should wait until someone builds a really killer quality, low energy sensor, and then stun the world with a great M7. If Cosina doesn't beat them to it.

-- Mark Wrathall (wrathall@laudaair.com), July 25, 2001.

Thanks Mark. Now I shall be busy to understand all details of your interesting mail. Have no doubt: I enjoy with my M like it is today (by the way, buying it was a very old dream). My actual fright is the death of conventional cameras (and the death of a dream is the worst thing I can imagine !)and it explains my "new" dream: why not a second life for Mister M in a digital way? But as "he" is and as I love "him" ...but for how long? With my best regards Alain

-- alain.besançon (alain.besancon@chu-dijon.fr), July 25, 2001.

Leica Camera AG, are you reading this thread? ¡It should tell you a lot about your customers' preferences!

I don't see any difficulty in designing a digital street photography-optimised M body. Shutter lag of conventional digicams can certainly be overcome. Admittedly, we'll be back to M5 metering without a shutter, but don't tell me the company that built the I and the M3 can't solve this problem!

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), July 25, 2001.

I think the digital M will have to be a whole new camera, not just a back for the current M cameras, simply due to the battery issue. As far as shutter lag goes, much of the shutter lag you experience in consumer-grade digital cameras is due to the sequence of events that must happen when you press the shutter button (autofocus, to be precise), and the fact that the processors in those things are slow and puny. If you forego autofocus, a given for a digital M, then that lag will go away. Importantly as well, the lag for reading the CCD (or other type of sensor) and processing the data is substantial, but I think this will not be a driver for an M, since it's not normally used as a "motor-drive-shoot-5-frames-a-second" camera anyway. The digital M does not have to be a do-everything camera by its very nature (unlike these digital SLRs now on the market). The key is an affordable full-frame sensor of 6 Megapixels or more. Those of you who doubt that a 6 Megapixel sensor would be sufficient...well, you may be right in an absolute sense, but have you seen prints done with the current crop of digital pro SLRs? Up to about 11x14, they're pretty impressive.

As far as low light goes, conceivably it would be possible to incorporate into the design some noise-reduction techniques that may limit the size at which you could plausibly print the resulting images...but doesn't this already happen with fast-film (BTW, I agree that large grain (from film) is far more acceptable than pixelization). I think a plausible digital M is closer to feasibility than you might think, if Leica can make it happen. I wonder if Matsushita (I doubt Leica's technical ability in design and production of the sophisticated electronics that would be required) is willing to sink resources into such a design for the admittedly small M market?

Also, with this alliance, Leica seems to finally be admitting the inevitable...that they are an OPTICS firm...how long will it be before they drop the R line of camera bodies and make lenses in mounts for other marques?

-- Dan Kreithen (dkreithen@mindspring.com), July 25, 2001.

Sorry but I thing a digital M is wishfull thinking, not counting the CCD size problems but the fact that Leica hasnt even put aperture priority into and M yet! Their association with Minolta could have given them that technology 20 years ago. Digital Leica M, I hope im alive in the year 2050 to see that one!

-- Joel Matherson (Joel_2000@hotmail.com), July 30, 2001.

I've always heard that the Minilux and other Leica P&Ss are made by Panasonic. Can anyone confirm or refute this?

-- Joe Buechler (jbuechler@toad.net), July 30, 2001.