[LRflex] Speculation....galore!
- From: KEITH LONGMORE <keith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:48:36 +0100
Hi All
Some interesting speculation already going without David's report - now
we can get down to some REAL speculation, methinks!! ;-)
Being serious though...the large Hasselblad sensor. If it caters for 2
1/4 square equivalent, I can see some sense in it; what I can't see is
going that route for 24x36 - indeed, I'm not enamoured with the idea of
jumping directly to a full-frame sensor anyway. Why? Two points:
1. Most film lenses don't perform well towards the edge of sensors
because of the very different incidence angle and the need for light to
go along a 'tube' for each pixel; so if you want good performance from a
full frame sensor, you need a lens designed for it. Just look at the
prices of Canon's L lenses, and you can see the consequence. That also
means that you can't use older glass successfully, and adaptors aren't
the solution (unless, of course, they involve some clever - therefore
expensive - optics). Users of R lenses, note well!
2. As well as allowing the effective use of older lenses, smaller
sensors, e.g. APS-C size, increase the effective magnification of the
lens. That means that people like me can avoid buying hugely expensive
new glass, and get very respectable results with older glass; that means
I am naturally attracted to buy a body that will permit me to do that.
(Note - I have now bought a Canon 20D body!) If a customer who buys a
new body that permits use of older glass, as I did, and is happy with
that body, as I am, that customer is very likely to gravitate to a body
of the same make when upgrading. If I upgrade now, I shall undoubtedly
look first at Canon / Sigma / Tamron glass designed for Canon bodies,
and that means compatible with the 1Ds. What the 20D does is buy me
breathing space, should I want to go that way. I can upgrade lenses as
and when I can afford them in the knowledge that they will perform
should I decide to buy a 1Ds at a later date. (I probably won't,
because of cost - but a 5D is a possibility) In other words, I'm
future-proofed, and they keep and grow my custom.
I would suggest that any camera company needs to think like this
nowadays. It's much cheaper to get repeat business than to keep seeking
new customers!
There is another point. Leica must learn to walk before it tries to
run. If problems occur in the field like with the DMR, what will that
do for them? Going to new-for-Leica technology on several fronts at
once (AF, IS, full-frame sensor, etc) will inevitably bring problems; if
they are committed to a launch date - which I guess will be an absolute
necessity in the current climate - they will have a disaster on their
hands if problems appear in the field. If you don't think there's
evidence for that, just think of the number of cars killed off or
unsuccessful for the same reason! (Citroen XM, Austin Maxi, Austin
Princess to name but three)
As I said before, we shall see. Speculation about what Leica will do is
bound to be fascinating (a 'merry sport') but at the end of the day, the
reaction of a far wider audience than this forum will be the ultimate
decider - and not least, the reaction of the photographic press.
Customers are a fickle bunch, let's hope that Leica turns them on and
not off...
Cheers
Keith
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
