Epson makes a digital rangefinder that takes the leica mount. I've heard a lot of good things
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Leica M9 is announced!
- Thread starter CrackedButter
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Epson makes a digital rangefinder that takes the leica mount. I've heard a lot of good things
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml
I don't think this improves the image in any way. In fact I think it makes it worse because of the greater divergence of light rays at the more extreme angles on the edges when the sensor is closer to the rear element. This is why many old primes and even the 70-200 are not that great on the latest nikon FX bodies (in the corners at least)- digital sensors don't receive light coming in at an angle as well as straight on, something that did not exist in film. This is why microlens technology is so important and possibly one of the reasons that the M8 was not FF- the microlens technology needed to advance to the point where it would be practical on a rangefinder with no mirror.
Because removing the AA filter introduces for moire, the reason that they put the filters on in the first place. Technically speaking the removal of the AA filter is best because you do get greater edge sharpness and can always use PP to help alleviate or remove moire, but it can be difficult and time consuming. This perhaps is where some of the Leica philosophy comes in, best image quality at all costs.
Incidentally such a service is available for Canon/Nikon SLRs. I think it's called "hotrodding" the camera and there is a company who will remove the AA filter for you on your camera. I believe this is a non-trivial procedure because the AA filter sits below the IR filter, directly on the sensor. Thus it requires a lot of disassembly to get to it and must be done in an absolutely clean environment to prevent dust intrusion. Cost is ~$500 I think but don't quote me on that. Some pro photographers have removed the AA filter from their DSLRs as well (Thom Hogan for example I think has done it on his D3).
The Epson rangefinder is now discontinued, so the Leica Ms are the only current rangefinders available new.
OK, this is my understanding of this! Anti aliasing filters are there to reduce the appearance of 'jaggies' on straight lines/edges, much like the appearance of AA'd fonts ie the edges are softened off. This process is required if the recording/display method (digital sensor, scanner, printer or computer screen) is of a lower resolution than the original source material as any edge would then appear with jagged edges as opposed to smooth lines (think of very early computer graphics where a diagonal line was composed of a 'stepped' line). An AA filter is used to reduce the resolution of an image to below that of the recording/display medium and therefore lines are smoothed out. An inherent side effect of AA filters this is that images are recorded softer, and with DSLR's an image is usually sharpened in camera when the JPG is created or at the RAW file processing stage to counter this.
It is possible Leica believe their M cameras are not going to be used for reprographics and such like, so will therefore not be often used to record strict edges. An M camera will more likely be used in the field, where organic shapes are more likely to exist and the resolution of current sensors is sufficiently high enough for any jaggies to only appear at true pixel peeping scrutiny, and which is not a true representation of normal viewing resolution (how often do you look at a Seurat pointillist painting from a few centimetres away?) Therefore an image recorded without an AA filter will be sharper, but does run the risk of any straight/repetitive lines being affected by moire and appearing jagged.
Do Canon and Nikon still need to still use AA filters on their current cameras? Possibly not as the resolution of sensors has increased over time. Certainly with early digital cameras they were required as the sensor resolutions were very low.
This is just my understanding if the issue so please don't quote me on any of this!
Bah, Padaung beat me to it.
In any case, since making this thread, I've started to save for the M9. I have 10% of the cost towards the body saved already! Woo!
You can also start saving up for the $6500 50mm f/1.0 Leica M lens, too.
More seriously, I hope you already have at least a small collection of Leica (or compatible) lenses or would plan on getting at least one or two lenses for the most common focal lengths you use. Most lenses aren't as expensive as the 50mm f/1.0, but the cost can add up quickly. Worth it to secure some decent lenses to put the M9 to good use? Definitely. Something to financially plan for? Definitely.
Some nice full res M9 samples uploaded here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-m9-portfolio-schmidt-en.html
As someone on the Fred Miranda forums pointed out, check out the third photograph down. There you'll see some good examples of what the lack of an Anti-alias filter can accomplish. Notably the scratches on the glass of the van's right front door where the reflection of the overhead light accentuates them. And the clarity of the text on the edge of screen right, under Curt Delfosse. Also the red and white decals on the front of the van. Impressive stuff!
Makes me want one all the more. But while I have the money, I don't (yet?) have the justification for getting one.
As someone on the Fred Miranda forums pointed out, check out the third photograph down. There you'll see some good examples of what the lack of an Anti-alias filter can accomplish. Notably the scratches on the glass of the van's right front door where the reflection of the overhead light accentuates them. And the clarity of the text on the edge of screen right, under Curt Delfosse. Also the red and white decals on the front of the van. Impressive stuff!
Makes me want one all the more.
But while I have the money, I don't (yet?) have the justification for getting one. thanks Ruahrc and Padaung, that made lots of sense and in fact I think Padaung got it right about the organic shapes thing cause if I recall correctly, the longest rangefinder lens is 105mm? So by the range of the lens alone, to me clearly markets the rangefinder for people/street photography
Yeah, it is addictive to see the M9. Hmm, maybe sometime in the future (after I completed my Nikon stuffs first) I might have one in my bag I love to take photographs of everything and street is one of the field where I would loved to take some photos of, just that usually dSLR stands out too much and PnS doesn't give the image quality I like (also I prefer to look through a non-electronic viewfinder)
Guess its time to work work work
Yeah, it is addictive to see the M9. Hmm, maybe sometime in the future (after I completed my Nikon stuffs first) I might have one in my bag
I love to take photographs of everything and street is one of the field where I would loved to take some photos of, just that usually dSLR stands out too much and PnS doesn't give the image quality I like (also I prefer to look through a non-electronic viewfinder)Guess its time to work work work
You can also start saving up for the $6500 50mm f/1.0 Leica M lens, too.
More seriously, I hope you already have at least a small collection of Leica (or compatible) lenses or would plan on getting at least one or two lenses for the most common focal lengths you use. Most lenses aren't as expensive as the 50mm f/1.0, but the cost can add up quickly. Worth it to secure some decent lenses to put the M9 to good use? Definitely. Something to financially plan for? Definitely.
I'm a Canon user who has always been interested in Leica, I knew they would release a full frame digital camera at some point.
I have some pretty good gear on the Canon side of things so when I get close I can sell it all to make up for it, maybe anyway, that's how my head is thinking!
Best of luck in saving your pennies, I'm sure it'll be worth it once you get the camera in your hands. Getting the top lenses adds considerably to the cost though!
PS Really like your 'Youth' series of images on your website.
Thanks a lot, I found the youths didn't mind my big 1Dsmk2 but the car culture is different, a lot of the people are older and self-concious sadly, and I want to be more discreet. But I only shoot at night and the shutter with my presence is really noticeable. If I could get this camera in time that would be great.
Thats is a very informative post, and thanks for it; I imagine that the Leica is incredibly rugged also. I have seen the M8 - and handled it, a beautifiul camera, and have read reviews on the M9 which make me seriously want to consider it. Is there anything else you'd care to add about Leica, seeing that you are a Leica owner?
Cheers and good luck
The Epson Rangefinder
I believe that the Epson RD1 still lives, but after the RD1 s iteration it's now the RD1 x and is a Japan only product. There is a lot of information online if you Google "Epson RD1 X" The camera still keeps a 6MP, but now has a 2.5" LCD. The crop factor of 1.5 makes this a different camera from the MP9's full frame though.
Oh well, dreams are free.
I believe that the Epson RD1 still lives, but after the RD1 s iteration it's now the RD1 x and is a Japan only product. There is a lot of information online if you Google "Epson RD1 X" The camera still keeps a 6MP, but now has a 2.5" LCD. The crop factor of 1.5 makes this a different camera from the MP9's full frame though.
Oh well, dreams are free.
Okay everybody. Just for a bit of fun, what kind of lens would you personally put on the M9.
Right now I'm leaning towards one of the following:
-Leica Summilux M 50mm f1.4 Asph - Silver
-Zeiss Planar 50mm f2.0 - Silver
-Leica Summicron M 35mm f2 Asph - Silver
The Zeiss is in there for a large part because it would be a significantly cheaper alternative to the allegedly superior Summilux. But eventhough the Zeiss is still highly lauded by many, the f1.4 of the 'lux is certainly a selling point.
Still very much deliberating between 35mm and 50mm.
Right now I'm leaning towards one of the following:
-Leica Summilux M 50mm f1.4 Asph - Silver
-Zeiss Planar 50mm f2.0 - Silver
-Leica Summicron M 35mm f2 Asph - Silver
The Zeiss is in there for a large part because it would be a significantly cheaper alternative to the allegedly superior Summilux. But eventhough the Zeiss is still highly lauded by many, the f1.4 of the 'lux is certainly a selling point.
Still very much deliberating between 35mm and 50mm.
Hmm, if its me, I would go for the f/1.4 cause of the aperture alone.
Now about the 35mm and 50mm, well I guess now it depends, cause there is no crop factor so both lenses will work as how it should. A 50mm is always regarded as a what you eye sees through the viewfinder, but sometime I find 35mm has it needs to
Yes, the f/1.4 is a big selling point. The lux, from what I can gather from online opinons, seems to get consistantly great reviews. Just a bit more consistant than the Planar.
Figuring out a good Wide Angle lens will be a lot trickier (and costly)....
Figuring out a good Wide Angle lens will be a lot trickier (and costly)....
Hmm, if its me, I would go for the f/1.4 cause of the aperture alone.
Now about the 35mm and 50mm, well I guess now it depends, cause there is no crop factor so both lenses will work as how it should. A 50mm is always regarded as a what you eye sees through the viewfinder, but sometime I find 35mm has it needs to
A 50mm is always regarded as a what you eye sees through the viewfinder, but sometime I find 35mm has it needs to
just to be clear, a standard lens does not represent what the eye sees. it merely reproduces the perspective. and in some article somewhere I don't remember, the author equated it with "what you remember from the scene 5 minutes later," or something along those lines.
what's your intended use? for street, I would pick 35mm. it allows you to get closer and really bring the viewer into the scene.
some people find the perspective of a standard lens a bit boring, so you should find out if you're on of those people.
Wow... I just placed an order.
M9 in steel-grey paint finish (should go nice with the uniBody MBP's) along with a 50mm Summilux with silver-chrome finish.
Now begins the agonizingly long wait for delivery (1-3 Weeks for the camera and 4-6 for the lens).
M9 in steel-grey paint finish (should go nice with the uniBody MBP's) along with a 50mm Summilux with silver-chrome finish.
Now begins the agonizingly long wait for delivery (1-3 Weeks for the camera and 4-6 for the lens).
congrats! Now what you need is to open a new thread to post a photo of the M9 and the 50mm Summilux (when you get it of course), and post up some photos taken by it
Pet photos FTW
Looks like I'm a bit late on this, but for others who are also asking the same question --
If you have the money for the Lux 1.4asph, go for it. It has the very modern Leica 'look,' and is considered to be the best 50mm available at any price by many.
If you're looking at spending less, consider picking up a vintage Leica lens rather than the modern Zeiss. A 1950's vintage 50mm Summicron (f/2) will be in the same ballpark, price wise, and will not disappoint.
When I bought my M8, I opted to go for the 35mm Lux ASPH to use as my normal, due to the crop factor, and it cost an arm and a leg. I find myself using a 50mm DR Summicron quite often (great lens, but has to be modified by a professional repair guy for use on the M8/M9 -- http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/98233-m9-dual-range-50mm-f2-summicron.html).
I find that the DR Summicron produces quite a different 'look' than the 35mm Lux ASPH, one that I like a lot. If you find yourself digging the 50mm focal length, it migth be something to consider in the future. There's plenty of vintage glass available.
Hope you enjoy the M9... it's a few years away for me.
I'm saving up for the M9 and the f1.4 50mm (aiming for the f0.95 is going to be impossible), all together I will be spending £6000 in total, then at some point I will go for the 24mm f1.4 and then the 90mm f2. This is like a 10 year plan though and it started last week
I need to shoot some more weddings for sure!
I need to shoot some more weddings for sure!
Wow, a 10 year plan, interesting. I wonder will there be a M10 during that timelineI'm saving up for the M9 and the f1.4 50mm (aiming for the f0.95 is going to be impossible), all together I will be spending £6000 in total, then at some point I will go for the 24mm f1.4 and then the 90mm f2. This is like a 10 year plan though and it started last week
I need to shoot some more weddings for sure!
And since you mentioned weddings, I do wonder, are they any wedding photographer who uses Leica for some of their wedding photos? Just wondering
Wow... I just placed an order.
M9 in steel-grey paint finish (should go nice with the uniBody MBP's) along with a 50mm Summilux with silver-chrome finish.
Nice one!
I'm saving up for the M9 and the f1.4 50mm (aiming for the f0.95 is going to be impossible), all together I will be spending £6000 in total, then at some point I will go for the 24mm f1.4 and then the 90mm f2. This is like a 10 year plan though and it started last week
I need to shoot some more weddings for sure!
I've been going through the same process! My dream kit comes to £19000
And since you mentioned weddings, I do wonder, are they any wedding photographer who uses Leica for some of their wedding photos? Just wondering
Yeah, a people use them. I've seen photographers carrying them and I've used mine in the past, but it's a film body so it doesn't get the use it really deserves these days. Go to here and you'll find a large number wedding photographers in the forums.
Wow, a 10 year plan, interesting. I wonder will there be a M10 during that timeline
And since you mentioned weddings, I do wonder, are they any wedding photographer who uses Leica for some of their wedding photos? Just wondering
The 10 year plan thing was a joke, to point out that this is going to take a while for me. By the time I have the money there might well be a M10, hope so because I will be first in line for it.
I'm sure there are people using Leica's for weddings and 'Wedding Journalism' (like me). The shutter clicks don't interfere with the ceremony for starters like an SLR would. It's as almost as though you're saying a £4000 camera isn't capable of shooting weddings.
I recently shot a wedding and wasn't allowed to photograph during the service, a 1Ds is kinda loud I guess, but while I could video the service, imagine the shots I could get via stills from a Leica?
Nice one!
I've been going through the same process! My dream kit comes to £19000
Whats your setup? Mine comes to at the moment:
M9 = £4217,
50mm f1.4 = £1850
24mm f1.4 = £3162
90mm f2 = £1880
Total = £11,109
But the body and the 50mm to begin with!