As reported on MirrorlessRumors the Panasonic built Leica T type mirrorless camera will be launched in April. And it’s now pretty save to say that this camera will not feature a Micro Four Thirds mount. Panasonic will make the camera and zoom lenses for the new Leica system.
It has still to be seen if Panasonic will ever join the system. Very unlikely if the sensor has the APS-C size. More likely if the camera uses a Full Frame sensor…
59 Responses
Admin! You made a typing error:
“It has still to be seen if Panasonic will ever join the system.” – Should be Leica as Panasonic has joined 43 many years ago.
Leica has clearly stated they will not join 43 as the sensor is too small for this kind of cameras. Admin: You will have to live with this….. Don´t cry any more 😉
Clearly Leica is aiming at very high end APS-C cameras with the X series. They have managed so so until now making brilliantly built cameras that can produce excellent images – but with serious flaws like slow AF. And the price is so high only the richest Leicistas buy the cameras. Leica is obviously very afraid to market something that can cannibalize on the Leica M sales. With such strong limitations on the camera it is unlikely they will be able to develop a camera system with any success sales-wise.
This is not about Leica or Panasonic joining Four Thirds/Micro Four Thirds, it’s about a new system from Leica. Admin is writing about whether Panasonic would join Leica’s new system.
Admin meant that it is still to be seen if Panasonic will join the new Leica system.
Sorry for my misunderstanding!
Panasonic has great problems with their m43sales, losing market shares in a non- growth time. Broadening their offer with another sensor size could improve profitability, especially if develoment cost is shared with Leica.
The Sony A7 has messed up the mirrorless market and I guess all manufacturers have to at least pre-study FF systems.
Being owner of a FF system I still belive m43/APS-C are relevant. (own one of those too. )
The big question if the smaller manufacturers can survive with sustainable profit on a ” single sensor size” stategy.
Well, sure, Panasonic had problems during most of the last two years (since the release of the EM-5, really) with Oly’s PEN line way kicking the butt of the GX/GF cameras in IQ and value, and the EM-5 selling like hot cakes while Panny didn’t have a similar hit in its hands… (I mean, really what did they have to answer to the OM-D… They were selling the G3 at the time, a body universally panned for feeling like something out of Mattel Corp., not a camera) But with the GX7, GM1, and much better consumer zooms the tides have turned once again, as they now have a more desirable product than the PEN line… Panny are finally getting their act together in a way they haven’t managed to since the days of the GF1.
Examine FF? Yes. But m43 is succesfull because it is different. Panasonic. Oly and Fuji 9with Leica may be) would be wise to go for either a 600 mm2 4:3 system or better: a 40*30 mm version rivalling Sony from the topside and attract some MF users. As long as the price can be brought considerably down, that option should be researched.
Me-Too would not have worked with APS-c and will not work with FF mirrorless I think.
me too? we’re not there yet.
the full frame mirrorless market lies open,
in any of the current mirrorless camera brands would offer a comparable camera to what they have at the moment but with a full frame sensor, they would turn a lot of heads and could establish themselves as a very serious contender.
but would a ff mirrorless be able to offer the same user experience (usability, features, handling, portability,…) as the current mirrorless systems?
I’m not gonna pay through the nose for a new system if its just for somewhat better IQ and DOF – and a form factor to rival current dslrs…
Well said.
Gearheads and trolls are not photographers, they only care about specs like sensor size and ultra-high ISO, none of which has any importance to most consumers, what the majority of people are looking for is better-than-P&S IQ and features (like connectivity), but above all else they’re looking for one thing: Convenience
You may talk all you want about specs and performance but it’s convenience and usability which dominated the consumer’s mind, why else would everyone opt for smartphones instead of compacts ? IQ ? DOF ? people don’t give a fck about those things for the most part, and when they do they’ll still prioritize convenience even when deciding for an ILC. That’s where m4/3 wins above all else, it’s a sweetspot for ergonomics, usability, convenience, size, IQ, versatility, diversity and features.
Don’t get me wrong, the A7/7R are really attractive cameras there’s no doubt about that, but laws of physics are still in place and until someone comes up with curved organic sensors (doubtful since flange distance would need to change) there’s no way FF mirrorless lenses are ever going to reach the size of m4/3 lenses, meanwhile sensor technology is gonna keep improving for m4/3. Now, this is where the trolls would like to jump in and make a point about other sensor formats improving as well and that is indeed true, but as I said, lenses for APS-C and FF will remain large and m4/3 can just keep producing ever faster lenses too, so ISO and DOF are irrelevant.
FF is nice but it’s largely overrated since it only offers a small improvement over today’s APS-C and M4/3 sensors, let alone next generation organic solutions, all at the cost of absolute inconvenience. If I ever needed a REAL quantum leap in quality I would go straight to Medium Format, that’s where the trade-off in portability and convenience start to make sense.
m4/3 is the perfect companion to a MF setup, all the portability you (usually) don’t get with MF you can have with m4/3 and if IQ is a priority then that’s where MF shines. APS-C and FF are neither here nor there.
Forgot to add:
The problem with m4/3s is not a technological one, is not a specs nor performance issue, it’s MARKETING, plain and simple.
If Olympus and Panasonic could understand this and began to properly advertise this system to a broader audience outside of the typical camera joshi segment in Asia and instead push m4/3 as proper alternative to DSLRs and P&S alike in markets like Europe, the US, Latin America, etc…They could cement this system’s future into history. M4/3 is 35mm format spiritual successor(portable, convenient) and FF has taken the place of MF (limited to professional users), Oly and Pany need to realise this and act on it, they need to promote this system’s diversity, m4/3 is about the only system with such freedom of choice between body types and lenses
It’s been stated numerous times that the Leica T will be built in Germany!
Face it, not by Panasonic.
Oh sure, Germany uses Kanji now.
What does the statement “made in Germany” actually mean in the times of tier 1 to n suppliers? It seems plausible that all the electronics and maybe also central mechatronic components, like the shutter, would be built by Panasonic while Leica may provide the final assembly to warrant the “made in Germany”. It is the same business model they had with Minolta for some R-series cameras. Why shouldn’t they repeat it?
The only thing that will be built in Germany is the red dot and the “Made in Germany” label.
Made in Germany is a merchandise mark indicating that a product has been manufactured in Germany.
Perhaps they will make a new system with aspect 4:3 and crop factor 1.5 ?
no, square sensor 29.8 * 29.8 mm FF competition 🙂
who cares i would not buy a leica camera anyway lens are a maybe but camera is a no
i for one are sick of the talk of full frame this full frame that
if i wanted a full frame camera i would buy one (i am thinking about it) as there are two makers on the market now with all the lens i would ever need
even if olympus made a full frame camare i would not buy it
they can not even get a full range of lens for MFT on to the market let
alone full frame
the reason i brought in to MFT is the size anyone who thinks that a em5 12-40 and 35-100 is big kit has not used full frame i have and iam not interested
the main thing i want a good camera for is traveling and 6-7kg is most Airlines
carry on limit
i hope that Panasonic and olympus (sony) read this
my intrest in your camera products is MFT stop makeing them i will stop
buying you cameras
if you want to sell more then make MFT sensors better improve your CT-AF
and cover the big gaps in your lens line
ie a good Super telephoto prime a good wide angle zoom even if they are big they
will be smaller then full frame
if you want my money then give me something to buy
+1000
+1 nobody care. Just another needless camera.
I agree with you on the missing super telephoto. But if you want a wide angle zoom what is wrong with the 7-14?
The 7-14 (great lens…I own one)….is only f/4 an it is large (relative to the system)…a small fast prime in the 7-10mm would szoom ell…Also, the system is in desperate need of some fast-focusing telephoto primes with some low f/stops in the 150-200mm range. The AF lens choices in those focal lengths are very disappointing, in focusing speed, sharpness and light-gathering capability. The cost would be significant for a good tele, but perhaps it has not been produced because it is difficult to design or perhaps manufacturers are afraid it will not sell???
given that they have built a 300mm f2.8 for the same size sensor i dont
think that f4 would be that hard to do
Oh..right..you are talkink about a 4/3 lens I guess…I am not to familiar with them….actually a 200mm, 250mm and/or 300mm would all probably sell…f/4 would be fine…
anything under 300mm would have to be f2.8 or its too slow for me
300mm and up f4 is fine or thought i would like faster
they would sell more if it was smaller and light but anything under f4 is too slow
MFT 250mm f2.8 prime with x2 teleconverter would be great
Yeah..I was going to mention a tele converter, too! I guess we néed some tele primes before we have any chance of seeing THAT! I would want a top notch one…not a Tamron special…LOL. I was thinkin that the f/4 would keep the cost and size down…but I would pay for that if it had top notch sharpness….but you are correct…that would take the TC out of the equation which would cut down on versatility….At this point I guess we would be happy with ANYTHING…cause right now…as far as this photographer is concerned…we have nothing!
It is interesting how many times people here and elsewhere, me included, have called for a 7-8mm prime. Nothing yet. Are we such a niche market that Panasonic and Olympus can safely ignore us? No, we are customers too.
A wide prime will come eventually if the system keeps growing…
Before joining m4/3 camp, I use various UWA. Sorry but…7-14 is the worst in terms of IQ. Lots of purple fringe, purple bubbles, etc.
Not on my Panasonic cameras……..
I’d give my 7-14 up for a 7mm 2.8 prime in a heartbeat.
The 7-14 is an excelent sharp lens. On an Olympus body you may see some purple issues you referred, but that’s it. It is also very good on the Pocket Cinema Camera.
It is not “some purple issue”. It is very annoying purple things covering almost everywhere in the frame. Even Pana body, the purple things still exist but not are severe like on Oly bodies. Honestly saying I find out this kind of purple things on 7-14 is worse than other UWA lense that I used to have.
@Stephen
“Before joining m4/3 camp, I use various UWA. Sorry but…7-14 is the worst in terms of IQ. Lots of purple fringe, purple bubbles, etc.”
Agree with you. I had the same “Purple Fringing” proplem with 7-14 even with a Pana body during our interior architecture project. This resulted to long argument with our customers. We finally had to give up and change our solution. Its sharpness is very pleasing, but purple fringing is the worst among UWA that we have.
i am thinking about it no fillters is the main thing putting me off
both portector and cokin
f4 dose not worry me as i would be useing it for land and city scapes
a veary sharp slow 9-18mm weather seald lens would be fine with me
reviews seem veary mixed on it and it is a rear lens so i have not had a chance to
use it myself
the only frist hand thing i have head is that it renders very well but is not as sharpe as it should be i dont know if that is true
i may look at it again this year and try to get hold of one to have a go with
no fillter on my €100 7.5 fisheye is one thing but on €1000 lens is another story
all togther
I only interested in this so called Leica T mirrorless system camera provided it is a RF style camera .
By the way , anyone know who make the sensor ?
panny sensor,you saw back cooperate leica-panny,
cost optimize is good all device from join partner
Sensor manufacturer isn’t known. According to Leica (in an interview last fall) it will be AF and then rangefinder wouldn’t make much sense. Camera is supposed to be produced in Germany, lenses production divided between Germany and Japan.
No idea where the built by Panasonic and Pansonic sensor rumor comes from, it’s completely contrary to the Leica interview form just a couple of months ago.
For Leica T-system? That sounds like a compact P&S camera LOL!
A compact P&S is technically mirrorless right? 😉
I would like to see a m8.2 Mark II. I’m curious to see what kind of Aps-c sensor Leica is going to put in the camera. Ì don ‘t know if Panasonic has enough energies (read money ) to put in a completely new series of lenses. But a square sensor could have sense, when using available m43. Lenses with a diffrent mount.
Just curious but not interested: Leica smells like milk( ing ) to me… 😉
If it’s APS-C, Panasonic should jump on board and develop a non Leica camera, like the original L-1. Using the same mount and new lenses with aperture rings.
Can you imagine APS-C Lens versions of the 15, 20, 25, 45mm Panasonic M43 Lenses?
There are various things happening i.e. Panny selling is sensor factory, so perhaps it could buy the same sensor of Leica – SGS?
There was also some PC by Oly mentioned it was working together with Sony on lenses and new technologies, which immediately calls to mind a fix to the A7s.
In other words it seems that m4/3 is branching towards new mounts, or adapted ones. Multiformat is however a reality, so jealousy is short lived. Once you dispose of the mirror, you can deal with lenses in many ways.
I don’t think that new formats would be in substitution of m4/3 i.e. the new Leica could have a larger format that can accept m4/3 and so Sony FE, with adapter. Let’s wait and see.
Off corse Leica is not going M43. Today M43 is the worst compromise. FF for high quality, APSC for very good and afordable quality. Today M43 is losing the race. There stuff is to big and expensive with medium quality output. M43 needs to target te small and cheap market and bring the fight to point and shoot. At that place they can rule.
Thank you!!! Lol lol lol… for the joke of the day!!
I think m43 IS relevant and works as a system. Yes, some lenses are missing like super-tele, but give it some time. It took CaNikon a long time to get to where they are today.
Image quality is close to APS-C and may not be relevant to most. Really, depending on what kind of photography you are into and how results are distributed, it is perfectly OK. If you print large and have critical audience there are better and more expensive alternatives though.
Pure B.S.
So let’s put your trolling on perspective shall we:
You say compromise I say sweetspot. M4/3 represents the best balance between size, weight, ergonomics, usability and features of any format today. It’s pretty much the most versatile format you can get your hands on right now, with a wide range of body types and lenses you can build any kind of kit for any kind of situation from GM1 to EM1, from small primes to fast 4/3 zooms, you can use m4/3 from the most casual of social situations up to weddings and photojournalism, whereas you would have to be pretty insane to take a D4 for a simple birthday party, nor would you have any advantage by taking a huge bulky APS-C to a war zone or an expedition instead of an weather, freeze and dust proofed EM1. m4/3 can cope with the same demands as those of a compact and/or a DSLR while retaining full compatibility with a huge catalog of native lenses PLUS 4/3 legacy lenses PLUS practically every other non-mirrorles lens system out there.
Oh, and did I forget to mention that m4/3 can do outstanding video too ? yeah, we have the GH3 and Blackmagic cameras (if only Oly would do good video + 5 axis). And BTW, how many companies are producing bodies and lenses for those other systems ? Sony have only themselves making NEX bodies, Fuji’s the same, Samsung’s the same, Canon too, Nikon as well, etc… Only M4/3 has 4 companies backing it up bodies-wise (Olympus, Panasonic, Blackmagic, Kodak and possibly Sigma in the future too) and let’s not even start counting how many companies are providing lenses for this system vs others (some even exclusively).
APS-C and FF do not provide a big enough leap in IQ for the level of inconvenience they represent. If you’re going to chase the absolute best IQ at the cost of bulk then you might as well go with MF.
The only Achilles’s Heel of m4/3 as far as I’m concerned is the mediocre marketing behind it.
Sweet spot? For some that is a 5MP smartphone with with a fixed lens. Imagine iphone and galaxy will all have micro optical zooms and organic sensors. Good enough for infinite DOF photography.
+1
I don’t understand why people are happy to get overprized bodies (Em-1, GX7) far beyond APS-C and even beyond FF prices (e.g. NEX-6 or A7) and need 1600$ lenses to compete in output with a 250$ lens for bigger sensors. The price for this miniaturisation is so high, people are not willing to pay for it. The normal, more affordable lenses and cameras in M43 are meanwhile overtaken by non interchangeable lens cameras like the RX100 or the RX10 with a similar sized sensor and fast lenses.
These are also not really cheap cameras but just as expensive as a M43 body and ONE lens, yet more versatile or better in output. Going high end is the wrong direction. People wanting high end will go DSLR or higher end mirrorless, Fuji or Sony. TImes have changed, other manage to make small lenses as well for bigger sensor. The M43 vs DSLR war is alsmost over, now it’s M43 vs larger sensor mirrorless. The fight can’t be one so M43 should look more into getting smartphone and P&S camera users.
In a word: no.
well-founded argument
@Hans:
– ¨Sweet spot? For some that is a 5MP smartphone with with a fixed lens. Imagine iphone and galaxy will all have micro optical zooms and organic sensors. Good enough for infinite DOF photography.¨
Again, cameras are not just a sensor, and good cameras are not limited to big sensors either. A smartphone might take pictures but it’s not a photography centric machine much less a camera. A phone lacks the ergonomics and interface to properly serves as a serious camera, and it will remain so by its very nature, as long as humans have hands and eyes a camera will always offer a better experience than a phone.
-¨I don’t understand why people are happy to get overprized bodies (Em-1, GX7) far beyond APS-C and even beyond FF prices (e.g. NEX-6 or A7) and need 1600$ lenses to compete in output with a 250$ lens for bigger sensors.¨
a) Yes, m4/3 has taken a turn towards overprice, which is not a good thing for expaning your share of the market. OTOH Olympus and Panasonic don’t have the economies of scale of Canon, Nikon or Sony (but then again mirrorless should cost less to manufacture.
b)The EM1 might be a bit overpriced but when compared to other cameras in that segment the sheer amount of features and technology inside it put it somewhat ahead
of the pack. Show me any other camera, of that size, with 5 axis, weather sealing, robustness and versatility in the same market segment( And I don’t even like the EM1). Same goes for the GX7, sure, the NEX6 is very similar but then again the NEX doesn’t feature IBIS or a tilt EVF, nor does it have excellent small lenses. If your sole argument is sensor size then photography is not for you. Sensor performance between m4/3, APS-C and FF is a moot point by today’s standards, better come up with MF as a true compromise in favor of IQ.
– ¨The price for this miniaturisation is so high, people are not willing to pay for it. The normal, more affordable lenses and cameras in M43 are meanwhile overtaken by non interchangeable lens cameras like the RX100 or the RX10 with a similar sized sensor and fast lenses.¨
Overtaken ? HOW ? performance ? Nope. Size ? GM1, so nope. Versatility ? Nope, Interchangeable lenses. Price ? Again, no.
I do agree that m4/3 needs to start taking the market by lowering kit prices, that’s the only way to attract people to mirrorless instead of DSLRs. That, and a very intense and constant marketing campaign across the world.
¨ Going high end is the wrong direction. People wanting high end will go DSLR or higher end mirrorless, Fuji or Sony.¨
It’s not that high end is a bad thing, this is a system of cameras and lenses, having a foot in every segment is good. The bad thing is how badly priced and advertised the low end of m4/3 has been these past years.Also, how is Sony and Fuji higher end than m4/3 ? just sensor size ? Boy you’ve been brainwashed by marketing clowns.
¨TImes have changed, other manage to make small lenses as well for bigger sensor. The M43 vs DSLR war is alsmost over, now it’s M43 vs larger sensor mirrorless. The fight can’t be one so M43 should look more into getting smartphone and P&S camera users.¨
I don’t see any small compact bright zoom for bigger sensor mirrorless, and where are the bright pancakes ? yeah, didn’t think so. I do agree that m4/3 should place itself as a everyday camera in the minds of consumers, much like 35mm did back in the day, if people want more than a smartphone’s IQ they should go to m4/3 by default, and beyond that only MF makes sense.
Good arguments here. Having the possibility to chose between -say- a GH3 and a GM1 for shooting streetlife with excellent and fast and small “native” primes, adapting a broad range of FF lenses (while sitting via cropping with the smaller sensor in their sweet spot from start) or expanding via speedbooster your set of adapted lenses while in general not having to haul bulky equipment can make all the difference.
Versatility in gathering material rules. I rather lose a tiny, in most cases neglectable, percentage in IQ, than losing a shot altogether. The most terrible image is the one you have not gotten. Its a bit like people discussing cars only by relating to speed and forgetting that most times other factors are more important. Hell – even Cartier Bresson may have gotten “better IQ” using a 6×6 Pacemaker Speed Graphic but very propably would not have that chunk with him or not lifted it fast enough when the man did jump over the puddle…. 🙂
Bresson wasn’t fast when he took the picture of the jumping guy.
He saw a hole in the barrier surrounding the plaza, put the lens on the hole and took a random picture. He told that story when speaking about luck in photography.
There’s a french documentary (with subtitles) on youtube where you can actually see him telling the story of that picture.
Sorry, I can’t find the link, but that’s the truth.
Back to the answers to the FF troll: don’t even waste time with it.
I think there is one reason that EM1 sold at that ridiculous price: Oly thinks they are the new (japanese) Leica! Seriously, I can understand that kind of pricing if Oly has APS-C sensor but oly only use small m4/3 sensor. Oly should price it aggresively (like the EM5) and give more discount of volume lens purchase (buying lens in set of 2 or 3)
Since this new Leica wont be m43 and will involve Panasonic, it liiks like Panasonic is hedging their bet in m43.
The Leica T type 701 is just a replacement for the V-Lux. It has nothing to do with Leica’s upcoming mirrorless system camera.
Good move by panasonic, ie leica payiing them to develop a system that they will no doubt be able to take advantage of themselves (+the added cahe of the leica brand).
I think most people don’t see yet that 3/2 format is dead. More and more share in the market are aimed at screen display and video. In this sense an optical viewfinder is a non sense. And more at that the mirror is a relic that lives its last days. Think deep about why mirror were the dominant technology and then you will understand why its going to die.
Mirror have been there for focusing purpose in the manual focus days. Giving the user the power to focus. When auto focus was invented that fundamental was being shaken like a old pillar. When video began take over DSLR big format the mirror became a complete non sense. And now that the technology is allowing to make cheaper evf that ovf, mirror is dead.
Of course from a user point of view all this is BS, but from a theorical POV it is the reason Micro4/3 is here in the first place and why its going to rule the world sooner or later.
read above comment, DSLR is still the standard for APS-C, FF, 33×44 sensors , 48×36 sensors and 51×40 sensors. ( Phase one, Leaf, Mamiya, Pentax 645, Hasselblad, Leica S2, Nikon, Canon, Arca Swiss, Pentax and Sony) The tiny 110 filmsize MFT format is handsome and nice and has his place in the compact sector. Not the pixels does matter but the size does matter Always ! That was the case with analog photography and it’s the same with digital photograph it’s simple the law of physics (light, depth of field , dynamic range etc etc) For me is my Hasselblad H4-60 the standard nothing else.
And my analog Horseman 4×5 inch camera.
MFT format camera’s are the new compacts, (quarter of FF or 110 size sensor) and have there place. Serious photography is with 1/2 FF = APS-C ore with FF and larger. CMOS is entering the medium format and will further decrease prices. The need for a small sensor is passed away because prices are dropping. For reduction of camera sizes it’s meaningless advertisement , look at the FF Sony R1 ore A7.