[Leica] Leica modifying M-mount for digital M?

[allen.graves at charter.net (Allen Graves)]

Funny. When I use manual lenses on my D200, I just enter the focal 
length and max f-stop. From then on, I can just select that lens from 
a list.2 different 50's 2 different 35's, etc. Nothing spent on lens 
conversion. Takes a few seconds.Focal length and max f-stop data 
available for EXIF data. This could also trigger appropriate frame 
lines, if an SLR needed them.<grin>

  If this sort of cheesy "conversion" is required for each lens and 
doesn't give a lot more functionality than max f-stop and focal 
length, then Leica will have succeeded in driving one more nail into 
their coffin-even if the M8 is a fine camera. Even by Leica 
standards, 125 Euros is a lot for 6 dots of white (or black) paint. 
Jeffery  could rebuild the entire New Orleans Levee system for the 
cost of converting his 50's.

Allen

>To add to the speculation:
>http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24359
>
>This site (in French) seems to have good information.  Run it 
>through AltaVista translator (aka Babelfish) if you don't read 
>French.
>http://www.summilux.net/m_system/objectifs_6_bits.html
>
>It looks like a 6-bit system that is read optically, rather than 
>electronic contacts.
>
>A reasonable conclusion from all this is that the new coding will be 
>used to tell the camera exactly what focal length is mounted, and 
>what the maximum f-stop is.  This information could be used for EXIF 
>data, for metering, to compute the working f-stop by comparing the 
>light read from the lens to the light read from an external sensor. 
>It could also be used for vignetting compensation, color balance, 
>and things like that.
>
>It could also bring up framelines generated via an illuminated LCD. 
>This could be quite an exciting development, something I've wondered 
>about for years.  It would be like having the wonderful, clean M2 
>viewfinder again, but with individual 28 and 75mm frames also 
>available.  It could shift and expand or shrink based on focusing 
>distance. This would give us more accurate framing than the current 
>system, which only shifts.  The frame selector could work using the 
>original lens flange, plus one bit in the coding to tell the CPU 
>whether to bring up the large or small frameline of the original 
>pair.  Or just use the coding for exact focal length if available, 
>bring up the traditional pair if no coding.
>
>None of this precludes the use of old or non-chipped lenses.  It 
>just means you'd have less information in EXIF data, and you might 
>have to adjust vignetting or color balance a bit more manually in 
>Photoshop, Raw converter, etc.  And for the framelines, you'd have 
>to have a manual override for unconverted lenses.
>
>My own thought is that Leica would be incredibly stupid if they made 
>their existing lens base unusable without conversion.  And I don't 
>think they (and their new CEO) are that stupid.  Especially with an 
>R-D1 on the market, and the distinct possibility that Zeiss might 
>follow suit.  They can't afford to lose sales to the existing base 
>of M and LTM users, because that base will be the majority of their 
>sales.
>
>So Leica, if you're listening, PLEASE allow viewfinder frames to be 
>set manually, if the coding is used to bring up an LCD-based 
>frameline.  Backward lens compatibility is a MUST.
>
>Supposedly Leica will make an official announcement next week.
>
>Now, anyone want to take bets on how long it will be before a 
>do-it-yourself lens upgrade method gets posted on the Web? 
>Something involving a rat-tailed file, a micrometer, and nail polish 
>stolen from your Goth-girl daughter or girlfriend . . .  Kyle 
>Cassidy, take note!   :-)
>
>--Peter
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information