Leica User Forum


Go Back   Leica User Forum > International User Forum > General Leica Discussions > Customer Forum

Customer Forum The Leica Customer Forum is the place for discussions about the Leica in general, what is not covered by the more specialised sections

Reply « Previous Thread | Next Thread »
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 30/09/12, 22:06   #1 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
iedei's Avatar
 
Join Date: 20/08/12
Location: Brooklyn NYC
Posts: 865
Default Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Ad
so either they decided between May and now that they are going to use their 'new' M and Type designation.......OR perhaps they will go back to M11? (less likely)

M11 - Reviews & Brand Information - Leica Camera AG , - Serial Number: 79113724

the same site shows the M10 being trademarked in 2010. Interestingly they let the X1 trademark expire, however renewed the M8 trademark this month! not sure why they would do that.....but interesting!
__________________
SYED
Leica M5 & Leica M8.1
Elmarit 21mm F2.8
Komura 35mm F3.5
Summicron 40mm F2.0
Summilux 50mm F1.4
Super Rokkor 50mm F1.8
Ricoh GRD-3 & GXR
500px
iedei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30/09/12, 23:05   #2 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
Join Date: 27/11/11
Location: Bath
Posts: 2,448
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

I see no reason for just the M, we all get used to systems and names. MX of M10 worked for me. It will be what people call it.

They could easily simply put M on the front and M10 on the Shoe
IWC Doppel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 00:21   #3 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
bybrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: 18/09/07
Posts: 1,386
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

I've just posted this elsewhere but it's more relevent here -

"Naming the M10 as M also renders it almost completely future google proof."
__________________
Brett
flickr
interview
bybrett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 00:34   #4 (permalink)
Sponsoring Member
 
farnz's Avatar
 
Join Date: 28/02/06
Location: London
Posts: 12,622
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

"Leica M" isn't search engine proof though so does calling it the M instead of M10 make any real difference in this regard?

Pete.
__________________
Eur. Ing. Pete F@rnsworth
Live and let live.
My tea is brewed in Russell's Teapot.
farnz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 01:35   #5 (permalink)
mjh
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
mjh's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01/03/06
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 9,089
Default AW: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by iedei View Post
so either they decided between May and now that they are going to use their 'new' M and Type designation.......OR perhaps they will go back to M11? (less likely)
It’s the former.
__________________
Michael J. Hußmann
mjh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 02:13   #6 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
iedei's Avatar
 
Join Date: 20/08/12
Location: Brooklyn NYC
Posts: 865
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by bybrett View Post
I've just posted this elsewhere but it's more relevent here -

"Naming the M10 as M also renders it almost completely future google proof."
good point. it sucks to search for "Leica M' instead of "Leica M10"....as one ends up with all sorts of other results.

then again, the automotive world has dealt with this over the years, however people often search for cars with their year or chassis/generation number. It won't be easy....but i'm guessing people will formulate a way.

what i found striking is that they trademarked the M10 name as late as May.....so dropping it was a late development....
__________________
SYED
Leica M5 & Leica M8.1
Elmarit 21mm F2.8
Komura 35mm F3.5
Summicron 40mm F2.0
Summilux 50mm F1.4
Super Rokkor 50mm F1.8
Ricoh GRD-3 & GXR
500px
iedei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 02:35   #7 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
Join Date: 21/08/07
Posts: 339
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Perhaps by using only "M", Leica is telling us that this is the end of the 80 or so year coupled rangefinder range. To me. M is a generic term for the bayonet mount r/f camera.
With the live view and EVF with peak focus, what further need is there for such an expensive, complex and delicate system of focusing?
A new range of lenses with the diaphram ring placed at the back of each lens, but otherwise needing little if any optical difference could be used for wide open focus with auto stop down. The present lenses would only need manual stop down.
Doubtless I am totally wrong, but that is not for the first time.\
John.
EJohnE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 03:25   #8 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
darylgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06/08/11
Posts: 484
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by iedei View Post

what i found striking is that they trademarked the M10 name as late as May.....so dropping it was a late development....
If Leica trademarks the name, it removes the availability of the designation M10 despite non use. I am surprised they waited until May to do this, no matter when deciding on the final model name.

Once upon a time Olympus introduced a M-1 model, prior to release the model name changed to OM-1. Leica is said to have influenced Olympus to change the name.
__________________
Daryl
darylgo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 04:04   #9 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
Join Date: 02/03/10
Posts: 3,341
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Hello Everybody,

Perhaps what started life as the "M10" & "M11" ended up being "M" & "M-E".

Which, given the late date of the 2nd application, might mean that the M-E was an after thought when some 1 realized that the space occupied internally by the frame preview mechanism & USB port was required for something else in the future, or alternatively, the frame preview's elimination might be part of the phasing out of the optical/mechanical range/viewfinder @ a time period when there is still a strong demand for the M9.

This might partially explain the lower price of the M-E. Incentive to transition.

Similar to the M2 which was introduced in1958: The M3 began production in 1954. The big difference in cost between the M3 & the M2 was the range/viewfinder. The range/viewfinder used in later M3's cost more to produce than the range/viewfinder in the M2. The manual reset frame counter, rewind button & removal of finger guards around the range/viewfinder windows & lens release button, which were less significant, were popularily noted when listing reasons for the price decrease of the M2 (the newer camera). The M4 that replaced both the M3 & the M2 in 1967 was essentially a stylistically updated M2 w/ a non-removable quick load, self resetting frame counter, canted (faster) rewind & 135mm frame shown together w/ the 35mm frame. The M2 had the 35mm frame but not the 135mm outline. The M4 also had standard PC outlets (Prontor-Compur) in place of the stronger & more secure, but less universal, Leitz outlets. The 1st M to have a hot shoe was the M5 which replaced the M4 in 1971. It had 3 flash outlets: Hotshoe, electronic flash & bulb. Each independent of the other.

Best Regards,

Michael

Last edited by Michael Geschlecht; 01/10/12 at 04:24.
Michael Geschlecht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 06:47   #10 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
bybrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: 18/09/07
Posts: 1,386
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Return of the Visoflex...

Jan Stamer, 35536 Wetzlar, FED REP GERMANY - a Trademark Correspondent
__________________
Brett
flickr
interview
bybrett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 06:56   #11 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
Join Date: 05/09/10
Posts: 143
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Ad
I hope this does not presage a change of mentality in Leica to that beloved by (mainly, but not exclusively) American firms*, namely trademarking various relatively simple and common phrases and bons mots used in their publicity, then getting very snooty and protective if someone (in their opinion) uses this in another context. No doubt all due to some scheme dreamt up by a lawyer with nothing better to do.

Just think how we could all be extolling our Leicas with "I'm loving it" if someone had not got there first...

*If this has whetted your appetite, see:
Microsoft Trademarks
Apple - Legal - Trademark List
What is the Trademark of McDonalds

As for the cameras, the M-number line being developments (some might not say 'improvements') of earlier models, there was some logic in the sequential system. However, although numbers are infinite, a given technology does eventually reach its apogee and a new direction has to be taken.

In this respect, the M8 and M9 are something of a transition - digital technology in a body originally designed for film. When an alternative to rangefinder focusing (i.e. live view) was added - although still a Messersucher - methinks someone in cried, 'Enough is enough!', and so we have M-alone.

What about the M-E? Given this could not be construed as a development of the M9, there was not point in increasing the number. However, as declared by Leica, it is an Entry or Eintritts model. How long before an M user buys one as a second body and cries 'ME too!'?
Richardgb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 07:16   #12 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
bybrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: 18/09/07
Posts: 1,386
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by bybrett View Post
Return of the Visoflex...
Followed by return of Frank cue Big Splash
__________________
Brett
flickr
interview
bybrett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 07:40   #13 (permalink)
Sponsoring Member
 
farnz's Avatar
 
Join Date: 28/02/06
Location: London
Posts: 12,622
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by bybrett View Post
Followed by return of Frank cue Big Splash
PLEASE NOOOoooooo!!
__________________
Eur. Ing. Pete F@rnsworth
Live and let live.
My tea is brewed in Russell's Teapot.
farnz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 08:36   #14 (permalink)
SJP
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
SJP's Avatar
 
Join Date: 27/09/07
Location: Den Haag
Posts: 4,314
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

At least someone listened to his advice.
__________________
Stephen
unofficial unmoderator
________________________________________________
my flickr site
SJP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 14:44   #15 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
Angora's Avatar
 
Join Date: 24/06/06
Location: Paris (Latin Europe)
Posts: 424
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by iedei View Post
good point. it sucks to search for "Leica M' instead of "Leica M10"....as one ends up with all sorts of other results.
Well, it's less convenient.
But a search for +"leica m" +2012; or +"leica m" +240 for example; should be quite efficient.

Systematically adding M10, M11, M12, etc. when talking about the corresponding model will also render Leica's scheme completely pointless.
Angora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 14:47   #16 (permalink)
mjh
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
mjh's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01/03/06
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 9,089
Default AW: Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Geschlecht View Post
Perhaps what started life as the "M10" & "M11" ended up being "M" & "M-E".
As far as I know, M11 always referred (informally) to a successor of the M10, just as M10 referred to the successor of the M9. There were also the usual internal code names for the M and M-E, but these were neither M10 nor M11.
__________________
Michael J. Hußmann
mjh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01/10/12, 14:50   #17 (permalink)
mjh
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
mjh's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01/03/06
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 9,089
Default AW: Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by EJohnE View Post
With the live view and EVF with peak focus, what further need is there for such an expensive, complex and delicate system of focusing?
Customers buying the camera for just that feature? Just a thought …
__________________
Michael J. Hußmann
mjh is offline   Reply With Quote
Thank You says
EJohnE (02/10/12)
Old 01/10/12, 17:09   #18 (permalink)
SJP
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
SJP's Avatar
 
Join Date: 27/09/07
Location: Den Haag
Posts: 4,314
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

We could demand the Mπ, the irrational model, or Mi the imaginary one.

Where has Frank/megasplash gone anyway? At least he provided some text to get our teeth into...
__________________
Stephen
unofficial unmoderator
________________________________________________
my flickr site
SJP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03/10/12, 02:21   #19 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
Join Date: 21/08/07
Posts: 339
Default Re: AW: Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjh View Post
Customers buying the camera for just that feature? Just a thought …
True. However many new Leica users seem to have trouble, at least initially with rangefinder focusing. Others are simply puzzled by it.
Maybe many of those who say they have always wanted a Leica would be more attracted to a camera with what is now more conventional focus method.
I personally loved the rangefineer/viewfinder system, but as an uninformed guess it must comprise about one third to one half of the camera's cost???
A greater market share may be achieved by a new body able to still use M lenses and those from 1930'sLTM with adaptors, pluse R lenses, and just about any one elses.
Leica had better be quick, otherwise Olympust may beat them to such a 24 x 36 format offering much the same at a lower cost, and little loss of quality.
John.
EJohnE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03/10/12, 07:25   #20 (permalink)
Erfahrener Benutzer
 
Join Date: 27/11/11
Location: Bath
Posts: 2,448
Default Re: Leica had trademarked "M11" in 05/2012..

Quote:
Originally Posted by bybrett View Post
I've just posted this elsewhere but it's more relevent here -

"Naming the M10 as M also renders it almost completely future google proof."
The name, yes, but not the Camera. Porsche 911, BMW M3, M5 have gone the same way, for me my next question is 964?, 993?, 996?, 997, 997.2 etc or E34, E39, E60 and so on. The 'M' will only get you have way.

For me the M'number' was Classic and differentiated the models much more elegantly, they could happily put it in small print or Roman numerals on the top. We all know the M range anyway, the marketeers have now added 'E' in any case
IWC Doppel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Current eBay Ads
Current bid:
404.3 GBP
(0 bids)

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 00:29.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
© juergensen.net - Andreas Jürgensen