When can we expect a reasonably good screen and fast image review?

[xrogers]

The next digital M will almost certainly have a better screen. A current 3" 3:2 aspect ratio screen with the same resolution as the S2 is used on the DLUX-4/5, and could fit by widening out the rear controls a bit (no need to move into the top plate at all, perhaps a little into the bottom).

The next digital M will likely be faster because Leica has already developed what they need to make it faster in the S2. It's likely the next M will use fewer electronic parts (the Maestro includes dual cores, DSP, SD/CF and USB interfaces in one chip).

Leica would benefit from a single code base for firmware, for cost, speed to market, common bug fixing, and common base code libraries (I have not heard about SD card compatibility problems with the S2---the SD firmware for the S2 comes from Fujitsu with the Maestro). The more parts in common between the M and S lines (and even the X) the better for Leica and customers.

A smaller, low resolution LCD and slow processing (whether some care or not) is not a selling point. We have the screen and slow processors because the M9 had to be based on the M8. The M10 will be based on the M9 and S2, and will be a better camera for it.

Until later,

Clyde

[paulmac]

Nothing wrong with the M9 as it is - don't reinvent the wheel and ruin a great design. Want a bigger screen, then maybe best to go and buy another camera.

[Steve Ash]

[quote=Swanny66;1759122]I do not take 10 extra shots ..quote]

So do I. I set the focus when I look through the viewfinder.

Regards
Steve

[bill]

So, here's a quick sanity check... All these paragons of photographic virtue with bigger rear screens are either physically bigger already (DSLRs) or designed to be held at arm's length with that peculiar "fastidious zombie" grasp. What matters to me is the amount of real-estate on the back of the camera that I can use to grasp it firmly while holding it to my eye without accidentally thumbing a button or sticking prints on a screen. Most modern digicompacts have already gone too far in this regard.

Regards,

Bill

[bill]

Originally Posted by Dabow

...I'd rather have a tool that does the job I need it for well rather than something that just looks good at club meetings.

...and the point that I, and many others make is that there are probably tools that are better for the job that YOU need it for than this one.

A chisel is a fine tool for carving wood. You can also use it to slice cheese. If you need to slice cheese you don't start by buying a chisel and wishing that it was a cheese knife and arguing that it should be modified to suit that purpose.

Regards,

Bill

[Dabow]

Originally Posted by bill

...and the point that I, and many others make is that there are probably tools that are better for the job that YOU need it for than this one.

A chisel is a fine tool for carving wood. You can also use it to slice cheese. If you need to slice cheese you don't start by buying a chisel and wishing that it was a cheese knife and arguing that it should be modified to suit that purpose.

Regards,

Bill

I think we've already had the 'those that like to have one foot stuck in the past/those that like to look forward to the future' debate Bill, so I'm not going there. I don't think it's your position to suggest to me what tools I should be using to do my job. Nor is it anyone else's, just because they enter panic mode whenever anyone suggests what they regard as an improvement that doesn't take away form. Debate and huff and puff to your hearts content, but I'll use what I please to get the look that I want and exert my right to request improvements where I see they're required. You didn't write the book, you certainly don't own the company. As such, I suggest you respect those who dare to differ without resorting to radical (and somewhat presumptuous) suggestions that they're using the wrong equipment. This, IMO, is one of the fundamental flaws of this forum - 'M elitism' and the fear of change, which leads to the berating of anyone who offers up an improvement suggestion.

Time moves on and with it comes change. Some for better, some for worse. I know what I want, you seem to know what you want. Let's leave it at that, eh?

[jaapv]

I don't think Bill is talking about form, i think functionality is more on his mind. I agree that there is always room for improvement, but there are no reasons to graft functions onto the M whatever that are better on other tools, and certainly not at the expense of the concept of the Leica M series. Up until now Leica has done a great job retaining the basic ideas of the M3 in the latest iterations, and I am sure they will not deviate. It would be suicide.

[Dabow]

Originally Posted by jaapv

I don't think Bill is talking about form, i think functionality is more on his mind. I agree that there is always room for improvement, but there are no reasons to graft functions onto the M whatever that are better on other tools, and certainly not at the expense of the concept of the Leica M series. Up until now Leica has done a great job retaining the basic ideas of the M3 in the latest iterations, and I am sure they will not deviate. It would be suicide.

I firmly believe that the suggestions I have made serve only to improve the M, NOT turn it into something it isn't. There are reasons I bought the M in the first place so what would be the point in Leica taking a different direction. As you state, it would be suicide. Similarly, staying putt would also be suicide. So there has to be a compromise somewhere.

The other thing is, there seems to be some God written rule which some members doggedly adhere to that the Leica M should only be used as a street camera. Quite why is beyond me, and surely it serves Leica better if people use it for other purposes as well, thereby increasing the customer base. Why come out with a lens like the Noctilux and then limit it's capabilities to street work when it's capable of creating beautiful portraits. Unfortunately, portraits wide open require critical focus, and this (for me) is where the M9 fails. It doesn't have to though, hence my various suggestions which - and let me just reiterate this for the panic brigade - would not move the M away from it's core values (IMO)

[charlesphoto99]

Perhaps along with the bigger display Leica will give us a a bigger sensor for the M10. Sources tell me this is one under consideration (and it's still a CCD):

What a 268-Megapixel Sensor Looks Like

[andybarton]

I don't think that real estate on the rear of the camera for a 3 inch LCD screen would be a problem if that sensor were to be used on the M10.

It's interesting to see how large that is. I wonder if it's the astronomical use that drives that? After all, a few Hasselblad sensors stuck together would soon get to 268 mpixel, in a much smaller area.

[Steve Ash]

Originally Posted by Dabow

Thank you for your recommendation, which you freely give having no knowledge of the type of photography I would like this feature improved for. My recommendation is to keep such wisdom to yourself, unless it's applicable to the case at hand (which it is not).

Dabow, your are welcome.

The reason why I join this forum is that I enjoy to discuss the different point of views and learn from the experience of other users. In this respect I kindly decline your recommendation. You might reevaluate your motivation to join this forum.

Kind regards,
Steve

[jaapv]

I haven't seen much about street shooting in this thread, anyway I am not guilty. I am probably the worst street shooter on the forum, so I tend to stay far from the subject.
For me the M(9) is far more universal than many would give it credit. I think the changes that will be created for a successor will be non-invasive in a superficial sense, complicated as they might be to implement. Things like weatherproofing, a better LCD at the same size, processing improvements through newer electronic technology, maybe even a new sensor if Leica can find one they like and such are far more likely than vast changes in specifications, hybrid viewfinders, focus confirmation and the rest that have been proposed in this forum.


Btw. Your M9 should not fail in critical focus on portraits, on the contrary, that is one of its strong points.

Originally Posted by Dabow

I firmly believe that the suggestions I have made serve only to improve the M, NOT turn it into something it isn't. There are reasons I bought the M in the first place so what would be the point in Leica taking a different direction. As you state, it would be suicide. Similarly, staying putt would also be suicide. So there has to be a compromise somewhere.

The other thing is, there seems to be some God written rule which some members doggedly adhere to that the Leica M should only be used as a street camera. Quite why is beyond me, and surely it serves Leica better if people use it for other purposes as well, thereby increasing the customer base. Why come out with a lens like the Noctilux and then limit it's capabilities to street work when it's capable of creating beautiful portraits. Unfortunately, portraits wide open require critical focus, and this (for me) is where the M9 fails. It doesn't have to though, hence my various suggestions which - and let me just reiterate this for the panic brigade - would not move the M away from it's core values (IMO)

[andybarton]

Originally Posted by jaapv

I haven't seen much about street shooting in this thread, anyway I am not guilty. I am probably the worst street shooter on the forum, so I tend to stay far from the subject.

You're going to have to get behind me in the queue for that accolade

[xrogers]

Originally Posted by bill

So, here's a quick sanity check... All these paragons of photographic virtue with bigger rear screens are either physically bigger already (DSLRs) or designed to be held at arm's length with that peculiar "fastidious zombie" grasp. What matters to me is the amount of real-estate on the back of the camera that I can use to grasp it firmly while holding it to my eye without accidentally thumbing a button or sticking prints on a screen. Most modern digicompacts have already gone too far in this regard.

Regards,

Bill

I think a larger screen can be added without risk of messing with a button or smudging a screen (beyond the fact that a larger screen will always have more area to smudge). . The whole left edge of the camera back can be used for whatever you want, your hand isn't there, it's under the base and lens. Leica has allowed more room than is required for the left side buttons by a fair measure, I'd expect little "real estate" trouble fitting a wider screen.

I also agree that if doing it screws up the camera, Leica should not (and will not) do it.

Until later,

Clyde

[pico]

Shoot tethered to a Garmin through an adapter to it's micro SD slot.

[diogenis]

There are more elegant solutions to allow an external monitor to connect with an M. So, instead of Leica changing everything in the camera they can simply add a wifi chip and connect with everything.
Either way however, Leica should make the current screen OLED if possible for lower power and better llumination. They also need to make it faster too. But come on guys, seriously, don't tell me that you need that shitty LCD monitor to validate your focus: just trust the RF mechanism and your eyes, and you will never miss focus again.

[krabat]

I also cannot imagine that the correct focus can be evaluated on a small rear screen in a reliable way, no matter if it is 2.5 or 3 inches. Please think about how an M camera would look like with a really large screen. In addition, please think about the power consumption with all technical add-ons one could imagine (wifi, GPS, etc.). In the end, somebody calls for an integrated shoe-shining brush or a built-in coffee mill...

[Dabow]

Originally Posted by Steve Ash

Dabow, your are welcome.

The reason why I join this forum is that I enjoy to discuss the different point of views and learn from the experience of other users. In this respect I kindly decline your recommendation. You might reevaluate your motivation to join this forum.

Kind regards,
Steve

Might I? Is that yet another recommendation Steve?

Discuss and learn. Perhaps you'd better add teaching to that.

Your original recommendation was presumptuous and ill informed. Perhaps, therefore, there's a lesson in there to be learned. Let's leave it at that

[Dabow]

Originally Posted by jaapv

Btw. Your M9 should not fail in critical focus on portraits, on the contrary, that is one of its strong points.

Well, as I've mentioned elsewhere, glasses are an issue for me and I struggle to obtain critical focus where I want it as much as I would like, especially in portrait mode. Some of that is my issue. Some of it is, as I see it, a camera failing that could be improved upon.

[Double Negative]

Originally Posted by movito

My mother's Canon S90 has a better screen (and better interaction design) than my M9.

Then go buy an S90?