Tempted by M-E ?

[Guest MarcRF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Marc, you are quite right; it is possible to visualize the fields of view for popular focal lengths. But see my reply above for my technique for exploring tighter crops. There is something quite satisfying floating a frame over sub-sets of a scene. Sure you could guess, but why guess when within a few seconds you can evaluate precisely the benefits of changing a lens.

 

I should add that in some situations when I am working with one lens, I use the lever to assess the potential for a return visit on another occasion, or under different lighting conditions, with a different lens. For travel I always have two or three lenses with me.

 

well I see the point of course. it's just that I've gotten used to the lines so fast... probably just because I dont use 75/135 at all. anyways, I still got the lever on the M6ttl I got. I had a shooting with the M-E today and I must say that the 50 summilux was just on it forever... no need to even imagine the other frame lines, at least today

 

but good to see that there are people actually using the feature... I just guess that you belong to a minority, thats why leica didnt include it in the new M as well... might still be the same workflow for you. when you did this for quite a time you might be able to see the other lines already

[wda]

...but good to see that there are people actually using the feature... I just guess that you belong to a minority, thats why leica didnt include it in the new M as well... ...

Or they guessed I would be keeping my M3, M6, M8 and M9.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[wilfredo]

Responding to the original question, yes I am tempted and considering both options I'm looking forward to seeing images from the new M but have a sneaky suspicion they will resemble Leica X series camera images, which looks more like Canon to me than Leica. M9 prices on E-bay have come down significantly.

Edited December 22, 2012 by wilfredo

[Dougg]

...

but good to see that there are people actually using the feature... I just guess that you belong to a minority, thats why leica didnt include it in the new M as well... might still be the same workflow for you. when you did this for quite a time you might be able to see the other lines already

I'm another throwback who likes the frame selector lever to preview the scene for other lenses. Unfortunate to have that missing from the new Leicas.

 

An oddball use is when mounting my 40mm Rokkor which normally brings up the 50mm frame... To use the 35mm frame instead, I can loop a rubber band around the preview lever and strap lug to hold the lever full-left. I started doing this on an M2 years ago, but it works as well on M8/9. Prefer not to grind the lens lug... Also this could serve when using a 35mm screw-mount lens on the "wrong" adapter.

 

And... when those admirers around me observe I apparently need a rubber band to hold my camera together, it may take the edge off any elitism!

[ramosa]

I am waiting to see what the M will be like. I don't need the video or focus peaking, etc., but would like to move from cropped to FF and wouldn't turn my nose at other improvements on the M9 (e.g., faster processor, better LCD, quieter shutter). Of course, IQ is what matters most. If the M's IQ isn't good enough, I would, then, likely ponder an M9 or ME at a much cheaper price. I have never been concerned with how a camera looks ... well, until I saw the ME. Ha. I don't mind the greyish metal, but the silver knobs! Man, just give me all black.

[Universalb50]

Personal preference regarding features like paint color, color of various knobs, deletion of USB port/frame selection knob notwithstanding, isn't it a bit unusual to cease production of your most conventional model M9 so long before your successor M model is available?

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Personal preference regarding features like paint color, color of various knobs, deletion of USB port/frame selection knob notwithstanding, isn't it a bit unusual to cease production of your most conventional model M9 so long before your successor M model is available?

 

I don't think so.

 

They haven't really discontinued the M9, because apart from those two relatively immaterial changes which do not affect the performance one jot, and the colour which shouldn't matter to anyone, the ME still is the M9. Just a little less expensive.

[jip]

I rather stick with my black M9-P and M8.2 because it has saphire glas instead of gorilla glas... spahire is better. The M9 I have has un countable scratches... on the screen, very annoying.

[plasticman]

I hadn't considered the M-E at all until I saw the recent images from the M - now I'm not sure what to do. If my M8 somehow malfunctions or breaks down in the (near) future, then I'd hate not to have a CCD option from Leica.

 

But the M-E rankles with me because it's so obviously designed to be moderately unattractive and unnecessarily accentuate its 'cut-price' nature, so as not to draw sales from the new camera whilst also not alienating existing M9 and M9-P owners wishing to sell and 'upgrade' to a later model.

 

The design of any equipment I use is important to me - it adds to my overall pleasure of using it, and I therefore genuinely believe it helps me be a better and more enthusiastic photographer. I personally wish they'd continued the M9-P - surely anyone wishing to retain the CCD look would also be willing to pay for a nicer looking camera?

[pop]

(...) surely anyone wishing to retain the CCD look would also be willing to pay for a nicer looking camera?

 

Not me. While I don't think I would buy a gold or pink edition or some such, I don't really care what my gear looks like. If it was the only camera at hand with the required properties, I'd not be above using even such garish gear.

 

Had I known that they were about to bring the M-E to market, I'd have waited half a year before buying.

[colonel]

But the M-E rankles with me because it's so obviously designed to be moderately unattractive and unnecessarily accentuate its 'cut-price' nature, so as not to draw sales from the new camera whilst also not alienating existing M9 and M9-P owners wishing to sell and 'upgrade' to a later model.

 

The M-E looks beautiful in the flesh

Its nice to have the slightly blued grey, and the bottom door with the silver catch looks great.

I think I mentioned that I swapped my M9 for a M-E

 

I don't think the M-E is designed to be cut price at all. The M9 manufacturing process has merely been honed to be 20% cheaper. The box, finish and feel of the M-E are all as premium as the discontinued M9

[Universalb50]

I had thought that the M-E was a echo of the wartime and immediate post war Leica cameras, made when chrome was not easily available and so the "utility" gray-green paint finish was used as a low cost substitute?

[colonel]

I had thought that the M-E was a echo of the wartime and immediate post war Leica cameras, made when chrome was not easily available and so the "utility" gray-green paint finish was used as a low cost substitute?

 

leica black and M-E are over brass

the same

 

blued grey is used for guns and artillery pieces where the highest wear is required

[plasticman]

The M-E looks beautiful in the flesh

Its nice to have the slightly blued grey...

 

Naturally we can discuss differences of taste for ever - thank goodness we don't all like the same things - but I have seen it 'in the flesh', and of the four of us that stood in the shop discussing the M-E, only one person rather feebly defended the design (saying it was "okay"), and he was the dealer selling it!

 

The point I was trying to make in my earlier post is that Leica quite intentionally constructed the camera as a design outlier - some will like it, but the vast majority will be (at most) lukewarm.

 

If they'd produced an all-black camera, then I absolutely promise you that no-one would be saying 'I wish they'd produced a dull, rather sickly greyish blue M9 instead'.

 

So my point isn't really about the fact that I personally don't like it - but that I believe Leica themselves designed it to be somewhat off-putting (for the reasons I stated above).

 

Still we'll see what happens in the future. I was appalled by what we've seen of the CMOS sensor so far - we'll see some real comparisons over the next month. Maybe the last chapter in the Leica CCD book hasn't been written yet, after all...

[colonel]

Naturally we can discuss differences of taste for ever - thank goodness we don't all like the same things - but I have seen it 'in the flesh', and of the four of us that stood in the shop discussing the M-E, only one person rather feebly defended the design (saying it was "okay"), and he was the dealer selling it!

 

The point I was trying to make in my earlier post is that Leica quite intentionally constructed the camera as a design outlier - some will like it, but the vast majority will be (at most) lukewarm.

 

.

 

This just is not logical

I get it, that you don't like it

It's taste after all

But to say that any company intentionally designed something not to sell is just crazy.

I have shown it to colleagues at work, friends and family. Most say it looks smarter then the black.

Of course some traditional/older M photographers might not like change. Maybe those were the people in the shop.

[plasticman]

This just is not logical

I get it, that you don't like it

It's taste after all

But to say that any company intentionally designed something not to sell is just crazy.

I have shown it to colleagues at work, friends and family. Most say it looks smarter then the black.

Of course some traditional/older M photographers might not like change. Maybe those were the people in the shop.

 

I have no idea why the other guys didn't like it - camera shops are one of the few places strangers will speak to each other in Sweden. We all agreed the Xpan I was there to look at was a beauty - maybe they were just being polite.

 

I don't know I'd describe myself as a 'traditionalist' - I just like understated design. A camera color that doesn't attract attention to itself is therefore preferable - in my opinion.

 

The M-E is still a better looking camera than 99% of other cameras out there anyway.

 

PS: naturally I don't mean that Leica want to actively discourage people from buying the camera, but just like many other manufacturers (of cars, hi-fi equipment etc) they want to create a 'hierarchy' of desirability for their products, to steer buyers in a certain direction.

Edited December 26, 2012 by plasticman

[Michael Geschlecht]

Helo Everybody,

 

Don't forget Leitz built a VISIBLY lower cost alternative before with the introduction of the M2 as a companion to the M3.

 

On the outside the M2 originally had a button rewind in place of the earlier better lever rewind & a manually reset frame counter in place of the earlier better automatically resetting frame counter which reset itself to -2 with the removal of the take up spool in the M3.

 

There was also the removal of the earlier really nice frames around the 3 windows in the front of the camera. These frames both helped to protect the windows & helped to keep finger marks, etc off of them.

 

But: The biggest cost differential between the M2 & M3 was the much cheaper to build M2 range/viewfinder which became the model for all later M range/viewfinders. The newer range/viewfinder in the M2 was the major reason for the substantially lower price of the M2.

 

The M4 was an upgrade of the M2 after the M3 was discontinued.

 

In the same manner: The R3 was created to replace the Leicaflexes because the Leicaflex's shutter had become very expensive to build.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited December 26, 2012 by Michael Geschlecht

[iedei]

But to say that any company intentionally designed something not to sell is just crazy.

 

totally agree. NO company does that. i think the M-E is FAAAR cooler looking than the outgoing M9.

[plasticman]

totally agree. NO company does that.

 

I admit I put this very badly in my original post, but in fact companies position their products in this way all the time: disabling an output on a hi-fi system; not allowing leather seating in a specific car model, and so on.

 

The role of the M-E is therefore as a 'positional good' in relation to the M - which is in turn a classic 'Veblen good'.

 

PS: I didn't mean my posts to be an attack on the M-E. As far as I'm concerned, I'm yet to meet anyone who likes it, and I'm basing my views on that general fact - it seems that a lot of people are at the very least indifferent to the color and spec of the camera.

I genuinely think that Leica could quite easily have continued producing an all-black camera, and that such a product would have sold at a better rate than the M-Es that are sitting on shelves. Why they chose a color that isn't for everyone is up to others to decide, if they disagree with my speculative analysis.

Edited December 26, 2012 by plasticman

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Peter H]

I think the least desirable of the Ms is the M9P.

 

All the others are beautiful in their own way, but the P is a very sullied product, like the Hermes editions, by virtue of existing solely for aesthetic/cosmetic considerations rather than functional reasons, the antithesis of the Leica ideal.

 

In this respect, the ME is far superior.