indergaard Posted April 16, 2015 Share #41 Posted April 16, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Who is saying it's revolutionary? It's an updated M3. I would rather call it a modified MP, or a variation of the MP, since it shares all it's components with the MP, not the M3. The only differences are the finish, the lack of a meter, and since it doesn't have a meter, the shorter travel of the shutter button since it doesn't need a meter activation step. Edited April 16, 2015 by indergaard 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 Hi indergaard, Take a look here Leica M-A question. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted April 16, 2015 Share #42 Posted April 16, 2015 I would rather call it a modified MP, or a variation of the MP, since it shares all it's components with the MP, not the M3. The only differences are the finish, the lack of a meter, and since it doesn't have a meter, the shorter travel of the shutter button since it doesn't need a meter activation step. Suit yourself. I'm not sure why it's so important to you. The fact is that it is a meterless, purely manual M camera. It's not an MP. It may share comments, a chassis - almost everything with an MP but it isn't an MP. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted April 16, 2015 Share #43 Posted April 16, 2015 (edited) Suit yourself. I'm not sure why it's so important to you. The fact is that it is a meterless, purely manual M camera. It's not an MP. It may share comments, a chassis - almost everything with an MP but it isn't an MP. It's not important to me, but when people talk about the M-A like it is something very new, fantastic and great, while it is basically a modified MP that has been on the market for 13 years, I kinda have to laugh. I'm not saying it is an MP either. I'm simply saying that it is more a variation of the MP than an update to the M3. It doesn't share anything with the M3, except being a 35mm manual film camera. It does however share a lot with the MP: Same mechanics, same body, same viewfinder, same rewind lever, same film loading mechanism, same ISO knob, the same design, same shutter, etc, etc, etc... I know you like to think that you have something special, and I guess an M3 update is more in line with what you prefer to think than owning an MP variant. But it still doesn't change the fact that it is more an MP variant than an M3 update. Sorry to burst your bubble. Anyway, I'm going to stop this here. It's getting kind of pointless. Edited April 16, 2015 by indergaard Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted April 16, 2015 Share #44 Posted April 16, 2015 back when, a cadillac fleetwood, buick electra, olds 98, and chevy impala were all the same car with different trimmings sold at radically different prices. rebadged panasonics are a similar idea. the MA is build on a MP chasis, why wouldn't it be, but it is a different camera. not better, not worse, just different. btw, the iso knob on the ma is just a reminder, has no connection to anything other than being a bit more elegant than shoving a piece of cardboard into the flash show to remind you whats in the camera. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted April 16, 2015 Share #45 Posted April 16, 2015 (edited) All the post-M3 M film cameras (arguably with the exception of the M5) are updates or variations on the M3. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the M-A is new or revolutionary (I even wrote something similar when I started an "I love my M-A" thread last year) and I don't understand why the existence of this camera seems to have put a few noses out of joint. There has been a similar reaction to the M60 which might suggest that there is something unsettling for some people about a company releasing new versions of product that has fewer features than the product it succeeds (or it might just be a kind of sour grapes reaction to the enthusiastic buzz surrounding a new product). Putting aside the M7 (which meets different functional objectives), Leica now offer the choice of a simple metered camera or a simple unmetered camera. Neither product is superior or inferior to the other – both have their advantages and disadvantages depending upon your personal preferences – and everyone is free to choose which one they like best. Edited April 16, 2015 by wattsy 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted April 16, 2015 Share #46 Posted April 16, 2015 If Leica wanted to be revolutionary with the M-A, it could have incorporated shutter speeds of much faster increments than 1/1000. The 1/1000 is kind of a dinosaur and nowadays with the wide selection of fast lenses and (perhaps more importantly) the numerous other cameras out their with much higher shutter speeds. This is really the only improvement that I think could be made; and I think that it is a fair criticism of Leica that they didn't think a little outside of the box in this regard. Not an improvement, but it would have also been nice to have incorporated a self-timer winder. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted April 16, 2015 Share #47 Posted April 16, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) No need for faster shutter speed myself, but that self timer, I'd like to have, too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted April 16, 2015 Share #48 Posted April 16, 2015 FWIW, here's an excerpt from Puts' comments (latest blog) on various cameras... "When one reviews the evolution from M3 to M 60, one sees a change from film loading and mechanical features to sensor capture and electronically controlled features. The M3 in its day was a camera that incorporated as many features as possible within the optical-mechanical technology of its day. The main operative functions (manual selection of film emulsions, manual focus, manual exposure setting and manual framing of the scene) have their equivalents in the M 60 (manual ISO selection, manual focus, manual framing of the scene, semi-manual exposure setting through aperture selection). Instead of a comparison with the M3 one could with equal argument refer to the M-A, a modern incarnation of the original M3, with a comparable shutter mechanism, but without the rangefinder design of the M3. The M-A is in fact the Leica MP without the internal exposure mechanism. The MP is the original M6 with some elements of the M3." Jeff 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted April 16, 2015 Share #49 Posted April 16, 2015 one area where they did fall back on the MA, IMHO, is that on the M4 the shutter will fire at speeds between the marks on the dial -- that is you can set it between 250 and 500 and get 320 or something. The instruction book with the MA is very clear this feature doesn't exist. Not a great big deal, but every once in a while I would rather shift speed than alter the f/stop. Not enough of a problem for me to trade in the M-A, this camera is going with me as long as I continue to go! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted April 16, 2015 Share #50 Posted April 16, 2015 If Leica wanted to be revolutionary with the M-A, it could have incorporated shutter speeds of much faster increments than 1/1000. The 1/1000 is kind of a dinosaur and nowadays with the wide selection of fast lenses and (perhaps more importantly) the numerous other cameras out their with much higher shutter speeds. This is really the only improvement that I think could be made; and I think that it is a fair criticism of Leica that they didn't think a little outside of the box in this regard. Not an improvement, but it would have also been nice to have incorporated a self-timer winder. I believe they kept to 1/1000 sec. because to go higher would require either a narrower curtain slit, which is harder to regulate, or faster curtain travel, which increases strain and wear on the geartrain, increases inertial camera shake, and increases noise. I suppose if they used titanium curtains like Nikon did with their RFs (which started out using cloth) they could go higher but they don't. It's their call. I don't know if Leica cares about being "revolutionary" although releasing in 2014 a new model of film camera, with no meter no less, is pretty ballsy, as is the M-60. Considering they continue to march and manufacture to their own drummer and produce a camera unlike any other you can buy is already pretty far out of the box if you ask me. I have two M3s but selling both of them wouldn't get me close to the price of an M-A, and I already have an MP so the M-A is right out. If it was around when I bought the MP I wouldn't have; I love the MP but not because it has a meter. Regards, s-a 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted April 17, 2015 Share #51 Posted April 17, 2015 S-A - I hear you, and largely agree. I just think that, at the same time, something can be said for the lack of innovation. Generally, in life, where there is a will, there is a way. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted April 17, 2015 Share #52 Posted April 17, 2015 S-A - I hear you, and largely agree. I just think that, at the same time, something can be said for the lack of innovation. Generally, in life, where there is a will, there is a way. You are right. I have to admit, e.g., the Kravitz Version to me lacks a certain something; sort of an easy out. If Leica's cameras were cheaper they might attract more new young users, but they do more market research than I do. Pre-ripped jeans sold well too, remember. Just wait, I'm sure leica is going to bowl us over this year with a 35 APO-'cron, a 28 'lux, and some sort of new camera thing. Right? s-a 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 17, 2015 Share #53 Posted April 17, 2015 (edited) Who is saying it's revolutionary? It's an updated M3. One difference besides the viewfinder is that the M3's parts were hand-fitted. That means the builder finely filed parts to fit, whereas today they have small bins of the same part in slightly different sizes, and when necessary the builder chooses one which fits. Today's method of fitting is not inferior. A slight aside, I think it was S.K. Grimes who once wrote that flat stamped small parts manufacturing is an engineering feat to be admired for its complexity for fine use instruments such as camera clock-works. I respected Grimes. He did some marvelous work for me, above and beyond what a machinist without an aesthetic sensitivity could do. Edited April 17, 2015 by pico 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePioneer Posted April 17, 2015 Share #54 Posted April 17, 2015 You know, this is all quite interesting. However, in the end, it really doesn't matter to me. What does matter to me is that in 2014, Leica saw fit to build me a brand-new, classic, meterless, M film camera that builds on a long line of classic M cameras. I bought one. I really don't much care if you want one, or even like them. But if you ever do change your mind and decide you do want one. Buy your own cause you are not getting your hands on mine. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted April 17, 2015 Share #55 Posted April 17, 2015 What does matter to me is that in 2014, Leica saw fit to build me a brand-new, classic, meterless, M film camera that builds on a long line of classic M cameras. (Emphasis mine) Leica doesn't care about you. They care about their aggregate customer base; as all typical companies do. The fact that you feel the way you do about your camera proves in part that: 1) Leica is not your typical company, and 2) they're doing a damn fine job. That they offer a product that can engender such a feeling of connection is crucial to their future, moreso, I think, than the parade of special editions which are good for temporary headlines. I would be the last to deny they have made mistakes but I feel your right to make mistakes varies inversely with your price point. At $50 for lamb chops the kitchen is not entitled to an off-day. Period. s-a Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePioneer Posted April 18, 2015 Share #56 Posted April 18, 2015 (Emphasis mine) Leica doesn't care about you. s-a What!!! That just can't be true!! I mean, the guy from Leica San Francisco even called me personally and said "my" camera had just arrived at the store and would be shipped out to me the next day. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted April 18, 2015 Share #57 Posted April 18, 2015 What!!! That just can't be true!! I mean, the guy from Leica San Francisco even called me personally and said "my" camera had just arrived at the store and would be shipped out to me the next day. A fluke. You should buy another one and see if it happens again... s-a Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted April 21, 2015 Share #58 Posted April 21, 2015 So much patience... I'd probably be jumping in the car picking it up myself the same day. [emoji1] Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePioneer Posted April 22, 2015 Share #59 Posted April 22, 2015 So much patience... I'd probably be jumping in the car picking it up myself the same day. [emoji1] It was a real close one. I could have driven there in 12 hours. But since everyone in Europe already had theirs, and stores in England were already selling them off the shelves, I decided I could wait a couple of days. I guess it was best to wait. At least my film wind works properly. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted April 29, 2015 Share #60 Posted April 29, 2015 I believe they kept to 1/1000 sec. because to go higher would require either a narrower curtain slit, which is harder to regulate, or faster curtain travel, which increases strain and wear on the geartrain, increases inertial camera shake, and increases noise. ... Would it be so different from the M8/9/M/240 shutters that offer speeds up to 1/8000? Pete. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.