Manual shutter recock lever on digital M?

[insf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've always been curious about this since learning about the Epson RD-1. Would a manual lever for recocking the shutter have any meaningful impact on battery life, body size and/or reliability? Are there any real advantages to removing this automation from the camera or would this just be a one-way ticket to Ludditeville with no significant benefits?

[TomB_tx]

It should give some increase in battery life, possibly reducing the size and weight of the battery at least. Of course, it would slow down people who do continuous mode shooting, but would give Leica a new revenue stream to sell them a motor drive!

[Advertisement]

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

[insf]

Interesting, that's what I was assuming. It's not like the M bodies have crazy-fast continuous shooting to begin with - benefits in battery life and size reduction (assuming they were not minuscule) would likely be worth it for me.

Edited October 24, 2016 by insf

[pop]

I don't think any reduction in size would be noticeable. You would drop the motor which is scarcely more than a solenoid, I think, and you would add the lever, some gears and a locking mechanism to prevent cocking the shutter when already cocked or while operating. Also, I presume that Leica uses off-the-shelf shutters which already have the motor built-in. So you would have to opt for a speciality shutter. Not cheap, I think.

 

I did own an R-D1 for a while and greatly loved that lever. Manually rewinding the shutter after each frame makes you much more aware of having finally taken the frame. It might have to do with the larger motion of the hand instead of merely pressing one button which does it all.

[insf]

Ah, interesting. So they couldn't just use the shutter used in the M-A? Seems like Leica nailed that whole part of the camera decades ago.

[pgk]

Ah, interesting. So they couldn't just use the shutter used in the M-A? Seems like Leica nailed that whole part of the camera decades ago.

 

Digital Backs for Hasselblad 500 series cameras seem to work ok ..... . Don't see any good technical reason for not building a manual mechanical Leica with a digital sensor myself.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The only reason the RD-1 had a manual recock is because Epson took a DBS Bessa body and squashed the Nikon D70 sensor and electronics in. The manual Leica cloth shutter is far too bulky to allow the electronic part to be fitted, the film gate would not allow more than APS-H, nor would anybody accept 1/1000th max and 1/50th sync nowadays.

If Leica would have to incorporate  a modern full-frame manual shutter it would mean a complete redesign at a shocking cost.

[bocaburger]

Leica is no stranger to charging a shocking price for the deletion of modern technology   And if they felt there would be enough takers to satisfy the minimum order from their shutter supplier, I'm fairly confident one could be built for manual recocking.  I'm not sure of the extent or feasibility of whatever internal redesign would be required to make room for the needed shaft and linkage(s).  I am sure a manual lever would not be compatible with LV or advanced metering which require almost instantaneous double shutter cocking, or if anyone has a quick enough thumb!  It would be like a DS M3 on steriods...that is, the user might need to be on steroids A lever would definitely add something to the ergonomics of grip, and obviate add-on thumb rests.   Personally (as a former owner of an RD1) the only thing I disliked about Leica's mandatory motor recocking was the noise it made in the M8 and M9, but that has pretty much been dealt away in the current models. 

Edited October 24, 2016 by bocaburger

[jmahto]

The only reason the RD-1 had a manual recock is because Epson took a DBS Bessa body and squashed the Nikon D70 sensor and electronics in. The manual Leica cloth shutter is far too bulky to allow the electronic part to be fitted, the film gate would not allow more than APS-H, nor would anybody accept 1/1000th max and 1/50th sync nowadays.

If Leica would have to incorporate  a modern full-frame manual shutter it would mean a complete redesign at a shocking cost.

I have a novel idea. Keep the existing shutter cocking mechanism (motor etc.) and add the dummy advance lever which has the only function of unlocking the shutter (and a thumb rest).

 

But then it will add 10.07grams to the body and then purists will object.... so much for my novel idea. 

[Steve Ricoh]

A clock-work shutter would be great... think, no more bad boy tantrums, as a few of us have suffered with their M Type 240.

[edwardkaraa]

I actually like the idea especially that you don't have to re-cock the shutter after every shot so I'm sure it will have a positive effect on shutter noise levels.

[pgk]

The only reason the RD-1 had a manual recock is because Epson took a DBS Bessa body and squashed the Nikon D70 sensor and electronics in. The manual Leica cloth shutter is far too bulky to allow the electronic part to be fitted, the film gate would not allow more than APS-H, nor would anybody accept 1/1000th max and 1/50th sync nowadays.

If Leica would have to incorporate  a modern full-frame manual shutter it would mean a complete redesign at a shocking cost.

 

We're talking retro here jaapv, logic and cost are lesser considerations. After all if you can build new versions of old lenses at higher prices than newer versions .....

 

Such a camera (mechanical/manual/digital) might actually fit Leica's portfolio very well even if expensive and limited in sales.

[Exodies]

Why not get rid of the shutter altogether and control exposure by removing the lens cap?

[Peter H]

 It does seem that the M might become the "heritage" item in the Leica portfolio, much to my dismay.

 

But I still hope and  just about expect Leica to ignore requests to go backwards with the next M.

 

I love the feel of a good rewind lever but I don't want it on a new digital camera.

[Exodies]

Point of information - it's a wind lever, not a rewind lever. Unless I'm wrong which would be implausible wouldn't it?

[jdlaing]

A "wind" lever is needed on a new M camera as much as you need another posterior.

[Peter H]

Point of information - it's a wind lever, not a rewind lever. Unless I'm wrong which would be implausible wouldn't it?

It was wound into the canister, then to take a photo you need to rewind it out again. Then when you've finished, you rerewind it in again.

 

Clear?

[ramarren]

I had an Epson R-D1 for a short time. I know many love the manual shutter winding, but I found it clumsy and 'in the way' every time I used it. Even the rather slow and apathetic sounding M9 shutter recock was smoother and nicer to use; the M typ 240/246/262 shutter recock is efficient, quiet, and much more to my liking. 

[lucerne]

I have a novel idea. Keep the existing shutter cocking mechanism (motor etc.) and add the dummy advance lever which has the only function of unlocking the shutter (and a thumb rest).

 

But then it will add 10.07grams to the body and then purists will object.... so much for my novel idea.

I like this idea as well. A correctly shaped thumb rest and I wonder whether it could also incorporate the on/off switch which on the Leica Q is often criticised for its lack of positive action and risk of selecting continuous. Edited October 25, 2016 by lucerne

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M