Leica M and Video

[Luke_Miller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I thought a discussion of video in the digital M series bodies might be worthwhile since there appears to be a lot of angst regarding the deletion of video in the M10.

 

Now obviously Leica understands video (at least optically) since it produces a full complement of cine lenses.  The 10 lens T1.4 Summilux-C kit will set one back $353,100 at B&H, but if one can live with T2.0 the 9 lens Summicron-C set can be had for only $142,000.  These are PL mount lenses so they can't be directly mounted on the M-240 or M-246 Leica bodies although Leica does offers a $2,800 PL-M adapter.  So with these bodies Leica provided the ability to mount world-class cinematography lenses plus an external microphone (at the expense of losing use of the EVF) and then deleted the video function altogether in the M10.  And so the question arises - "What does this mean?"  I certainly don't know, but I have a few thoughts on it.

 

I can hear reviewers of a video enabled M10 now "The $6500 M10 has but a single memory card, no HDMI connection, no provision for an external microphone, no stabilized lenses or in-body-stabilization, and no auto-focus.  The $1200 ____ has all those things."

 

Now the lack of stabilized lenses (or in-body-stabilization) can be addressed by shooting from a tripod. And serious video is nearly always performed using manual focus.  So within these constrains the M-240 (with the optional Leica external microphone) should be useful for capturing video and an M10 with video would presumably add 4K capability.  So why delete the capability?

 

Possibly Leica decided that going forward the video capability in an M series body would always be limited and hence would pale in comparison to that of much less expensive cameras as well as that of the SL.  As someone who struggles with hand-held video, the absence of any form of stabilization is a serious limitation and one not easily addressed in an M.  While I believe the Leica rangefinder is a marvelous device for manual focusing I don't find it well suited for video when using a tripod where almost any contact with the camera is revealed in the footage.  Since I need good audio the EVF is replaced with the external microphone.  Live view works fine for still focusing, but video is most interesting when taken of active subjects.  I prefer a either a large external monitor (or a smaller one with magnifier) for the precise focus needed due to the shallow depth of field of the 35mm sensor.  But the external connections needed for such devices works against Leica's emphasis on weather proofing. I can imagine the anguish of stills shooters who are afraid to take their M out in a drizzle for fear of moisture getting into the external ports.

 

Some of my favorite videos were taken on travel to Alaska and Europe.  I used to travel with both a still and video camera, but now travel exclusively with a still camera that is also competent in capturing video.  But I need stabilization, a zoom lens and autofocus for that video.  So my M-240 (or an M10 with video capability) is not a camera I would take.  Possibly Leica feels the same way. 

[Archiver]

Leica's expertise is in the creation of lenses, not digital cameras, and certainly not video-centric cameras.

 

IMO, the addition of video to the M series with the M240 was an attempt to satisfy the more mainstream crowd, and provide at least the perception of the inclusion of what is now considered an essential function.  I don't believe the video in the M series was meant for professional video production.  Even for unobtrusive shooting and (heaven forbid) crash cams, there are much better and cheaper alternatives than a Leica M.  Not to mention that an exact 180" shutter angle is impossible with the current shutter speeds on the dial.  Video in the M is a reasonably well-placed addition, and not intended for anything serious.

 

The PL-M mount adapter looks like a gimmick.  The video functions of the M240 are no way in line with the quality of Leica cine lenses, which are used on cinema cameras like the Arri Alexa and Red Epic Dragon/Weapon which cost tens of thousands of dollars themselves.

 

If you travel with a hybrid stills and video camera, and need good autofocus and image stabilization, the obvious solutions are the Sony A7S II or A7R II, or the Panasonic GH5.  The Sony cameras will beat the Panasonic for low light performance and depth of field control, but the GH5 is smaller, has excellent colour, and the lenses are much more compact.  I've used the Panasonic GH cameras for work for about five years now, and while I work around the limitations and quirks, they are excellent for travel and documentary shooting.  Just look at the GH4 and GH5 travel videos on YouTube.  Watchtower of Turkey was shot with a Panasonic GH3!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7yqtW4Isec

 

If you're using an unstabilized lens or camera, a very reasonable solution is using a Gorillapod as a shoulder/chest rig and adjusting the shoulder strap to make the setup taut and stable.  I've had very good results with this setup, which is very light and unobtrusive.  The Gorillapod detaches instantly to get out of the way for stills shooting, and the same setup could be used with the M240 if you really want.

 

I'm not really fazed by the omission of video from the M10.  If I really want video in a M body, the M240 is adequate for everyday video.  It's convenient to have everything in one camera, but then, you pays yer money and makes yer choice.

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

Not sure about the "mainstream crowd" but this old Leica user needs basic video from time to time and wants to use his M lenses for that. The SL is too bulky for my taste and the M240's EVF is so sluggish that i don't use it anymore. After 30+ years of Leica M & R ownership my main M body is then now a Sony A7s with a thin sensor stack modded by Kolari vision. Still happy to use my M240 in RF mode but my next Leica body will have video capabilities or won't be. FWIW.