Video mode on future M

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Arguing in absurdem is a well-known trick. It still doesn't justify advocating adding features that are alien to the concept of this specific camera, just because others, competition or not, have it.

 

I have owned a M camera's of some sort or other for 32 years. I'm now worried because if your attitude and opinions are what results from exposure to M's they can't be part of a healthy and balanced lifestyle. Can I remind you that I have never 'advocated' adding features in this discussion (as early as post #11 this was made clear) so I'd like you to retract what you said.

 

Steve

[swamiji]

From what I can tell, the M's reasons for existence are decreasing, not increasing.

 

According to M9 sales, I would say the buying public would disagree.

[swamiji]

So the "concept" is defined somewhere and is immutable??

 

I guess if someone someday shoots a video with a Leica M, their hands will develop warts.

 

It appears by Leica's actions, that both may be true. When you can shoot video in a S3 or X2, then I believe Leica's views IMHO will have changed. As both a Visoflex and Focoslide user I would say the "concept" is defined somewhere and is immutable, and that somewhere is in it's past. Other wise there would be no need to keep any legacy glass around. Like other camera companies do. But then it wouldn't be an M

[AlanG]

According to M9 sales, I would say the buying public would disagree.

 

So in what fields of photography would the M be the best choice, or close to the best choice, as one's sole camera system?

[jaapv]

Why should it be a sole system:confused:. From a 1970-ies Leica book: "The M3 is a camera for those users that understand the differences and applications of both rangefinders and single lens reflexes, and have the expertise to use either system, according to the circumstances."

[swamiji]

So in what fields of photography would the M be the best choice, or close to the best choice, as one's sole camera system?

 

It's my sole system. I use it in all fields, meadows, chapels, streets, studios, etc. But Jaap has a good point, it's just one system, of many. All have there advantages. If I needed Video, I would get a good Video system... Not just a modified still camera, one that does the job well.

[35mmSummicron]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If Leica were able to integrate video function without adding size or additional button clutter why would there be objections? Just because the camera (hypothetically) has the function, doesn't mean you need to use it.

 

When the M7 came out, they integrated AE. Many purists objected, but it doesn't get in the way if you don't want to use it.

 

When the M8/M8.2 received an updated firmware, it got Snapshot Mode. Completely useless in my opinion, but it doesn't get in the way.

 

 

I for one, DEFINITELY want Leica to integrate live view an HD video in a Leica M body.

[bill]

If I needed Video, I would get a good Video system... Not just a modified still camera, one that does the job well.

 

...well said.

 

Why are people so irrationally resistant to this? Do they all have a single Swiss Army Knife in their kitchens? I have R, M, LTM Digilux and D-Lux from Leica, and DSLRs from Olympus. They each do different things, better or worse.

 

I choose the tool for the job, both the one that will do it best, and the one that will be most pleasurable to use on the particular occasion. Thus, when I go to a big event where the action is a long way away, I take the Olympus or Leica R system. When wandering around an unfamiliar city I might take the M, with the Digilux or D-Lux. When wandering around a familiar city, the Barnack...

 

Horses for courses. Why do we all have to be the same? Leave the M alone. Have something else.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[35mmSummicron]

Bill, I agree that in many cases you want to choose the best tool for the job, however what you may not be aware is that HD functionality--specifically in cameras like The Canon 5DMKII and 7D are SO high quality, and open new possibilities in filmmaking that they are considered *the best tool* or at least a VERY close alternative for certain projects.

 

 

 

...well said.

 

Why are people so irrationally resistant to this? Do they all have a single Swiss Army Knife in their kitchens? I have R, M, LTM Digilux and D-Lux from Leica, and DSLRs from Olympus. They each do different things, better or worse.

 

I choose the tool for the job, both the one that will do it best, and the one that will be most pleasurable to use on the particular occasion. Thus, when I go to a big event where the action is a long way away, I take the Olympus or Leica R system. When wandering around an unfamiliar city I might take the M, with the Digilux or D-Lux. When wandering around a familiar city, the Barnack...

 

Horses for courses. Why do we all have to be the same? Leave the M alone. Have something else.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[pop]

Why are people so irrationally resistant to this? Do they all have a single Swiss Army Knife in their kitchens?

 

They buy one shoe at a time.

[swamiji]

Bill, I agree that in many cases you want to choose the best tool for the job, however what you may not be aware is that HD functionality--specifically in cameras like The Canon 5DMKII and 7D are SO high quality, and open new possibilities in filmmaking that they are considered *the best tool* or at least a VERY close alternative for certain projects.

 

Then buy a Canon 5DMKII or 7D. I work in a location where we get lots of media attention, and the Pro's that need video, all come with huge cam's connect via microwave to there tv stations. The Video pros don't use Canon 5DMKII or 7D or Nikon. They get the right tool for the job. It may be true that Canon 5DMKII or 7D may be as good as a prosumer video cam, but certainly not Pro.

[35mmSummicron]

....sigh.... I'm talking to brick walls.

[pop]

Bill, I agree that in many cases you want to choose the best tool for the job, however ... HD functionality ... in cameras like The Canon 5DMKII and 7D are SO high quality, and open new possibilities in filmmaking that they are considered ... a VERY close alternative for certain projects.

 

....sigh.... I'm talking to brick walls.

 

Why didn't you say so before? I don't think that many here disagree about some DSLRs being very attractive for selected jobs.

 

It's only that many here are not willing to jeopardize the optimum performance of their M gear for the odd job they might not ever encounter. It might have escaped your notice, but there are many more situations than just those "certain projects" where the M camera does not excel. That has no bearing on the fact that in the mind of a great many photographers there are projects where the M is best suited as it is now.

 

Taking photos of brick walls is one of those.

[swamiji]

 

Taking photos of brick walls is one of those.

 

And doors, windows, an occasional barn. Well Said!

[bill]

Why didn't you say so before? I don't think that many here disagree about some DSLRs being very attractive for selected jobs.

 

...which is exactly what I said above. Horses for courses.

 

 

It's only that many here are not willing to jeopardize the optimum performance of their M gear for the odd job they might not ever encounter.

 

Absolutely. The worst of all worlds - a compromised tool at a higher price.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[AlanG]

It's my sole system. I use it in all fields, meadows, chapels, streets, studios, etc. But Jaap has a good point, it's just one system, of many. All have there advantages. If I needed Video, I would get a good Video system... Not just a modified still camera, one that does the job well.

 

Those are not fields of photography. Fields would include photojournalism, advertising, architecture, fashion, sports, weddings, portraits, landscape, etc. I don't see the M being the best choice as a sole system for many photographers in any of those fields.

 

That is why I feel the reasons for the M's existence are declining... it is appealing to a certain number of photographers because it suits them and their needs but it doesn't open many new doors to photography and Leica is not taking advantage of advances in technology to do so. Whereas other cameras give you the option to shoot quicker, hand held in lower light, with higher frame rates, and with a wider range of lenses. And the micro 4/3rd systems are smaller, lighter and more versatile. So the M is getting pinched from both ends and now for some fields of photography only suits some photographers as an adjunct to another system. (That may be enough of a market to satisfy Leica but is hardly breaking new grounds in photography as other camera companies are doing.)

 

Did you know that the 5DII is being used for some quite high level video production work. Its capabilities surprised many people. Did you watch the "Great Shootout" video I linked to at the Zacuto site? Consider that the 5DII is Canon's first foray into incorporating video into a DSLR, what do you think future models might bring to the table?

 

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout

[swamiji]

Those are not fields of photography. Fields would include photojournalism, advertising, architecture, fashion, sports, weddings, portraits, landscape, etc. I don't see the M being the best choice as a sole system for many photographers in any of those fields.

 

 

Your being to literal... but I have to agree with bill and pop. I don't really see your point. I really would not be interested in a compromised M, and to make Video work properly you would have to. Yes M is not the only system, and for many not the best. To each there own.

 

Chapel = Weddings

Studio = Portraits

Street = Photojournalism

etc.

[bill]

Those are not fields of photography. Fields would include photojournalism, advertising, architecture, fashion, sports, weddings, portraits, landscape, etc.

 

That was a joke, I think you will find...

 

I don't see the M being the best choice as a sole system for many photographers in any of those fields.

 

There are photographers working in those fields that will disagree with you.

 

That is why I feel the reasons for the M's existence are declining... it is appealing to a certain number of photographers because it suits them and their needs...

 

That has always been the case. Now, it seems, sales are up...

 

So the M is getting pinched from both ends and now for some fields of photography only suits some photographers as an adjunct to another system.

 

As before. You say it like it's a bad thing. In actual fact, in my case and that of, I suspect, many others, the M is the system to which others are an adjunct...

 

(That may be enough of a market to satisfy Leica but is hardly breaking new grounds in photography as other camera companies are doing.)

 

Jolly good for them. Leica does not have to slavishly follow the herd, does it?

 

Did you know that the 5DII is being used for some quite high level video production work. Its capabilities surprised many people.

 

Yes. The Canon fanboys do not lose an opportunity to point it out. Again, good for them. It leaves me cold.

 

I have said it before, but it seems I need to say it again. If there is one thing that gets my goat it is the attitude around here that seems to state any desire for simplicity is a Luddite approach and therefore worthy only of derision, and that the One True Path is to turn the M into a Canon clone.

 

For those who think that, they are free to buy Canon. Enjoy. I am told they make quite good cameras for a photocopier company.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[35mmSummicron]

I don't want to see a compromised M either. At the end of the day Canon/Nikon DSLR's have the primary function as a *STILLS* camera. The 5DMKII is a vast improvement over the 5DMKI in this category. I don't see Leica willing to sacrifice image quality just to add more functionality in future M's.

 

However, I don't see why technology (in the near future) won't allow for HD vid functionality in the size of a FF M9.

 

 

...I really would not be interested in a compromised M, and to make Video work properly you would have to. Yes M is not the only system, and for many not the best. To each there own.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pop]

I don't see why technology (in the near future) won't allow for HD vid functionality in the size of a FF M9.

 

I'd be a bit surprised if HD video wasn't already available in that size range. Again, what's the dimension of the HD frame in pixels? 1280 x 720 or 1440 x 1080 which is 921,600 and 1,555,200 pixels, respectively. Don't say that they haven't been able to put a decent sensor for one and a half MP into a box the volume of an M9, please, with room to spare for a decent hard disk. Well, perhaps they have to use an external battery pack.