M9 - Not broken please don't fix.

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On the morning after the M9t announcement, there is already a thread about making the M9t better (ISO wheel!). At any one time on this forum there seems to be at least one thread raging about new features or redesigns of the current digital M.

 

This made me wonder what message Leica must get from people posting things like this (not saying there is anything wrong with posting one's ideas). After all, Andy said he knows for a fact that Leica reads the forum. But, this place can be a never ending parade of ideas of what would make the M a better camera, and it almost always has to do with something added to the current design or something that has to be changed. For example:

 

-Members post about hand grips and Luigi cases and RRS brackets... No wonder Leica thinks we want a new hand strap on the M9t.

-Members post that they won't be buying a painted M9 until it comes in chrome... No wonder Leica thinks we want a fancy Titanium M9t.

-Members post about the short comings of the rangefinder optic and redesign it with everything short of a web browser crammed in... No wonder Leica thinks we want LED frame lines in our M9t.

 

I know that I don't speak for everyone, that is clear to me from all of the posts on this forum about added features and what has to change. But, if Leica reads this, my wants are simple and clear:

 

I want reliability and quality.

 

Just work on that. That is it. I'm not going to even delineate what falls into those two categories but, it rarely would mean more stuff added to the concept of the current M9. Just, make what is already there (and it is good) better, and make it even more reliable with each version. Again, that is it. The concept is not broken. Please, leave it alone. Just my humble and solitary wish.

[Advertisement]

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

[dbraid]

I have to agree that reliability and quality are what I want most as well. I enjoyed my M8 and I enjoy my M9 because it embodies these concepts. The only other word I might add to this discussion is simplicity. In essence simplicity is inherent in reliability and quality—the simpler the mechanism the more reliable it should be or can be.

 

In speaking about theories, Albert Einstein is often quoted as having said that "A theory should be as simple as possible but not simpler than possible." The same could be said about cameras.

[adan]

Conspiracy theory: The M9Ti is Leica's "New Coke", designed to reinforce and publicize loyalty to the existing product.

 

Of course, New Coke was not actually a conspiracy, by most analyses - just dumb.

 

Although as one Coke executive spun it, "We love any retreat which has us rushing toward our best customers with the product they love the most."

 

For those who want more: New Coke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[yanidel]

I fully agree.

 

The M9 is a great tool. I no longer tell myself "I wish it had this feature" because it does everything I need it to. I am not against evolution, but in my opinion anybody holding on the purchase because of color or whatever missing feature, just doesn't really need it.

[250swb]

I generally agree Rick, but it wouldn't do Leica any harm to do something imaginative and introduce a different type of 'M' monicker, like the CL.

 

So far this Photokina its been upgrading current models. And what makes the M9Ti look so utterly stupid as proud moment in Leica's history is that Fuji have walked right into Leica's hunting ground and stolen all the limelight with the X100, a camera so desired (according to polls) that I can't believe that Leica can have missed that need on their radar. If Leica spend any more time with manufacturing crap like the M9Ti then Fuji or sombody else will finally nail the alternative digital interchangable lens rangefinder, and then its curtains, because there will never ever be enough meat left in superb lenses or 'hand built' quality to continue.

 

Steve

[skinnfell]

I only wish I had my M9 back from solms...

 

Currently it has been in service longer than it has been in my hands (!!!)

 

No need for titanium, funky strap contraptions or audi rubber mats, just reliability and service.

 

 

OP said it all. Amen to that.

[andybarton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After all, Andy said he knows for a fact that Leica reads the forum.

 

I said that I knew that Leica were reading that thread.

 

They'd go insane if they read the whole forum...

[Nicoleica]

I said that I knew that Leica were reading that thread.

 

They'd go insane if they read the whole forum...

 

Maybe they did, and then created the Frankenleica.

[herbet]

Ditto. The camera is perfect the way it is.

[mongrelnomad]

Apart from the steady improvement in sensor tech (high ISO etc), the ONLY improvement I want - no, need - is weather-proofing on any new M.

 

I just paid for a new M9 because of water ingress frying all the electronics.

 

As for looks, or genuinely functional improvements (such as the new LED-finder), bring on the changes, I'm agnostic as long as it still feels and functions like an M...

[zlatkob]

I said that I knew that Leica were reading that thread.

 

They'd go insane if they read the whole forum...

 

If Leica followed Leica-related forums too closely, they would never have built the M8 because film was such an awesome medium and digital looked "too digital" and wasn't real photography anyway. And then they would never have built the M9 because the M8 was so awesome and could make 30x40-inch prints as good as medium format, and no one needed any ISO above 400 anyway, and excess infrared sensitivity was kind of cool in black & white. And we would still be setting exposure compensation via a menu, just like on a point & shoot, because real photographers always shoot in manual and do exposure compensation in their heads.

 

If they follow the forum too closely, they will never build an M10 because the M9 is so awesome that even it's LCD should not be improved. This is where photographers claim they never use the LCD anyway because it would distract them from their film-era reverie.

 

I fear that online forums (Leica and other) are most heavily populated by photographers who have a lot of time for forums and who don't shoot very much or very well. So manufacturers may have a very hard time digging for good insights online. Among the brand-loyal, everything is always perfect and can't possibly be improved.

[Neopan]

According to UPS my broken two month old M9 arrived in Solms this morning. I don't want any more features, I love the camera just the way it is. I love the fact that I can go from M6 to M9 with such familiarity.

 

All I ask is for reliability and great customer service. Alas I have not had the first we will see about the latter.

 

Christian

[jaapv]

If Leica followed Leica-related forums too closely, they would never have built the M8 because film was such an awesome medium and digital looked "too digital" and wasn't real photography anyway. And then they would never have built the M9 because the M8 was so awesome and could make 30x40-inch prints as good as medium format, and no one needed any ISO above 400 anyway, and excess infrared sensitivity was kind of cool in black & white. And we would still be setting exposure compensation via a menu, just like on a point & shoot, because real photographers always shoot in manual and do exposure compensation in their heads.

Both are completely untrue. There was huge pressure in the forums to build a digital M from 2004 (the date I joined) right up to the M8. Leica responded by "not possible with the present technology"... When the RD1 hit the market, the forums registered a shout of indignation and the M8 appeared.

As for the M9; The number of threads hammering Leica for the crop factor were innumerable, only surpassed by IR filter ones - You must have seen the enthusiasm of the reception of the M9 a year ago.

[wattsy]

As for the M9; The number of threads hammering Leica for the crop factor were innumerable, only surpassed by IR filter ones

 

That's not how I remember it. I would say the consensus view here was that full frame was an unnecessary luxury (and, because of the laws of physics, was a moot question anyway) and that IR filters were a "non-issue".

[Viv]

My M9 is fine as it is. It helps me to make good pictures. Leave it alone.

[stunsworth]

I'd rather have a camera designed by an inspired designer rather than by committee or Internet vote thank you very much.

[zlatkob]

Both are completely untrue. There was huge pressure in the forums to build a digital M from 2004 (the date I joined) right up to the M8. Leica responded by "not possible with the present technology"... When the RD1 hit the market, the forums registered a shout of indignation and the M8 appeared.

As for the M9; The number of threads hammering Leica for the crop factor were innumerable, only surpassed by IR filter ones - You must have seen the enthusiasm of the reception of the M9 a year ago.

 

You make it sound as if the forums had a unified voice. Of course, I did too. But the forums are a mix of opinions. You can still find people who are militantly against digital — thankfully, Leica is not listening to them. I seem to remember people finding 10 megapixels and ISO 160 to be all they'll ever need. and the M8 as their lifetime camera. I remember someone defending the whacky white balance on the initial M8 because white balance was something you're supposed to set manually anyway. My point is that in the mix of opinions, there are always some who defend the status quo, and if you listen to the defenders, you stop all innovation and desist from further improvements.

 

That's not how I remember it. I would say the consensus view here was that full frame was an unnecessary luxury (and, because of the laws of physics, was a moot question anyway) and that IR filters were a "non-issue".

 

Oh yes, thank you! Now you've refreshed my memory.

[lars_bergquist]

As it is now, the only improvement the digital M really needs is --

 

weather sealing.

 

Desirable improvements are --

 

faster computation,

an AF lock button, or an equivalent solution,

better battery life and finally

a slimmer form factor.

 

Now please imagine that you are back in 1953 ... what improvements to the Leica IIIf would you have called for? I can tell you: A Leica IIIg.

 

Instead, at the 1954 Photokina, Leitz sprung the M3 on the world. Now get this: Nobody said he wanted anything like the M3. Nobody demanded a quantum leap. What people wanted was what they could imagine: Small, incremental detail improvements.

 

And I would bet that on the eve of the Leipzig Spring Fair in January 1932, nobody was demanding a Leica II. Some people may well have wanted a further improved Leica I. That was all.

 

Because we start from what we know, and adjust detail. Creative engineering, innovative engineering, leaps beyond the incremental, the way Oskar Barnack did in 1913, and in 1932.

 

And we are taken aback, and stall over detail. In 1954, no less person than Walter Benser complained that he found the cocking lever irritating! A Leica with lever cocking was no real Leica. And, true to form, in 2006 I distinctly heard people complaining that the absence of the damn lever was irritating. A Leica without a cocking lever, you see, is no real Leica.

 

If Leica Camera can come up, not with a new Barnack, but with a new edition of the team that created the M3, I will be thrilled. But I can imagine what the reactions here will be ...

 

The old man from 1954

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

You make it sound as if the forums had a unified voice. Of course, I did too. But the forums are a mix of opinions. You can still find people who are militantly against digital — thankfully, Leica is not listening to them. I seem to remember people finding 10 megapixels and ISO 160 to be all they'll ever need. and the M8 as their lifetime camera. I remember someone defending the whacky white balance on the initial M8 because white balance was something you're supposed to set manually anyway. My point is that in the mix of opinions, there are always some who defend the status quo, and if you listen to the defenders, you stop all innovation and desist from further improvements.

 

 

 

Oh yes, thank you! Now you've refreshed my memory.

I think you are confusing a number of threads/posts that attempted to explain how the limitations could be dealt with, with defensive posts. I know that happened to me a great number of time - like saying: The M8 needs very careful exposure to get good high-ISO shots - and the only thing that would register were the words "good high Iso shots" setting off a round of I love my Nikon posts....

[elgenper]

........

Desirable improvements are --

 

.....

an AF lock button, or an equivalent solution,

......

 

That´s a tall order.....

 

Suppose you mean AE lock. Personally, don´t need that either; manual exposure is what I use whenever lighting is difficult. With my M2, I even had to use a hand-held meter.