Open Letter to Leica — 10 Ways To Improve the M9 Rangefinder

[wildlightphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What seems irrational is the constant dismissal of proposed improvements, even very good ones. In other words, why are people so militantly against improvements when they are proposed, and then most rationally in favor of them when they appear in the new product, so much so that they quickly buy the new product?

 

What evidence do you have that the individuals who are against suggested changes are the same individuals who will purchase a new product whose properties and capabilities are presently unknown? I suggest the confusion is in your perception.

[Advertisement]

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

[AlanJW]

Your have just indicated that you are aware that focus confirmation is not a practical scheme that wold work, the Contax G1 and G2 dont work.

 

If you like a ZM rangefinder better than a M3, thay would be possible but getting Leica to adopt difficult at best.

 

Noel

 

The G2 was old technology and not focus confirmation but autofocus. I had one. I got rid of it because there was no consistent way to know what you were focused on. I wouldn't mind at all a system that allowed me to select the focus (such as by using the current style rangefinder patch) while providing some sort of confirmation of focus such as patch blinks or framelines illuminate differently. This would not for me change the essential nature of the camera but would be a huge help. I don't see it as any different frankly than having a meter in the camera. If the luddites want to go back to "simple" why not get rid of the rangefinder entirely? Any good photographer should be able to estimate distances and put them in manually without the distraction of a rangefinder patch. The point is things change and that includes Leica.

[markgay]

What evidence do you have that the individuals who are against suggested changes are the same individuals who will purchase a new product whose properties and capabilities are presently unknown? I suggest the confusion is in your perception.

 

Because that is what happens in an information vacuum. Confusion rules - nay, is promoted because it encourages irrational spending decisions.

 

Before the Internet, the only people with a network that gave them information (against the camera retailer and manufacturer) were professionals. All others made their purchase decisions based on reviews in magazines PAID FOR BY the camera retailers and manufacturers.

 

Sadly the Internet has not suddenly turned all consumers into fully informed rational beings. If you are not comfortable with that statement, peruse the discussions at DP review. And ask yourself why Amazon bought it.

[AlanG]

With the latter wide open it's always a hit and miss affair. If there's a catch-light in the eyes that always aids focus with an RF, I find.

 

 

Kalart rangefinders used to have a device called a "focus spot" that was basically a light bulb that projected two images of the bulb filament through the range finder onto the subject, You'd turn the focus knob to bring them together for focus. I don't see why a modern version of this couldn't be used that employed an IR source and some kind of reader that would trigger a light in the camera or beep to tell you that you are in focus.

 

The Kalart Focuspot

 

Some of the action video cameras have lasers for aiming them. I don't know if this is a problem when aimed at people, but it is interesting that they are available. (Maybe there is a warning in the packaging. ) I also think one model has an IR laser so perhaps someone could make a focus confirmation solution that employ lasers as weird as that seems.

 

ContourHD 1080p Wearable Camcorder Package - PointofViewCameras.com

 

"Dual Laser Alignment = Fool Proof Recording

VholdR ContourHD 1080p Dual Laser Alignment Rotating Lens

 

I know, this camera keeps getting better, how can we continue to out do ourselves... well, In addition to having a 180¡ rotating lens, the ContourHD 1080p has 2 lasers to ensure perfect alignment on every shot. All you have to do is turn them on and rotate the lens until the lasers are horizontal - it is actually that simple, now focus on your ride."

[ezc203]

With all these "improvements" that Leica so obviously should be making on their camera bodies/sensor, I am curious as to why no one as suggested an across-the-board upgrade to the lens line? What about a full Noctilux-M line? f/1.0 all around: from 18mm to 135mm. Of course with < 0.5% distortion, no focus shifting at any aperture.... and so on.

 

[Washington]

Oh Lord, why doesn’t somebody go out and buy a camera they like.

[mblaze]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Personally, I think the criticisms in Lloyd's blog were spot on. I like the M9, and on balance, it's often the best shooting choice for me, but there are definitely substandard aspects to its performance that make me select it less often than I otherwise would. The medium- and high- ISO noise level is a particularly serious limitation in a "street shooting" camera, and seems especially and inexplicably non-competitive given the much better noise performance of other current cameras, particularly given the price.

 

The M9 has a lot going for it (not least the ability to use the Leica glass), but Leica needs to seriously re-engineer the sensor (among other things) in the M10 if they want people like me (those of us not looking for camera jewelry) to take them seriously going forward.

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

The M9 has a lot going for it (not least the ability to use the Leica glass), but Leica needs to seriously re-engineer the sensor (among other things) in the M10 if they want people like me (those of us not looking for camera jewelry) to take them seriously going forward.

 

So what high resolution camera, exactly, do you think the M9 doesn't compete with at medium ISOs?

 

And what do you call high? I get one extra stop or a little more, really, from my D3 over the M9, and after that the D3 turns to mostly mush with noise reduction. The M9, on the other hand, continues to deliver sharp pictures. You have to contend with noise, but at least I'm making the NR decisions not the camera

 

That's one tradeoff between typical alias filtered CMOS sensors (Nikon and Canon) and CCD sensors with AA filters (like the M9, along with most medium format bodies like the S2).

 

Personally, I slightly prefer the Kodak CCD line that the M9 uses compared with the D3 for all kinds of reasons, not the least of which is overall colour signature. As has been pointed out Kodak has been making pro sensors for companies like Phase for years (though not in the last Phase backs, IIRC). I don't think anyone would say that Kodak doesn't have a feel for colour science....

 

Having said that, I have no doubt whatsoever that Leica will pick the best sensor possible for the M10 (they don't do sensor engineering themselves to the best of my knowledge). It wouldn't surprise me at all if it was a CMOS, though if that's true I hope it retains the colour characteristics that make the M9 files so downright simple to colour correct in post.

[mblaze]

So what high resolution camera, exactly, do you think the M9 doesn't compete with at medium ISOs?

 

And what do you call high? I get one extra stop or a little more, really, from my D3 over the M9, and after that the D3 turns to mostly mush with noise reduction. The M9, on the other hand, continues to deliver sharp pictures. You have to contend with noise, but at least I'm making the NR decisions not the camera

 

That's one tradeoff between typical alias filtered CMOS sensors (Nikon and Canon) and CCD sensors with AA filters (like the M9, along with most medium format bodies like the S2).

 

Personally, I slightly prefer the Kodak CCD line that the M9 uses compared with the D3 for all kinds of reasons, not the least of which is overall colour signature. As has been pointed out Kodak has been making pro sensors for companies like Phase for years (though not in the last Phase backs, IIRC). I don't think anyone would say that Kodak doesn't have a feel for colour science....

 

Having said that, I have no doubt whatsoever that Leica will pick the best sensor possible for the M10 (they don't do sensor engineering themselves to the best of my knowledge). It wouldn't surprise me at all if it was a CMOS, though if that's true I hope it retains the colour characteristics that make the M9 files so downright simple to colour correct in post.

 

Well, I think the the D3x has much better performance in the 400-2500 range (and beyond), and the D3s is, of course, in a class by itself at very high ISOs (at somewhat lower resolution, of course). I also dislike the AA filtering of the Nikons, but the higher resolution of the D3x sensor makes up for that to a large degree.

 

I also use a large format scanning digital back with a Kodak CCD (a BetterLight), and I agree about their very good color rendering. But I shoot mostly for B&W, so that's not a big issue for me.

[Dabow]

Oh Lord, why doesn’t somebody go out and buy a camera they like.

 

I don't want a camera I just like, I want a camera I can't put down! Too much to ask?

[jaapv]

Well, my wife would object...

[Steve Ash]

...if they want people like me (those of us not looking for camera jewelry) to take them seriously going forward.

 

I find this command rather condescending, arrogant and overvaluing yourself. Thus I finally find your argument not very convincing.

 

Regards,

Steve

[Ecaton]

Dizzy from reading this thread. Just grabbing my M9 with the hyped Summilux asph 50 to go out and shoot.

Am wondering whether there are still a handful of forum members out there who have neither written a M9 review, nor a open letter to Leica, nor enriched the world with a comparison of M9 or X1 versus RicFujCanNikSamPanOlySig:(

[rosuna]

I see the M9 is below the quality standards established by the S2 camera. The electronics efficiency, speed of operation, weather sealing, interface robustness (buttons at the back), software flexibility, etc. of the S2 are set at a higher level than those of the M8/M9 camera (and at even a lower level is the X1). Some leveling would be welcome.

 

There are constraints, of course, in the technical side and the economic side of the problem. But after several years of S2 production, and two years of M9 production, I expect to see some advance in this regard very soon, with the M9-P or with a new camera a few months from now.

[zlatkob]

And why should we care how a camera is designed? It's not an object of art, it's just a tool to get you pictures. This is secondary to its prime virtues, which are perfectly easy to lay down, because they are mostly the same for every other product: miniaturization, weight, ease of use etc, etc...

 

Oh goodness, does one have to explain the value of design in the M9 forum? Not an interesting topic? All of the virtues you mentioned don't just magically fall together into a product that is useful and elegant. Those virtues (and others) are the product of design.

[diogenis]

Oh goodness, does one have to explain the value of design in the M9 forum? Not an interesting topic? All of the virtues you mentioned don't just magically fall together into a product that is useful and elegant. Those virtues (and others) are the product of design.

 

You can explain the value of design as much as you like.

All the virtues I mentioned are there because of clever engineering, not design. Unless you imply that the Japanese, even after 50 years are still not capable of designing, because their cameras are simply bulky and heavy.

For sure design counts, but to a camera other things matter most. At least to me

[mblaze]

I find this command rather condescending, arrogant and overvaluing yourself. Thus I finally find your argument not very convincing.

 

 

I'm simply stating my honest opinion of the camera. You can take it personally if you want, though.

[zlatkob]

What evidence do you have that the individuals who are against suggested changes are the same individuals who will purchase a new product whose properties and capabilities are presently unknown? I suggest the confusion is in your perception.

 

I don't have evidence of future actions. I'm making a prediction based on reading this forum from the introduction of the M8 to the present. As for the future, let's just say "we'll see". Maybe revisit this thread when the M10 appears. Then see what improvements it incorporates and who has bought it.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[zlatkob]

You can explain the value of design as much as you like.

All the virtues I mentioned are there because of clever engineering, not design. Unless you imply that the Japanese, even after 50 years are still not capable of designing, because their cameras are simply bulky and heavy.

For sure design counts, but to a camera other things matter most. At least to me

 

Ok, it seems you're just working with a different definition of design -- one that excludes engineering. Japan makes lots of small cameras, so I don't know where you're going with that.

[marknorton]

The viewfinder/rangerfinder of the M camera is its USP - it's the reason the camera exists.

 

As a method of focussing, it certainly works up to a point. The difficulties of using it in real world situations stem from it only really being accurate enough for digital when perfectly aligned and the need for a range of add-ons to support lenses which didn't exist when the idea was first thought up - wide lenses, fast lenses.

 

It's a near 60 year-old design which needs updating with new methods, materials and technologies and I would much rather Leica turned their attention to it than fill in another blank entry in the focal length/lens speed matrix.