When can we expect a reasonably good screen and fast image review?

[Swanny66]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I understand people don't always use the screen. And to those who don't...more power to you. But for a person who shoots landscapes/ sunrise/sunset/ night photography/bracketing, I will use it mainly for the histogram. Mainly because in A the overall 'averaging' is much more centered than my mk4. So there is a difference I have to get used to when switching systems from taking bird photos with the mk4 to my M9's uses. When I am in manual I don't really need it.

 

Is it really necessary to lambast those who check their exposures in difficult circumstances? I would rather not be the one wasting their time taking unusable photos because my pride is such that I cannot look at the back of my camera to look at a histogram because of some self-imposed moratorium from the film days (btw...I was/am a film guy too).

 

I would like to leave the M9 camera screen as is. I like it for what I use it for as I am just looking at certain parts of a photo or histogram. But if people want to use the M9 like a film camera, there are plenty of used M3s etc. to keep you busy. I will use the technology included in the camera. That is why I purchased it.

[diogenis]

The only valid point for Leica to introduce a larger screen is purely for cosmetic reasons and this step will require Leica to completely redesign it's camera:

For exposure check: you need a higher fidelity screen, one that will show true colors/contrast. Dimensions or pixel density means nothing when all you need is review your photo.

Histogram check: the current one is fine for this job, but maybe one that can display more contrast under heavy sunlight will fit the bill perfectly (like current OLEDs)

For focus confirmation check: you need to learn to trust the RF system of your camera because it's fast and accurate and unless you do mistakes you don't really need to confirm focus. If however you need to then a higher density screen would indeed be desirable.

The new supposed screen should also perform faster and consume less power. These are the key features: speed, contrast, low power.

[Advertisement]

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

[marknorton]

Those who think the screen is not required for focus confirmation have never used a Noctilux or first version 35mm Summilux.

[Steve Ash]

Those who think the screen is not required for focus confirmation have never used a Noctilux or first version 35mm Summilux.

 

It won't make the focus any better though.

 

The screen is required for making your settings of the camera, exposure confirmation and give others an impression how the shot looks like.

 

To keep the form factor as it is or smaller is much more important then getting an improved confirmation by a bigger screen in the field that you made a good job.

 

Regards,

Steve

[Dabow]

It won't make the focus any better though.

 

It will allow you to check you've hit the focus mark correctly with lenses that require precision and therefore, if you're slightly out, retake the shot. I think I'd rather be sure my focus is good while I still have the opportunity to address it rather than when I get home and it's too late.

 

To keep the form factor as it is or smaller is much more important then getting an improved confirmation by a bigger screen in the field that you made a good job.

 

If you believe the camera has to increase to some unwieldy size just by the addition of a larger, higher-res LCD when much smaller cameras than the M9 manage it quite successfully. Really don't understand where this logic is coming from that larger LCD = larger camera

[mjh]

If you believe the camera has to increase to some unwieldy size just by the addition of a larger, higher-res LCD when much smaller cameras than the M9 manage it quite successfully. Really don't understand where this logic is coming from that larger LCD = larger camera

Of course you can design a small camera with a large 3" screen. First you do away with the viewfinder. Compact cameras, as a rule, don’t have one, and nobody cares. Then you reduce the number of buttons and dials. You can even do without any buttons at all if you choose an interface based on a touchscreen. So yes, a camera doesn’t have to be that large just to accommodate a large display. The real question is: How can one design a future M model with a large display and still maintain the basic look and feel of an M-type camera?

[Dabow]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Of course you can design a small camera with a large 3" screen. First you do away with the viewfinder. Compact cameras, as a rule, don’t have one, and nobody cares. Then you reduce the number of buttons and dials. You can even do without any buttons at all if you choose an interface based on a touchscreen. So yes, a camera doesn’t have to be that large just to accommodate a large display. The real question is: How can one design a future M model with a large display and still maintain the basic look and feel of an M-type camera?

 

And that'd be one for the designers and engineers at Solms. Given the current size of the camera and realty on the back I don't see it as some unachievable goal though.

[ho_co]

Dave, the M8 had to grow from the size of the M6/M7 to fit all the pieces inside. The extra size is the reason for the reduced finder magnification.

 

The M9 is the smallest full-frame camera on the market.

 

I understand the logic of "Well, smaller bodies have bigger screens," but they're not Leicas. I hope you're right that it can be done. I'm sure Leica would like to give the M a better LCD. But so far, I don't see how that could be accomplished.

 

I'm sure you're familiar with Mark Norton's Anatomy of the M8. The camera is crammed. Mark says he still doesn't see how Leica got a full-frame sensor into the same-size body. Any change to a component would just about require a redesign of the whole box.

[andybarton]

The current screen more or less stretches from the top of the base plate to the bottom edge of the top plate. allowing for the frame round the screen.

 

Without a complete, radical, redesign of the whole camera, I cannot see how a taller screen can be accommodated onto the existing body. There is "stuff" behind the top plate that couldn't easily be moved, and reducing the height of the top plate would have a drastic effect on the rangfinder mechanism.

 

This isn't something that could be done very easily, unless the whole body is redesigned.

[wattsy]

Maybe an opportunity for Leica to bite the bullet and do away with the rear LCD completely. They can always stick a small LCD in the top plate (where the useless Leica script now goes) for camera settings and a simple histogram.

[Dabow]

Okay, I'm no technical expert. I just want a tool that meets my requirements as best it can. When the M8 came out Leica said there was no way a FF sensor could be put into an M body. Guess what - they achieved it with the M9 just a few years down the line. When the M10 comes out, we'll be a few years further down the line and I'm hoping Leica has spent that time wisely, aside from coming out with cosmetic niceties that really serve no functional purpose, to work out ways to incorporate a better LCD into the M without compromising the camera. That's the great thing about technology, the wizards are constantly moving it on. We mightn't see a way, we may shrug our shoulders and mutter "But how can such magic be achieved...?! But this WILL have to happen at some stage if Leica is to move the digital M series forward in a positive manner.

 

Maybe an opportunity for Leica to bite the bullet and do away with the rear LCD completely. They can always stick a small LCD in the top plate (where the useless Leica script now goes) for camera settings and a simple histogram.

 

You need a histogram?? What on Earth for. Any photographer worth his salt can gauge exposure perfectly by eye

[diogenis]

So far no one here answers the big question: do we NEED it? (the larger screen)

Leica will never design something because the rest competitors do it.

Who can prove me here that 3" screen will do what 2.5" can't do? And if 3.0" are so much important then why not 4? or even more?

And lastly, here is a quotation from mr. Leica himself that says it all basically:

Leica is considering some of the new technologies used by other camera manufacturers: “But there will be some technologies that could make sense. HD, wireless, Geo-tagging all could make sense. We are studying these, and usually at the end, we’ll come up with a German engineer solution”.

 

Read more on LeicaRumors.com: Interviews with Andreas Kaufmann and Stefan Daniel | Leica News & Rumors

 

The "German engineering" at the end is the reason why people buys and trusts Leica.

Edited July 5, 2011 by diogenis

[Steve Ash]

It will allow you to check you've hit the focus mark correctly with lenses that require precision and therefore, if you're slightly out, retake the shot. I think I'd rather be sure my focus is good while I still have the opportunity to address it rather than when I get home and it's too late.

 

The time you waste to check whether you hit the focus or not you can simply utilize to make another 10 shots. My recommendation is to concentrate on the scene unfolding in front of you instead of checking your possible hits and failures.

 

If you believe the camera has to increase to some unwieldy size just by the addition of a larger, higher-res LCD when much smaller cameras than the M9 manage it quite successfully. Really don't understand where this logic is coming from that larger LCD = larger camera

At least it would spoil the classic design of the camera which I care of as I do not see a real advantage of a bigger screen.

 

Regards,

Steve

[Fotofanatiker]

Just a question to those with an engineering background - would it be possible to drop the LCD screen entirely and create a hybrid viewfinder (similar to the X100) for reviewing pictures? I have no experience with the latest high-res viewfinders from Panasonic, but I would like to know whether this would be feasible...

[Swanny66]

The time you waste to check whether you hit the focus or not you can simply utilize to make another 10 shots. My recommendation is to concentrate on the scene unfolding in front of you instead of checking your possible hits and failures.

 

Regards,

Steve

 

I do not take 10 extra shots or check for focus. But I also do not tell people how to enjoy their photography experience. What if they are on holiday or over seas and won't find out until they get home that they didn't quite get the shot? What are 10 poor shots worth then? How do you know know you got them correct under low light conditions? I am not asking for a reply. I am just saying there is no blanket answer, and each photographer has their reasons/methods. I think taking 10 shots whirling the focus ring in hopes of hitting gold is not a good use of time. But I am not saying you are wrong to do it

 

I think we can agree that some want a bigger screen (I don't) and some want no screen (I don't).

[Jeff S]

I understand people don't always use the screen. And to those who don't...more power to you.

 

Literally.

 

Jeff

[charlesphoto99]

I too was disappointed that the M9 didn't feature a better screen. But if that's all that's available, then that's what we have to work with. It really does work just fine for what it's supposed to. M photography has always had a certain ethos to it - catching the "decisive moment" and Leica stand behind that. No amount of focus checking will allow one to go back and recapture that lost moment. Best to just take more pictures as Steve says. Of course now many want the M to be all things - a large format landscape camera, a wildlife/sports camera, etc etc. Lets face it, there are better tools for those purposes.

 

With all the radical redesigns people want for the M10 then don't expect one before 2013 if Leica follow that advice. Redesign of the top plate and what's behind it is no small thing, esp as people are clambering for smaller and smaller cameras (what happened to people's spines that the M isn't small enough?). The only thing I think Leica truly missed the boat on is the whole sapphire glass thing. They really couldn't source out some inexpensive "Gorilla Glass" or equivalent like every other camera?

 

Anyway, M9 works great for me, esp now that I have two of them.

[Swanny66]

I agree Charles. That is why I use 2 systems. I like the M9 for certain things and my Canon for others. I love my M9 and like the small size. I have not had an issue with focus except in low light. And that is to be expected with the longer focal lengths in those situations. I think going forward there will be no really big changes in the line. Just a gradual evolution.

[Dabow]

The time you waste to check whether you hit the focus or not you can simply utilize to make another 10 shots. My recommendation is to concentrate on the scene unfolding in front of you instead of checking your possible hits and failures.

 

Thank you for your recommendation, which you freely give having no knowledge of the type of photography I would like this feature improved for. My recommendation is to keep such wisdom to yourself, unless it's applicable to the case at hand (which it is not).

 

FWIW I like to take my time with my photography, and not bang out shots infinitum in the hope I get one right. It's one of the reasons I bought into the M system in the first place. That's just not my style and probably a throwback to film days. I have previously raised issues I have with the Noctilux/M9 and critical focus for portraiture. An improved LCD would help me check focus. That doesn't need to necessarily be a bigger LCD, just a better resolution one. Although I hear that higher res screens at this size are hard to, if not impossible, to come by. So perhaps the size increase is required, but it's not essential for me. Good luck with your multiple shot approach.

 

At least it would spoil the classic design of the camera which I care of as I do not see a real advantage of a bigger screen.

 

Yeah, well, classic lines to not a good tool make. You only have to look at the car market to understand that. I'd rather have a tool that does the job I need it for well rather than something that just looks good at club meetings.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[xrogers]

The next digital M will almost certainly have a better screen. A current 3" 3:2 aspect ratio screen with the same resolution as the S2 is used on the DLUX-4/5, and could fit by widening out the rear controls a bit (no need to move into the top plate at all, perhaps a little into the bottom).

 

The next digital M will likely be faster because Leica has already developed what they need to make it faster in the S2. It's likely the next M will use fewer electronic parts (the Maestro includes dual cores, DSP, SD/CF and USB interfaces in one chip).

 

Leica would benefit from a single code base for firmware, for cost, speed to market, common bug fixing, and common base code libraries (I have not heard about SD card compatibility problems with the S2---the SD firmware for the S2 comes from Fujitsu with the Maestro). The more parts in common between the M and S lines (and even the X) the better for Leica and customers.

 

A smaller, low resolution LCD and slow processing (whether some care or not) is not a selling point. We have the screen and slow processors because the M9 had to be based on the M8. The M10 will be based on the M9 and S2, and will be a better camera for it.

 

Until later,

 

Clyde