robert blu Posted October 3, 2011 Share #21 Posted October 3, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Nice photos at the concert, nggalai in spite of the limits of position, I guess as viewer. robert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 Hi robert blu, Take a look here Removable bottom plates, and how to deal with them.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
vladik Posted October 3, 2011 Share #22 Posted October 3, 2011 Removable base plate is a pain (M9 is my 1st Leica) and I would say that it must cost more to manufacture then to have an opening for battery and a card. If it were a non removable it would surely be more secure when tripod mounted on occasion. Just my 2 cents worth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest srheker Posted October 3, 2011 Share #23 Posted October 3, 2011 Does anybody here have any info from Leica why they stuck with a removable bottom plate with their digital offerings? The bottom plate is a plain surface, without openings, gaps etc. The advantages should be obvious, if not place a Canon EOS 5D in a puddle of beer. It might be nicely retro, but well, I dropped it after a bump in the back last night during a concert. It took me until after the concert to recover the plate, i.e. be able to shoot some more. Yes, one might drop the bottom plate, but other people break the hinges of their battery and SD-Card doors in exact the same situation or even more often. One needs to pick it up, one needs a spare part. Guess who's lucky? And by the way, the fact that you need to remove the plate doesn't come as a surprise, so it should be no problem to have a procedure to manage this safely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted October 3, 2011 Share #24 Posted October 3, 2011 These dinky little hatch covers on non-M digital cameras, however, are usually the first piece to fail. You might guess that, but it's not true for all non-M cameras. I've owned quite a lot of DSLRs and never had a hatch cover fail. Cheap cameras do have dinky covers that flip open too easily or break. The better cameras do not. The Canon 1D-series has a sturdy metal door. In my experience, a shutter is more likely to fail, and that's after many thousands of exposures. More importantly, the reason for the removable baseplate is gone. It was to keep the film plane flat and immobile. Now it's there too promote the "art of anticipation"? Or perhaps it's there just to remind us how a film-M works. Yes, I'm sure that's what the designers intended. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nggalai Posted October 3, 2011 Author Share #25 Posted October 3, 2011 Hey, thanks for this lively discussion. Much appreciated! Also great to see my original posting was taken somewhat tongue-in-cheek; that’s why I originally posted this thread in the Bar. Check out the RRS bottom plate which is made for tripod clamps, but also has a hand grip option which for me performs better than the Leica grip. You can get the base without the hand grip, though-just to be clear. Excellent suggestion – I was looking into RRS before; that their plate design might come in handy in this case never entered my mind, though. Cheers! Would the camera bottom need to be slightly bigger to accommodate a door? Maybe, or maybe not, I don't know. I’d guess the problem is not so much whether the bottom needed to be bigger but the whole camera if you want sensible doors. All my digital cameras carry the SD slot right above / next to the battery which would mean additional bulk to the body if you wanted the battery remain about the same size. Leica didn’t have too much space to waste in their digital M, so card interface and battery had to go quite far apart. This would mean two access doors or a completely different design where you slot in your card where now the USB port is or the like. Two access doors at the bottom would necessitate additional liquid/dust sealing as srheker pointed out with the beer puddle example. It seems having the whole bottom plate removable was the only sensible course of action, also on the lines of keeping the digital M look (mostly) like their predecessors. Bummer they didn’t add some form of catch, mind. I cannot help but smile at those who bemoan baseplate juggling to change their battery or SD card every few hundred shots or so. I don't complain once every 36 exposures... You’re totally right, naturally. I never saw this as a problem with my M3 either. In the case of the M9, the camera apparently got “stuck” turned on or something crazy happened to the battery. It was nigh-fully charged when I left the house, about 50 shots later -> empty. (No chimping.) Hence the rather impromptu dance with the bottom plate. This is the first time I had to replace the battery in the field, hence – no routine set yet. I should gear up on my Plate Kata or something. If get a mangled baseplate after dropping it you can stick some Blu Tack over the little recessed pin next to the battery compartment and the camera will be fully operational again. Another good hint. Cheers! And rest asured, it wasn’t that kind of party. I don’t think they’d allow cameras for such events. Lars, Jaap, thanks for your plate-to-mouth postings. Seems as if I had taken Carlmuck the wrong way and this is standard behaviour? Nice photos at the concert, nggalai in spite of the limits of position, I guess as viewer. Yes, just a “normal” viewer. I didn’t even plan on taking the camera with me, more or less automatically grabbed it when leaving for the concert. Glad you liked the pics. Cheers, -Sascha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest srheker Posted October 3, 2011 Share #26 Posted October 3, 2011 The Canon 1D-series has a sturdy metal door. The M9 Body just doesn't offer the space for hinges, sealing and opening mechanism the 1D has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted October 3, 2011 Share #27 Posted October 3, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I’d guess the problem is not so much whether the bottom needed to be bigger but the whole camera if you want sensible doors. ... Two access doors at the bottom would necessitate additional liquid/dust sealing as srheker pointed out with the beer puddle example. It seems having the whole bottom plate removable was the only sensible course of action, also on the lines of keeping the digital M look (mostly) like their predecessors. Bummer they didn’t add some form of catch, mind. Why make the whole camera bigger? Two little doors at the bottom don't need to make the whole camera bigger. There is no liquid sealing presently, so the need for liquid sealing is not apparent. It seems that everyone has given up on the idea of liquid sealing, so let's not put that up as a barrier to an efficient door design. I don't know that the puddle of beer test is the key anyway. Puddles of beer have not been a part of my photography. But if one is going to put a 5D in a puddle of beer, then let's put an M9 in a puddle of beer too. As for dust, pretty much any door will keep out dust; that could hardly be a big challenge for Leica. Keep in mind that dust is coming in as soon as you open a door to change a card or battery -- just as dust comes in when you load a film camera. But none of that dust is reaching the sensor. The M9 Body just doesn't offer the space for hinges, sealing and opening mechanism the 1D has. If a third party (Luigi) can make a bottom plate with two doors, then I'm sure that the original manufacturer could devise something even better. Of course the space is limited. But the argument that "there is no space" presumes that nothing about the camera body (or camera bottom) can be changed. But in going to digital, Leica has already changed the camera body in many ways, from making the body thicker, to removing the wind lever and rewind knob, to adding an LCD and a thumbwheel and a series of buttons, and removing the frame counter, etc. The current bottom plate already uses a rather large opening mechanism, so there is some room by the SD card anyway. Adding card & battery doors to the bottom would be a logical and functional step in the transformation to digital. Film required a large camera-wide opening for loading; digital doesn't. Leica can design and build a full-frame digital M (previously described as impossible) and the amazing S2, and an incredible array of lenses. So would a battery and card door be too much of a challenge for them? I don't think so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted October 3, 2011 Share #28 Posted October 3, 2011 I suspect that after reading all of the arguments here in favor of a removable baseplate, that many other manufacturers will incorporate one in their future cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest srheker Posted October 3, 2011 Share #29 Posted October 3, 2011 Leica can design and build a full-frame digital M (previously described as impossible) and the amazing S2, and an incredible array of lenses. So would a battery and card door be too much of a challenge for them? I don't think so. The most dangerous thing for a manufacturer* is to think that the 2, 20 or 200 people who complain about something represent the majority of their costumers, just because the costumers who are completely satisfied with the feature don't feel the need to say so. *The same applies to politicians. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted October 3, 2011 Share #30 Posted October 3, 2011 I really like the removable base plates. They do the job of sealing the bottom of the camera to perfection. And if I ever were to lose one (and I never have yet in 20+ years) I'd get a replacement, as opposed to sending the camera in for repair if I mangled the hinge or broke the door off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buranca Posted October 3, 2011 Share #31 Posted October 3, 2011 I really like the removable base plates. Thank you! So do I. IMHO... The teutonic simplicity of the M digitals (M8 in my case) is one of their biggest, if not the biggest, draw for me. I love the retro, familial ties of the base plate design as it is. So much so, that every time I look at the chunky USB flap on the side -I cringe. Why they didn't place it under the base plate escapes me -the only time I use it is for firmware updates. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pelagia Posted October 3, 2011 Share #32 Posted October 3, 2011 So much so, that every time I look at the chunky USB flap on the side -I cringe. Why they didn't place it under the base plate escapes me -the only time I use it is for firmware updates. There is a reason for this, I suppose. Removing the base plate "disables" the camera, which provides for safe removal of the battery or the card. Whereas the USB connection needs a functioning camera, e.g. for tethered shooting, image downloading etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted October 3, 2011 Share #33 Posted October 3, 2011 I really like the removable base plates. They do the job of sealing the bottom of the camera to perfection. I'm trying to figure out how a removable baseplate that has no weather sealing gaskets and leaves a large gaping hole in the bottom of the camera when removed is anyone's idea of "sealing the bottom of the camera to perfection." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted October 3, 2011 Share #34 Posted October 3, 2011 I'm trying to figure out how a removable baseplate that has no weather sealing gaskets and leaves a large gaping hole in the bottom of the camera when removed is anyone's idea of "sealing the bottom of the camera to perfection." Of course the base plate won't seal the bottom of the camera "when removed" but I don't think that's what Peter H meant. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted October 3, 2011 Share #35 Posted October 3, 2011 Of course the base plate won't seal the bottom of the camera "when removed" but I don't think that's what Peter H meant. Pete. It won't seal it when it is installed either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted October 3, 2011 Share #36 Posted October 3, 2011 It won't seal it when it is installed either. ... and if it was a problem the forum would be filled with angry posts. But it's not. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 3, 2011 Share #37 Posted October 3, 2011 If post numbers are an indicator of seriousness then removable baseplates are far less of a concern than what strap to hang the thing from Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nggalai Posted October 3, 2011 Author Share #38 Posted October 3, 2011 Why make the whole camera bigger? Two little doors at the bottom don't need to make the whole camera bigger. […] If a third party (Luigi) can make a bottom plate with two doors, then I'm sure that the original manufacturer could devise something even better. […] Leica can design and build a full-frame digital M (previously described as impossible) and the amazing S2, and an incredible array of lenses. So would a battery and card door be too much of a challenge for them? I don't think so. My reasoning: For obvious reasons, you’ll want the base plate to be as stable as possible – it also holds the tripod mount. Already in its current state, a lot of people are apprehensive of camera belt systems like the Blackrapid or Sunsniper, even though there’s this LFI article where Leica claims the base plate fastenings are more than stable enough for them. Adding two doors/holes to the plate won’t make it more sturdy. And if you only want one flap, you’ll have to put the card reader electronics (and slot) right next to the battery which means: Physically smaller battery or fatter camera. And if I ever were to lose one (and I never have yet in 20+ years) I'd get a replacement, as opposed to sending the camera in for repair if I mangled the hinge or broke the door off. Good point. Add Steve’s hint with the blue-tack in case you’ve lost it and need to wait for a replacement to get shipped to your place, and it’s not really a biggie. Which doesn’t mean I like the removable bottom. But the digital M is crammed to the brim with electronics and mechanics, so I think this is all that was possible at the time of R&D of both M8 and M9. It might look like the SD slot is just, well, a slot, so you could put it anywhere, but trying to get all the rest of the camera to fit into this form factor because you want easy-access SD and battery compartments … Aren’t many long-time M users complaining the digital Ms are too bulky as is? The M10 might pull this off, as integration naturally has developed, too. Cheers, -Sascha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted October 3, 2011 Share #39 Posted October 3, 2011 I'm trying to figure out how a removable baseplate that has no weather sealing gaskets and leaves a large gaping hole in the bottom of the camera when removed is anyone's idea of "sealing the bottom of the camera to perfection." ... especially when you're in a drizzle or rain, or in the wind, or in a dusty place, and you must change the card/battery in order to make more pictures. This is a detail that helps define whether a camera is mainly for leisure-time casual use, or practical for use in more fast-paced or demanding circumstances. I know people think that card and battery doors snap off like chips, but I've never* experienced that in nearly 10 years of digital photography, making ~ 100k exposures per year. On the other hand, I have seen reports of baseplates broken just from using a tripod. This is almost a predictable when you consider how the baseplate is attached. The idea of supporting an object by its "door" is questionable from the start. It is a little bit like carrying a refrigerator by its door, or lifting a car by placing the jack under its door (I'm exaggerating to illustrate the concept). *[Edited to add: on further thought, I recall one camera did suffer a broken door after about 5 years of heavy use; it was a 5D, not the more sturdy 1-series. This is only one camera out of many ... easy to forget. I ordered a replacement door from the manufacturer and replaced it myself in a few seconds.] The most dangerous thing for a manufacturer* is to think that the 2, 20 or 200 people who complain about something represent the majority of their costumers, just because the costumers who are completely satisfied with the feature don't feel the need to say so. This is correct. But it works the other way too. Polling your completely satisfied customers can lead to erroneous decisions as well. I think I've described before how in the 1980's Nikon was convinced that their professional customers did not want autofocus; that's what their satisfied professional customers where telling Nikon then. My reasoning: For obvious reasons, you’ll want the base plate to be as stable as possible – it also holds the tripod mount. ... Adding two doors/holes to the plate won’t make it more sturdy. Adding 2 doors to the baseplate would be bad, I agree. This is a workaround that Luigi has devised, forced by the fact that there is baseplate in the first place. It is an attractive workaround for someone that needs speedy access with the current camera. But if Leica gave up on the baseplate entirely, a future model could have a super-sturdy bottom, with the tripod mount firmly a part of the camera, not the baseplate. The doors would be hardly bigger than the current battery and SD card slot, making for a very sturdy camera bottom. FWIW, I have not found that the removable baseplate improves my photography or induces any special meditative state, whether I place it my mouth upside down or as a saliva-catcher, or put it in my pocket, or drop it on the floor, so I would not miss it at all on a future model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest srheker Posted October 3, 2011 Share #40 Posted October 3, 2011 I'm trying to figure out how a removable baseplate that has no weather sealing gaskets and leaves a large gaping hole in the bottom of the camera when removed is anyone's idea of "sealing the bottom of the camera to perfection." Yes, the battery-slot and memory card door of my EOS 1DsIII are waterproof even with battery removed or door opened! No...I was joking, they are not... ) But seriously. If you are in the pouring rain and remove the M9 base plate, the rain would have to make a u-turn to reach the card slot... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.