nowherean Posted January 12, 2012 Share #41 Posted January 12, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Make it take good pictures Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 12, 2012 Posted January 12, 2012 Hi nowherean, Take a look here Open letter to Leica: M10 suggestions. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Ecaton Posted January 12, 2012 Share #42 Posted January 12, 2012 1. CMOS sans anti-aliasing filter2. 12-14 FPS burst modee 3. AF line of lenses 4. EVF, more than 2 MP 5. Focus peaking 6. Smaller, MP sized 7. Video option (1080 p, 20-60 FPS) 8. HDR mode 9. Film pack to emulate all of the classic B&W film stock 10. 16 bit files 11. 30 day battery life, like the kindle 12. Priced to sell at $6500 Totally Joking, but all joking aside, make a less glitchy M9, with a bigger buffer, and I'd be fine, but probably would simply keep the already wonderful M9....I worry that the M10 will try to hard and fall on its face doing so..... Yes, MP size and 100g less weight, better high iso, bigger buffer, live view, better lcd, faster (review), max USD 4500. Larger battery, why not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted January 13, 2012 Share #43 Posted January 13, 2012 4. Remove the bottom cover. It no longer serves its original purpose of improving the rigidity of the film chamber, and removing it would gain valuable internal space which could be put to better use for something else. A simple hinged metal door would be plenty for access to the battery and SD card. I think this would make the camera a little bit lighter too, and it should make it easier to include a larger rear LCD. Yes, yes, yes, YES! A hinged metal door is a true minimalist design. A removable bottom plate is a contraption, fiddly to attach and a hindrance to speedy function. Its original rationale of body rigidity and film plane flatness is long gone, and it is now the weak link for tripod use. 5. Please, please, please keep the same battery! I'm going to keep my M8 for backup and IR photography. The M8 would make an awesome spare battery holder for the M10 No, no, no, please do NOT keep the same battery. Do not build a new camera around an old 2006 battery design. If it were some brilliant, super-long-lasting battery, then I would agree. But it isn't. Canon and Nikon keep building dramatically better batteries (along with lowering power consumption) and I am so glad to be rid of their old ones. I would much rather spend money on new battery technology than old. For their newer cameras, far fewer batteries are needed. New and improved batteries can be a significant selling point. My suggestions for an M10 would be: 1. When in A mode, I want to be able to use exposure compensation with the setting ring (thumbwheel) and exposure lock with half press of the shutter. If I set the M9 to soft release mode, I lose the ability to lock exposure with a half press of the shutter. 2. Bring back the top-LCD of the M8. Instantly seeing battery capacity and frame count is too important to require a button press. This is like the fuel gage in your car -- it should always be visible at a glance. I would add ISO and exposure compensation to the LCD too. 3. Show the exact exposure compensation setting in the viewfinder, either graphically or numerically. The M9 gives no indication of exposure compensation when in manual mode (even though it affects the metering!) and only gives a tiny blinking red dot when in A mode. Exposure comp. is basic information, not a distraction or gimmick. The blinking red dot is more of a distraction, showing neither the direction nor the extent of exposure compensation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted January 14, 2012 Share #44 Posted January 14, 2012 Yes, yes, yes, YES! A hinged metal door is a true minimalist design. A removable bottom plate is a contraption, fiddly to attach and a hindrance to speedy function. Its original rationale of body rigidity and film plane flatness is long gone, and it is now the weak link for tripod use..... No,no, NO! The removable bottom-plate is a classic Leica feature, easy to use, and still adds to construction rigidity and the sleek look of the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted January 14, 2012 Share #45 Posted January 14, 2012 A screw mount was a classic Leica feature ... easy to use. A viewfinder separate from the rangefinder was a classic Leica feature ... easy to use. An add-on light meter in the hot shoe was a classic Leica feature ... easy to use. A film chamber was a classic Leica feature ... easy to use (with film). A 1/50th second flash sync speed was a classic Leica feature ... easy to use (but easier to not use). Sometimes a classic Leica feature is replaced ... with a new classic Leica feature that makes Leica photographers buy new Leica cameras. I sincerely doubt the bottom plate adds construction rigidity. It creates a needlessly large opening in the bottom of the camera. And it means a tripod is never firmly attached to the body of the camera but rather to a removable part. The body would be just as sleek with a bottom-opening door. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 14, 2012 Share #46 Posted January 14, 2012 Red LED lines for just the lens mounted. A built-in diopter as you had in the 30's bodies. And I'll be one happy man and a new customer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 14, 2012 Share #47 Posted January 14, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Actually the 30ies bodies did not have a built- in diopter. They had a built in focussing mechanism for the rangefinder, as symbolized by an arrow and infinity symbol at the lever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted January 14, 2012 Share #48 Posted January 14, 2012 Bottom-opening door would preserve the Leica look, but not a back-opening door. I don't think it would add very much, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramosa Posted January 14, 2012 Share #49 Posted January 14, 2012 Here is my wish-list in no particular order: 1. High-resolution LCD (i.e. at least 920,000 pixels) w/ sapphire glass (not releasing the m10 without, then the m10-p with sapphire glass in 2 years) 2. Full weather-proofing on the body 3. Better battery life 4. Viewfinder from the M3 - i.e. 0.92x 5. Finally, improved high ISO performance Not too much to ask, is it? #1 and 5 are musts for me; #3 would be a bonus. i don't need any other changes. and i really don't want most of the changes articulated in this thread (not this previous post)--because they'd make the M10 more gizmo-laden and more expensive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucklik Posted January 14, 2012 Share #50 Posted January 14, 2012 Actually the 30ies bodies did not have a built- in diopter. They had a built in focussing mechanism for the rangefinder, as symbolized by an arrow and infinity symbol at the lever. There is a built in diopter on the viewfinder of my 1938 IIIa Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucklik Posted January 14, 2012 Share #51 Posted January 14, 2012 Bottom-opening door would preserve the Leica look, but not a back-opening door. I don't think it would add very much, though. I don't care about the look of the bottom opening. I find it annoying and it is always a problem where to put the cover while changing film. (yes I still use film) I know I will also find it annoying when I should have to change the battery or memory card of my next M (10?) I dropped the bottom cover some time ago in difficult situation. What when you are shooting on a small boat or high above the ground. Then you don't care about the Leica look. A camera is for taking pictures not to look at. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 14, 2012 Share #52 Posted January 14, 2012 There is a built in diopter on the viewfinder of my 1938 IIIa Yes - I know exactly what you mean - it was meant as a focussing adjustment for distance - not as a diopter adjustment, although up to a point it can be used as such. The little lever on the top on the far left - all rangefinder barnacks have it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted January 14, 2012 Share #53 Posted January 14, 2012 I really hope it doesn't venture too far from what it is already. I may be shot down in flames for saying this, but I'd love to see a rework of the viewfinder entirely so it only shows the lens attached, ala Contax G. I don't own an M9, so maybe it's not for me to say as I'm not part of the club but I will be purchasing very soon, probably an M10 and this is the one area of concern I have. I would imagine I would get used to it but it would certainly make like easier, no? I would also like to see Leica buck the 16-18mp trend and give us 22-24mp. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted January 14, 2012 Share #54 Posted January 14, 2012 ...it is always a problem where to put the cover while changing film. (yes I still use film) I find a pocket makes a perfect place to put the bottom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 14, 2012 Share #55 Posted January 14, 2012 I have an armpit for the same purpose. In fact, I have two. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 14, 2012 Share #56 Posted January 14, 2012 Actually the 30ies bodies did not have a built- in diopter. They had a built in focussing mechanism for the rangefinder, as symbolized by an arrow and infinity symbol at the lever. Jaap, that's interesting. I do notice that infinity is more clear when the thing its properly set, but my eyesight cannot be corrected to 20-20 (but close to it), so I thought it was acting like a diopter. Would something like a variable diopter help us compensate for rear (or front) focus with certain lenses at problematic distances (close) and wide-open aperture? I'm thinking of one or two lenses at specific distances. Thanks very much for the good information. -- Pico -- almost 20/20 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucklik Posted January 15, 2012 Share #57 Posted January 15, 2012 I find a pocket makes a perfect place to put the bottom. Yes but they are filled with other stuff ( like the pockets of a 12 year old boy) lenses, film, (or batteries and memory cards) pocketknife etc etc etc. And then I have to find some room for the bottom of my camera. lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 15, 2012 Share #58 Posted January 15, 2012 Jaap, that's interesting. I do notice that infinity is more clear when the thing its properly set, but my eyesight cannot be corrected to 20-20 (but close to it), so I thought it was acting like a diopter. Would something like a variable diopter help us compensate for rear (or front) focus with certain lenses at problematic distances (close) and wide-open aperture? I'm thinking of one or two lenses at specific distances. Thanks very much for the good information. -- Pico -- almost 20/20 No - it would only help focus more precisely, as the rf patch would be sharper. However I was told at Leica that the combined RF/VF makes a variable diopter very difficult to implement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted January 16, 2012 Share #59 Posted January 16, 2012 I for one would love Live View. it would mean I could use the camera more in different situations. I personally don't understand the staunch need for a "propper viewfinder" Please understand, I'm not saying I think anything adverse to it and I'm really not trying to attack anyone for it. I guess I just don't understand it. Perhaps it's for those that fall in to the category of "I prefer to take pictures" like HCB for instance, and then there are those who yearn for the end result. I think I fall somewhere in between. In that I love to take pictures more than mostly anything...but it's the end result I'm searching for like an illusive dream. For me a viewfinder that helps be do both is a massive benefit. For the times I want to look at the scene in the real then I do what I often do and drop the camera slightly below my eyes and witness the scene with nothing in front of me. Just my eyes. I like to do this quite a bit in fact. Also, and in great part is the sense that I've spent a lot of time looking at the back of a large format camera wether 10x8 or 5x4 that looking at the back of any camera really kind of translates to me. And we were doing this looooong before we were making telephone calls. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted January 18, 2012 Share #60 Posted January 18, 2012 Bottom-opening door would preserve the Leica look, but not a back-opening door. While bottom-openings make sense because of the battery and card locations on digital Ms, it's worth noting that a back-opening door is also classic Leica design, not something foreign to the Leica look: Leica M3 | Film loading compartment and glass pressure plate | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.