THE CAMERA WE NEED ! ANYONE LISTENING?

[marioalessi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

I hear what you are saying. But I didn't imply I wanted a film camera replica in respect to IQ. But simply a replica to the film M's ergonomics and simplicity. The ergonomics and form factor is a primary reason I've owned Leicas all my life. It's not only IQ, but also the feel and 'tactile quality,' and the quick and easy use of the optical rangefinder. It's basic, it's simple, and it works. No, I don't want 'digital film' but I want 'film camera' feel and simplicity of use. And I would rather have a limited high ISO if it meant higher IQ. The ISO the M9 is capable of now is fine for me. It beats high ISO film, for certain.

 

I have a D3s with quite a bit invested in Nikkor and Zeiss lenses. So far, it satisfies all my high ISO needs and 'leverages' all the tech I need. It's a specific camera for specific uses just like the M9. In the analog days I had both Leicas and SLRs. I don't think that's changed for most people even in the digital era. Utilizing specific tools for specific purposes is pretty common.

 

I find the M to be a very easy and quick camera to use. I just personally don't want all the 'excess' electronic aids in the M camera. I don't want any more buttons or loads of choices I won't ever use. I want it kept simple (remember when a light meter in the M was considered heresy )

 

And that's only a personal preference, so there's no 'argument' on my end but simply opining an individual's preference (just like the original post in this thread is doing.) And Leica will go the direction they feel is best for their future, despite how I feel.

 

Nothing about using older 'out-of-date' camera has ever kept me from making a worthwhile image. But to be sure, I'm no Luddite and I very much appreciate new technology. As much as I enjoy the tactile feel of the Porsche 993, I can also appreciate all the electronics and the navigation system of the modern 997 (now the 991.) But I'd be fine without those amenities, providing that the driving is still fulfilling. But ironically, the 993 is considered to be the last of the Porsches in respect to 'feel' and 'feedback.' All the current electronics and nannies that protect the driver has 'numbed down' the driving experience. And that's what I don't want to see happen to the M camera line.

 

The quest for all the original feel while progress marches own in really nostalgia and our personal needs as humans to stay relevant as we age.

 

The last 911 air cooled is great because it's the last air-cooled. You can still buy a GT3 with an engine that is based on the air cooled engine with true dry sump.

 

I'm sure people had the issues with progress when the integrated light meter started appearing.

 

As for focus peaking advancements in the viewfinder, apparently Leica thinks a manual version of that is important since they make two different magnifications for the eyepiece that screw on. So an advancement in that respect of an automatic one would be now different than the inclusion of an a light meter or auto iso.

[Ecaton]

A Porsche 911 costs 50.000 Euro/seat.

My Opel Omega costs extrapolated 5.000 Euro/seat.

Jan

 

A hot dogs cost USD 2 per pound, a filet mignon USD 20, both are considered "meat":p.

[dickgrafixstop]

In the end, any camera gives me an image that costs about $2.00 to print - and from

three feet away, you can't see any appreciable difference.

[IWC Doppel]

I think this demonstrates the differences of desires and opinions

 

I want to get better personally and don't want the camera to take that experience away, evolution not revolution of the M for me please.

 

I want a clever LSD not uber sophisticated taction control

[ringohung]

No EVF please. EVF makes my eye hurt.... I am pleased with my M9...