FlorianM Posted June 12, 2012 Share #1 Posted June 12, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) How would you like it? Here's what I mean: the RF mechanism would be replaced by the best EVF in the business with focus peaking. It's known that people at Leica are impressed by the quality of the current best EVF's and have even hinted it to be the future. I think I'd like it. I don't know if enough to prefer it over the current RF, but a lot would depend on just how good the EVF will be. Thoughts? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 12, 2012 Posted June 12, 2012 Hi FlorianM, Take a look here If the M10 were to focus like the NEX-7. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted June 12, 2012 Share #2 Posted June 12, 2012 It wouldn't be an M then. You are describing a completely different kind of camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 12, 2012 Share #3 Posted June 12, 2012 I might like it as an EVIL, if good enough, as a rangefinder it would suck... And if the styling were as "good" as the NEX Leica would sell three of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted June 12, 2012 Share #4 Posted June 12, 2012 I have a GXR. It works as you describe. It takes LTM, M and Leitaxed R lenses. It produces great results, particularly with R and Zeiss glass. It is not an M. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
}{B Posted June 12, 2012 Share #5 Posted June 12, 2012 The M series hasn't really changed since its introduction with the Leica M3. The addition of a built in light meter was hardly revolutionary and if you consider the move to a digital sensor to be just a way of replacing film while keeping the basic M design concept then what is the way forward? If Leica and it's customers continue to be happy to use what is basically a sixty year old design then future M cameras, to remain true to this heritage, will be limited to incremental upgrades of the sensor. An example of this is the new Leica Monochrom. Being a niche player rather than competing with the mainstream has its advantages providing the product doesn't become too expensive or ceases to meet the needs of its potential market. Providing I can still buy film and have it processed at a price I'm happy to pay I can sit back and await developments and in the meantime carry on using my fifty year old M2 and M3. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 12, 2012 Share #6 Posted June 12, 2012 The optomechanical rangefinder does still hold an advantage in the precision of focusing. Still, I would not fall off my armchair if the M10 (or whatever they choose to call it) has an optional electronic finder – with focus peaking. But apart from that, we are talking about two different camera lines: (1) the M line, and (2) the 'X3' line with an integrated electronic finder and interchangeable AF lenses – what I am calling the 'breakout camera' – 'breakout' for breaking out of the restricted Leica market niche. The old man from the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlorianM Posted June 12, 2012 Author Share #7 Posted June 12, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think I misled everybody with my use of the term M10, sorry about that! I hope the M10, i.e. the successor to the M9 will be an optical rangefinder. I do think it would be interesting if Leica also offered an M mount FF camera with an electronic VF with focus peaking and/or magnification, in parallel. Let the customers decide, so to speak. I think it would be a hit, as it would be eminently useable with virtually all Legacy 35mm lenses ever made, and the only camera in the world with that ability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted June 12, 2012 Share #8 Posted June 12, 2012 ...and the only camera in the world with that ability. Hardly... Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 12, 2012 Share #9 Posted June 12, 2012 ...I do think it would be interesting if Leica also offered an M mount FF camera with an electronic VF with focus peaking and/or magnification, in parallel... The M10 could do it eventually. 100% rangefinder + accessory EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shade Posted June 13, 2012 Share #10 Posted June 13, 2012 It's good if it can work like the usual range finder, and "switch" to an EVF, like the Fuji Xpro1. You can use it when you need it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted June 13, 2012 Share #11 Posted June 13, 2012 Personally I like the best of two worlds if it is at all possible: RF + AF! CJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 13, 2012 Share #12 Posted June 13, 2012 Leica will never bring out an EVIL camera with a 24x36mm sensor. Because such a camera would cannibalize the M line. And the M is important to Leica for more reasons than sales volume alone. It is the flagship, the standard bearer, the benchmark. The corporate identity. Therefore a Leica EVIL camera will have a smaller sensor. Leica have already ruled out the 4/3 size because it cannot produce the IQ and the robust files a true Leica has to produce. And because you cannot remake quantum mechanics – because you cannot shrink the photon and the electron – 4/3 is radically limited, and no hand waving and talk of Wonderful New Technology Coming Soon to a Camera Store Near You can waive them. I prefer pie on the plate to pie in the sky. So it will have to be something like APS-C or possibly APS-H. "Watson, when you have disproved all other possibilities, the remaining one must be true." The old man from the 110 Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-ph- Posted June 13, 2012 Share #13 Posted June 13, 2012 Of course a product lineup needs to make sense, but I think it is the biggest mistake to not produce a product because it competes with an existing product of that company. Assuming of course that the new product has potential to be very successful. If a great 35mm EVIL camera can be made by Leica, they should do so. If it is a real threat to the M line in the market, it is even more reason to make it, rather than let some other company kill the M line. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
urs0polar Posted June 14, 2012 Share #14 Posted June 14, 2012 I have a GXR. It works as you describe. It takes LTM, M and Leitaxed R lenses. It produces great results, particularly with R and Zeiss glass. It is not an M. Regards, Bill Hi Bill, You need to Leitax R lenses to use them on a GXR? You can't just use an adapter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 14, 2012 Share #15 Posted June 14, 2012 Of course a product lineup needs to make sense, but I think it is the biggest mistake to not produce a product because it competes with an existing product of that company. Assuming of course that the new product has potential to be very successful. If a great 35mm EVIL camera can be made by Leica, they should do so. If it is a real threat to the M line in the market, it is even more reason to make it, rather than let some other company kill the M line. Peter Better kill the M themselves than have somebody else to do that? This is a radical thought but worth serious consideration. In order to accept that, you must be convinced however that the M has exhausted its development potential. My argument is that new technology has actually widened that potential – we shall probably see examples of that this coming September. How far that can carry the M line is a different matter of course. In order to survive an enterprise must both live in the present and see the future. The old man from the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
urs0polar Posted June 15, 2012 Share #16 Posted June 15, 2012 Better kill the M themselves than have somebody else to do that? This is a radical thought but worth serious consideration. In order to accept that, you must be convinced however that the M has exhausted its development potential. My argument is that new technology has actually widened that potential – we shall probably see examples of that this coming September. How far that can carry the M line is a different matter of course. In order to survive an enterprise must both live in the present and see the future. The old man from the Kodachrome Age I don't think Peter meant that Leica themselves should kill the M. Rather, they should make a competitive NEX-7 like mirrorless that will compete with the other mirrorlesses (but have better ergonomics, build, etc etc). Then, they can keep both lines and have the optical M for the more discerning individuals. If they do nothing, there is a chance that the M line will price itself out of range for almost everyone eventually, and the front/backfocus/whatever-gripe issues will leave some with a bad taste and they will move whole-hog to NEX. To be honest, I'm not sure that I would have bought my M8 if there was a full-frame NEX out there. Now that I have the M8, and having played with a friend's NEX, I know that I do still prefer the RF to even the eventual full-frame NEX (so much so that I'm trying to figure out how to afford an MM eventually). Had there been a full-frame NEX when I was researching the M8, I would have probably thought buying a used M8 at around $1.8K as too much of a risk. As it was, my used M8's focus was misaligned and had to be sent to Leica NJ to the tune of $500 (It's perfect now, thank God). So, they need to do something awesome, like they did with the S2. They created out of thin air this MF SLR with the best lenses on the planet. Imagine if they created some new niche for FF M lenses but with focus peaking or whatever, in a new size, for $2500-$3500 (with M lenses and enough resolution, they can appeal to someone who might only consider a 5D3/D800)... it would hopefully be awesome and would take the pressure off the M line. The Ms will still sell to people like you and me, and they'll have more R&D/safety money from the new line. A win-win. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 15, 2012 Share #17 Posted June 15, 2012 How many Ms would they sell then? There is no room for two 24x36 systems at Leica's IMHO. The Leica EVIL, as much as we can foresee, should be APS-H or APS-C or will never exist at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 15, 2012 Share #18 Posted June 15, 2012 The optomechanical rangefinder does still hold an advantage in the precision of focusing. Still ... Might there be a better design of the optical-mechanical rangefinder? Has any developer/inventor challenged the optical design with another? Might there be another way to implement such w/o digital gear? Something to think about. When the solution is found it will be simple. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
urs0polar Posted June 15, 2012 Share #19 Posted June 15, 2012 How many Ms would they sell then? There is no room for two 24x36 systems at Leica's IMHO. The Leica EVIL, as much as we can foresee, should be APS-H or APS-C or will never exist at all. So, Nikon doesn't sell any D4's just because they have the D800? The M offers hand-made mechanical perfection, like a swiss watch. People still pay for swiss watches even though they gain/lose a second or more per day. With the Nikons, the axis of price is features. With this idea, the axis of price would be style and hand-made quality (and of course, simplicity) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 15, 2012 Share #20 Posted June 15, 2012 Leica is not Nikon. The M9 sells very well so far and what you like in EVILs could well be present to some extent in the M10. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.