Rick Posted June 25, 2012 Share #21 Posted June 25, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm no videographer, and have no desire to be one. But I have enjoyed using Leica glass on a NEX, with video. I hadn't realised how good manual focusing is (I can see why the top of the line cine lenses are manual). I could see such a camera replacing my NEX. I was in the "no video" group at one point. I had the same realization as you when I had my 5DII in the Christmas of 2009. I'd had the camera for about 10 months and never even wanted to figured out how to use the video. My wife wanted me to set the video up for filming the kids opening presents. Wow! I was completely amazed by the quality of video from that camera and the L-glass. So much so that I mounted it on a tripod and ended up played it back on the big flat screen. That changed my mind. I wanted that for my M glass!!! Also, I used to battle with Zlatkob because he just didn't understand the essence of the M! He wanted to get rid of the bottom plate. He wanted a whole bunch of anti-M stuff that improves high standards for speed and performance but, moves us away from 1954. Zlatkob said, "Good features can be borrowed without destroying the M. For one thing, a built-in thumb grip would be more M-like than any third party add-on. Built-in doors for the memory card and battery compartment would be more M-like than any third party add-on. A top-level frame counter would be M-like, consistent with generations of prior M cameras, and yet the current M doesn't have one." All of this will not threaten the M concept. Imagine all of this and more. Now imagine what really makes the M the envy of the rest of the photographic world... the glass. Markovich was right, " leica is a great optics company but a hopeless camera-electronics producer/user." I hope the M10 becomes an electronics performance leader. The M10 deserves that for all of the incredible glass Leica has made for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Hi Rick, Take a look here Autofocus AND video on the M? Yuck.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Messsucherkamera Posted June 25, 2012 Share #22 Posted June 25, 2012 You never know. From that recent interview, Leica has not discounted the idea that future M's will not have AF and video features. Hey, why stop there? If Leica is going to produce an M camera that makes and plays back movies, shouldn't it also dispense popcorn, milk duds and jolly ranchers?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted June 25, 2012 Share #23 Posted June 25, 2012 I have no issue with having video- but I don't know how well it will work on an RF camera... not very well is my guess?... Liveview may make it a bit more usable... but certainly not ideal... whatever the case- these days more and more I hope Leica will produce a small bodied DSLR that takes R lenses and has an AF capacity... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted June 25, 2012 Share #24 Posted June 25, 2012 Like what Nikon did with their D700 vs D7000: want a photo camera, get the D700. Want a gadget, get the D7000. That's not what Nikon did. The D3s (and the current D4) are professional photographers cameras that happen to also have video capabilities. The D700 did not have video to help keep the cost down and to differentiate between the professional line (D3/D3s) and the prosumer line. The D3s and the D700 lived parallel with each other in the Nikon line up. And the D7000 is not a 'gadget' but simply a consumer camera with video. The D3s and the D4 can be used (and are being used) as still cameras without any problem. Unless one has a psychological issue with not being able to ignore buttons that one may never use Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 25, 2012 Share #25 Posted June 25, 2012 ...these days more and more I hope Leica will produce a small bodied DSLR that takes R lenses and has an AF capacity... Could have been the R10 but Leica renounced as you know. An APS EVIL is more likely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #26 Posted June 25, 2012 ...Instead, I had to take my iPhone with me (extra junk) and use that crappy little piece of junk. But, at least I can play back my memory on my computer from time to time. It is a totally different feel watching it. More dynamic than stills. I can't imagine what that would look like with the M9 and the 50 lux! Nothing high tech about it. Actually, an HD video camera only needs a 2MP to 4MP sensor to capture all that it needs. In which case, an iPhone is more than adequate. In fact, a famous South Korean director shot a full feature film on 2 iPhones. Since the rest of the 34MP or whatever is wasted for video, Leica might as well come out with a 24MP or whatever equivalent to the Fuji X-Pro - which is to say, an entirely different line altogether, dedicated to electronics. I have video on my Pentax K-5, but it is nothing near the usability of the Canon 5D Mk II I rent for commercial video shoots. It only does 1080P30, which looks distinctly video like than the more filmic 1080P24. So I think to myself, if the video is not going to be as good as the stills quality, then why bother? You can get as good quality out of an iPhone, honestly, and with the larger + touch screen you'll also have an easier time using it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #27 Posted June 25, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) That's not what Nikon did. The D3s (and the current D4) are professional photographers cameras that happen to also have video capabilities. The D700 did not have video to help keep the cost down and to differentiate between the professional line (D3/D3s) and the prosumer line. The D3s and the D700 lived parallel with each other in the Nikon line up. And the D7000 is not a 'gadget' but simply a consumer camera with video. The D3s and the D4 can be used (and are being used) as still cameras without any problem. Unless one has a psychological issue with not being able to ignore buttons that one may never use Well, that's what their advertising said, at any rate. The message for each model was quite clearly delineated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted June 25, 2012 Share #28 Posted June 25, 2012 Assuming the M10 has video, if they fit a stereo headphone socket one could potentially watch movies loaded onto SD cards on the rear screen, making it a more useful travel companion. Seriously though, I can imagine video capability appealing to photojournalists - pretty much every news site now has text, still images and video clips relating to a story. Using a 35mm lens at f8 and 1.5M should negate the need for AF. Not ideal as a movie camera of course but for the odd video clip why not? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted June 25, 2012 Share #29 Posted June 25, 2012 ...for the odd video clip... Ay, there's the rub. There is very little more teeth-grindingly tedious in life as amateur video. I can fully see the point of the pro who wants to hit the button and capture a minute or so of moving images to pop on a website but I have visions of the threads that will start as soon as video hits the M. "Where's the video gallery?" "Why can't I post hour-long movies in People?" "My thumb gets into shot every time I try to adjust aperture on my 3.5cm Elmar - Please help!" "Best lense for Nuit Americaine?" Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 25, 2012 Share #30 Posted June 25, 2012 but for the odd video clip why not? That is exactly my problem... all video I take is odd...:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 25, 2012 Share #31 Posted June 25, 2012 You can get as good quality out of an iPhone, honestly, and with the larger + touch screen you'll also have an easier time using it. You really need to see what I have shot with my 5DII. And, you really need to see what comes out of a cell phone. If, you are right, and the cell phone can produce as good a quality of video as a 5DII then, why aren't wedding photographers using cell phones to shoot weddings, just for example? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted June 25, 2012 Share #32 Posted June 25, 2012 In case anyone from Leica is listening: I hope if Leica decides to implement these features on an M, it will be on a different line entirely. Well, if adding AF and Video is what it takes to keep making a camera with a proper mechanical/optical range finder (i.e. a Leica M) . . . . then I guess I'll put up with it. I just hope that they have 1 more extra menu setting in the current menu: Hide all this AF/Video stuff please Live view, on the other hand, would be useful to me. all the best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomlianza Posted June 25, 2012 Share #33 Posted June 25, 2012 If you want video, buy a video camera. The highest consumer resolution 1080p is far lower than any of the leica offerings. Putting video on an "m" is like adding milk to a single malt scotch. Any of the micro 4/3's offerings can do a very credible job. Auto focus is a much bigger issue with long lenses. I don't think auto focus would buy much on the M except add cost. I don't think that these features would make the M series any more attractive to current M users and I don't think that it would sufficiently expand the M eco-system to make it cost effective. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted June 25, 2012 Share #34 Posted June 25, 2012 Ay, there's the rub. There is very little more teeth-grindingly tedious in life as amateur video. I can fully see the point of the pro who wants to hit the button and capture a minute or so of moving images to pop on a website but I have visions of the threads that will start as soon as video hits the M. "Where's the video gallery?" "Why can't I post hour-long movies in People?" "My thumb gets into shot every time I try to adjust aperture on my 3.5cm Elmar - Please help!" "Best lense for Nuit Americaine?" Regards, Bill LOL I must admit I usually forget that I have video capability on my digicam or iphone. I guess I just don't 'think' in terms of moving images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 25, 2012 Share #35 Posted June 25, 2012 Hi Jono, Live view is the feed from the sensor to the LCD. Why not just give us that want it the ability to dump that feed to a card? It is probably on the live view chip set already. Would you really like Leica to disable the write to card part of that because, some folks don't want video on their 1954 designed M? I guess I don't see how video or other advanced electronics are viewed by some as anti-M. There is nothing about the essence of the M that says no video. It is just part of the digital sensor technology. Digital seems to be very M'ish. Why not have moving pictures as well as stills? I'm not saying we have to add sound yet and make talkies. Just one step at a time. Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyedward Posted June 25, 2012 Share #36 Posted June 25, 2012 I'm wondering why leica feel the need to consider video, AF, etc? I thought one of the reasons people were drawn to leica was for the back-to-basics, no BS shooting? I understand that an additional EVF may be necessary for a 30mp+ sensor, though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted June 25, 2012 Share #37 Posted June 25, 2012 I think there's a bit of confusion about the M camera, which is a relatively pure concept, and meeting market expectations, which the M camera doesn't need to do - not at a target of 1% of global market share. With the Monochrom and the M9P, it's a bit of a conundrum - where to next? Leica could just try to improve on what's there (weather sealing, buffer times, battery performance, high & low ISO etc), but there's a sense of guilding a lilly. I have no doubt Leica will address some of these things, but the M camera needs to retain the optical rangefinder, the same format, and it doesn't need more pixels. To my mind, that was one of the reasons for them releasing the Monochrom. As a concept, it meets its market segment perfectly - so well, people are complaining about the noisy shutter, and suggesting a winding lever for manual cocking. Really? But, the digital age is a bit like the Lorax - biggering & biggering & biggering ... The M9P/MM aren't responding to the demands of the digital age, by offering more and more and more. Leica wants to increase market share, and they've identified the $2,000 - $6,000 gap. Technology developments mean that EVF, AF and video are all achievable, with GPS tagging etc, and recent market developments show considerable interest and growth in the mirrorless market segment. Hi quality imaging, but a purely electronic/digital experience. To my mind, the X2 doesn't really do it. So my pick - M10 maybe. Whatever they're going to be called, an upgrade to the M9P/MM perhaps (a further evolution), with no AF, no video, no EVF. To digitize the M camera in this way is too much of a risk. The gap camera will have all this stuff. The trick will be maintaining image quality, providing a far better, more focused experience than the confusion of Japanese offerings (with pretty average performance) and keeping it below the M in terms of price and perhaps quality? If you were Leica, and you decided to do a camera for, say $5,000. You're a quality brand. You'll focus on image quality (large sensor - at least APS-C, or even APS-H, or perhaps full frame). You'll insist on the best optics - a new AF line, with compatibility with existing M & R lenses. EVF, video etc, but with a very clear and defined user experience. While it might shoot video (it comes free with CMos as does live view, I understand), it will still be very clearly a camera for shooting good images, and with minimal menu layers, and traditional controls - ISO, aperture, shutter etc. The interesting thing will be how far they go with the lenses - zoom? aperture control on the lens, or fully programmable with focus, aperture and shutter controlled by the camera electronically (but able to be overridden for existing MF M & R lenses). My pick is this is still a photographer's camera, so you will still set aperture, and have the option of auto-shutter or manual. The AF lenses will be pure AF, possibly with zoom. If you want to manual focus properly, you use an M or R lens. Now, if this camera is too good, what happens to the existing M? It stays where it is. It may even end up like the film cameras - "we'll continue making the M9P.2 & MM.2 for as long as there is demand ..." I think this all sounds like a great idea, but then I have no idea what Leica thinks! Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted June 25, 2012 Share #38 Posted June 25, 2012 Hi Jono, Live view is the feed from the sensor to the LCD. Why not just give us that want it the ability to dump that feed to a card? It is probably on the live view chip set already. Would you really like Leica to disable the write to card part of that because, some folks don't want video on their 1954 designed M? Hi Rick I think you misunderstand me . . . I'm right up for whatever is necessary to keep the M flourishing and viable - and I suspect that video is part of that . . . as is live view (although possible not AF). I can see that decent video with an M10 might be a real eye-opener - possibly even a game changer. My point really was that the mechanical / optical rangefinder is really the bottom line, and for those that only want this, it would be nice to have the option to hide the options for all the other stuff. (and that doesn't necessarily mean me!!!) all the best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted June 25, 2012 Share #39 Posted June 25, 2012 Personally, I think Fuji released the camera that Leica was planning for Photokina and now Leica is wondering what to do. With the release of the XPro1 there seemed, to me, to be a shift in the chat coming from Solms. The Fuji has video, but it's not a primary feature of the camera. It's definately a still camera first. Leica needs a camera like the Fuji to fill the middle market if it wants to grow. If the M10 has a CMOS sensor then it will have video. It would be silly to deliberately ignore a selling feature that cost effectively nothing to implement. And while I accept that I am one of about 10 people on the planet who would never use it, most people do, regardless of whether the clips are indeed crap or not. In addition the professional market is moving at an increasing pace to convergence. Any camera that pros buy will likely need to have some, although not necessarily sophisticated, video capabilities. I hope the M10 has video. Not because I'll use it. I won't. But it brings other benefits I can use. Mainly live view. Live view means the possibility of a true 1:1 macro lens for the M. It also means longer lenses are possible than 135mm and the WATE can actually be used as a zoom. That would mean i could finally retire my DSLR for good. The rangefinder, which I love, can remain unchanged. The only addition would be the port for the Olympus/Leica EVF and an "LV" setting between "C" and the timer on the top plate. Video, like the Fuji, can be a menu function. And that port does other thing for Olympus like microphones and video lights. I see the M10 in my head. Now I just need Leica to make it for me. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted June 26, 2012 Share #40 Posted June 26, 2012 It would be a curious beast, don't you think? Normal optical rangefinder, with live view on the LCD, and an optional EVF on the hotshot, providing video. The advantage is, as you say, how it handles and expands the capabilities of existing lenses. It all makes the optical rangefinder seem very odd. I guess if you ignored the live view/video option, and didn't add the EVF, it is just another M camera. But to my mind, it would still have a very confused place in the world. I wouldn't buy it. With such mixed DNA, it would run a real risk of following the M5 into oblivion - neither fish nor fowl. The rangefinder an all too daft and expensive relic from history for those wanting digital perfection, and too many digital bells & whistles for those wanting a successor to the M9 (see the topic of this thread). I guess I rather hope they stick with CCD for the M10, if Truesense can do something interesting with its high ISO performance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.