Jump to content

M'? '


Gerard

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, it worked in the tropical rainforest in Tanzania @ 110 F. and tropical downpour... ponchos were a bit of a bother but could not be avoided. rather uncomfortable, I admit...:o

 

Many ways to work, and I've certainly shot in the rain (and snow), sometimes with jacket or with camera in bag, but a sealed M (to at least a better degree) and lenses would still have great appeal for me....a lot more convenient and a lot more peace of mind. And one less reason to think about a complementary DSLR.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I agree about the peace of mind - moisture makes me nervous with a digital M. But up to now always without resin. Btw - Canons with weather sealing still fog up their mirror in the circumstances described - end of shooting due to loss of vision....:o

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Ming Rider

Looking at the second picture of the camera being held like a P&S, the index finger on the right hand looks way to long, as if everything has been stretched vertically?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Ming Rider
The M9 prototypes for the beta testers had an M8 engraving and a little rubber block to camouflage the cutout on the top plate.

 

Like this one ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd buy a whole new set of lenses if they did that along with a new sealed M; much more desirable than APO for me. Am I the only one?

 

Jeff

 

 

They already have a "sealed" M with the M9 :)

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

(sorry, had to)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice photoshop work.

 

It appears the M is moving into the mainstream a bit. I doubt that that appeals to everybody. Probably good for sales, though.

 

I still wonder about that lens... Weathersealing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would strongly reccommend Leica to move into AF with their M-series. And live view. What we 'oldies' think does not matter. AF/Live view has come to stay. A camera without these features will hardly be 'understood' by the younger part of the market. That said, both these features would extend the M-series capabilities. The M-series will still be the smallest FF camera on the market. A very strong feature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few problems there. AF would have to be extremely miniaturized, and even then the lenses would get considerably bigger to house the mechanism. And Leica would have to maintain retro-compatability.

 

It is much easier and less expensive to design a whole new camera that is laid out for autofocus in the first place. It could never be an M though, as "M"stands for "Messsucher"or rangefinder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would strongly reccommend Leica to move into AF with their M-series. And live view. What we 'oldies' think does not matter. AF/Live view has come to stay. A camera without these features will hardly be 'understood' by the younger part of the market. That said, both these features would extend the M-series capabilities. The M-series will still be the smallest FF camera on the market. A very strong feature.

Agreed from a marketing standpoint our wishes aren't attractive. But the dSLR forums are full of complaints about the autofocus missing the shot, focusing on the wrong place, etc. The answers are always long instructions on how to select the AF point or over-ride for manual focus (which is another complaint on dSLR viewfinders).

Why complicate it when focus is so simple on an M, and the "hit rate" is entirely in your control?

Link to post
Share on other sites

...and the "hit rate" is entirely in your control?

 

That is not correct.

 

It is not true when you are using lenses with focus shift.

 

It is not true when you are using long and fast lenses.

 

It is not true when you are focusing at points out of the center of the frame.

 

It is not true focusing at very short distances.

 

I mean, it is not true in any case. It is a question of trial and error.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not correct.

It is not true when you are using lenses with focus shift.

It is not true when you are using long and fast lenses.

It is not true when you are focusing at points out of the center of the frame.

It is not true focusing at very short distances.

I mean, it is not true in any case. It is a question of trial and error.

These are all issues of technique and experience. After 40+ years of using Ms I still say they are in your control. I do both macro and 200mm with my M9 (and Visoflex - which is true "live view"). You deal with focus shift by compensating the image overlap - not blindly accepting the coincident point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One feature the F5 had, and I miss, is the ability to move the focal point around the screen using the dial on the back of the camera. To be able to do this with the M9 would be great (I appreciate it would be nigh on impossible with the existing optical viewfinder).

 

I dislike focussing carefully on a subject, and then having to guess the focal adjustment (closer) as I swing the camera to put the subject off centre. It's annoying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...