jdlaing Posted July 24, 2012 Share #21 Posted July 24, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Why? As I believe you would see what you get. Somebody is gonna have to explain it to me in detail. I was led to believe rangefinders are not thru the lens views. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 Hi jdlaing, Take a look here M10 with Live View - I'm wrong to yawn about this ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Phil U Posted July 24, 2012 Share #22 Posted July 24, 2012 They are rangefinders when you are looking through the optical viewfinder but they would become a through the lens when using live view - i.e. live view is a through the lens system. Of course, you would have the option of either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Pop Posted July 24, 2012 Share #23 Posted July 24, 2012 I'm certainly yawning about it, simply because it seems to be endless debate about how to make the next M "competitive in today's market", i.e. basically keeping up with the Jones's. The next comment I'm waiting for is why doesn't Leica make a big DSLR like the 5D "so we can have faster frames/sec and use our R lenses". Because people want DSLRs. And some people want a new smaller mirrorless for the M lenses....Etc. Etc. The reason is that I specifically like the M9 (and many others out there) because it's a true rangefinder camera, and specifically because of what it DOESN'T have. There were choices in the market when I bought it, and there will continue to be choices out there. If one likes the Leica glass with a live view, buy a NEX-7 and use an adapter. Simple. Same if you want HD video. The only improvements I'm advocating for in the next M would be ones that address any performance limitations, but still keeping the shape, style, etc. of the M. The emergence of cameras like the Fuji series show that the look and style of the M are still very, very relevant to today's market, for those that want it. Certainly, Fuji's hybrid viewfinder was interesting. Things I'd like in the next M? Simple - faster write time with no glitches, better battery life, a degree of weather sealing of some sort, maybe 1/8000 shutter speed for shooting wide open on bright sunny days (though an ND filter addresses that), and a bit more information in the viewfinder perhaps. That's all. No other menus/fancy jazz, etc. I haven't had live view to tell me what's going on in my photos for a few decades now. Nice feature, I guess for certain applications, but hardly a deal breaker for any camera out there, quite frankly. It's not on a lot of cameras; Leica is hardly in a bad spot because of that - and they've got all the LUX cameras anyways. It's like complaining that a cell phone doesn't have enough apps....when the purpose is actually to make phone calls and as long as it has a way to dial a phone call, it works. And don't get into the rationale that the new M needs extra stuff based on "value for dollar because the other cameras cost less but have live view and HD video" debate....it's over. Elvis is dead, deal with it. Leica is low production, exclusive, expensive. Period. Move on people. If they turn a Porsche 911 (which I use simply because it's an example of a car whose internal components have been refined a lot over the years, but also whose basic ethos and shape and features have remained constant since the mid-1960s) into a four door sedan with an engine in the front, it'll certainly appeal to some additional users....but it won't be a 911 anymore - at all - and while one market may have been gained, another will be completely lost. I chose the M for some specific reasons, ie..it wasn't the same as all the other cameras out there, and fully accept and enjoy the limitations that come with that, and work within those limitations...it's part of the pleasure. This was true with film cameras too....some people complain about the problems with rangefinders "because you can't see through the lens and don't know what's really happening". They're right. Then buy an SLR rather than wishing the next M was an SLR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
em9 Posted July 24, 2012 Share #24 Posted July 24, 2012 Isn't this going to be the M10.000 dollars? Shouldn't we discuss that first? And for that price, of course it's not going to have live view! You're in Leica land now. It might have a tiny blue led though, in the viewfinder. Not sure what it does yet, but I'd like that... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 24, 2012 Share #25 Posted July 24, 2012 Nice to know a price that has not been announced yet.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
em9 Posted July 24, 2012 Share #26 Posted July 24, 2012 Nice to know a price that has not been announced yet.... No problem... I'm somewhat 'in the know' when it comes to prices of fantasy cameras. But I must admit that 'In the know' and 'knowing for sure' are also two different things, you know. So it's still up for debate... as is the name by the way. I've heard rumours it might be called the Leica MX! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted July 24, 2012 Share #27 Posted July 24, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've owned a Nikon D3 since about the time it came out. Haven't used live view once. If the M10 does other things you or others need then just don't use the ones you don't need. I really don't think it will cost any more for them to implement it and it will be there for those that feel strongly they need it. My hope is they get the other basics right (screen, buffer, start up time, etc). And that I could update my M9's with those basics (minus the sensor). I'm sure that won't happen, I'm just not sure what I'll think of the CMOS sensor even though I'll probably like everything else about the M10 (except the price ). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted July 24, 2012 Share #28 Posted July 24, 2012 I have never used live view (or DSLR Video) although I have several cameras that have it. I would like to see more precise focus, or confirmation with long or fast lenses, as well as more precise framing, but through the viewfinder. In Camera (sensor based) image stabilization would be nice,and a compelling reason to trade up. Sensor improvements will be automatic because of the rising technology tide. .. H Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 24, 2012 Share #29 Posted July 24, 2012 I was led to believe rangefinders are not thru the lens views. While the rangefinder as such is not, the sensor is looking through the lens and live view shows you what the sensor sees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted July 24, 2012 Share #30 Posted July 24, 2012 Leica's challenge is to retain the essential ethos that has made the M unique for decades... and yet to extend the capabilities of the M10 such that it appeals both to current M8/M9 owners as well as to prospective new customers. Nothing wrong with that. If they sit still, they die. They're not trying to craft a DSLR. Nor are they looking to throw out all the qualities that have for so long attracted many to the rangefinder. I, for one, would welcome Live View as long as it does not intrude on normal shooting. Same with video. That said, I wouldn't vote for either if they in any way detracted from the traditional M experience. I trust Leica enough to - should they choose to add those features - make them every bit as unobtrusive as, say, Continuous Mode... a current feature that I have never used but whose presence doesn't bother me in the least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted July 24, 2012 Share #31 Posted July 24, 2012 Yawning is ok. But live view is nothing to sneeze at. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted July 24, 2012 Share #32 Posted July 24, 2012 The only reason I gripe about live view in an M body is chroma noise. Leica is not the only camera I own. I am familiar with live view. I have been since 10-11 years ago when I got the first one. I have one now. I just don't use live view. The longer you use it you get a boatload of chroma noise. A lot of Leica shooters do a lot of low light shots and they're going to be disappointed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted July 24, 2012 Share #33 Posted July 24, 2012 If they turn a Porsche 911 (which I use simply because it's an example of a car whose internal components have been refined a lot over the years, but also whose basic ethos and shape and features have remained constant since the mid-1960s) into a four door sedan with an engine in the front, it'll certainly appeal to some additional users....but it won't be a 911 anymore - at all - and while one market may have been gained, another will be completely lost. And of course Porsche does make a four door with a motor in the front, and did so in the past too: the 928 (albeit with only 2 doors.) Today we know it as the Panamera and is sold alongside the 991 (the current 911 iteration.) I think it's conceivable that Leica could possibly sell a traditional M alongside any new M that has four doors and a motor in the front. The M9 could be slightly improved upon (like the way Porsche has done with the 911) but with a entirely new model available that appeals to the four door crowd. (btw, I do realize some Porsche enthusiasts feel that it all ended with the birth of the 996. But 964 owners felt the same when the 993 appeared. Just like M3 owners feel about the M4. And the M4 owners feel about the M6. And so on...... ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted July 25, 2012 Share #34 Posted July 25, 2012 Things I'd like in the next M? Simple - faster write time with no glitches, better battery life, a degree of weather sealing of some sort, maybe 1/8000 shutter speed for shooting wide open on bright sunny days (though an ND filter addresses that), and a bit more information in the viewfinder perhaps. That's all. No other menus/fancy jazz, etc..... Then buy an SLR rather than wishing the next M was an SLR. Live View doesn't turn the M into an SLR, just as weather sealing doesn't turn the M into an SLR; nor do any of the other sensible improvements you wish for. But people can't even agree on what constitutes an improvement. A bit more info in the viewfinder? Some people are against more info in the viewfinder, and will accuse anyone who wants more info in the viewfinder of wishing the next M was an SLR ("Go buy an SLR", they'll say). There is a sentiment that doing anything like any other manufacturer will inevitably lead to a bland impure copy-cat plastic-toy fancy-jazz gadget of a camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikenic Posted July 25, 2012 Share #35 Posted July 25, 2012 The M9 seems to have achieved a resonance, much like the M3. If so, it may be quite a difficult task that Leica has set for itself to break away from its own success. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted July 25, 2012 Share #36 Posted July 25, 2012 I think it's conceivable that Leica could possibly sell a traditional M alongside any new M that has four doors and a motor in the front. They have pretty much stated this is going to happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 25, 2012 Share #37 Posted July 25, 2012 I wonder who can appreciate the irony of advice such as “buy an SLR rather than wishing the next M was an SLR.” Just a few years ago, an SLR with live view was considered a contradiction in terms. SLR-newbies complaining that their new camera was obviously broken since its display would go black in shooting mode used to be the laughing stock of SLR-centric fora. And even now that all SLRs do, as a rule, support live view, it is still quite evident that it isn’t a match made in heaven. Strictly speaking an SLR ceases to be an SLR when it is switched into live view mode. Actually a rangefinder plus live view makes for a better match. There’s very little that needs to be adapted if you switch a rangefinder camera into live view mode. To support live view, the focal plane shutter needs to be open so the traditional approach of metering light off the shutter curtain won’t work, but then the sensor itself could be used for metering instead. More importantly the rangefinder wouldn’t be affected at all; if you wanted you could use the rangefinder for focusing and live view for composition, for example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted July 25, 2012 Share #38 Posted July 25, 2012 An optional but high res EVF and live view would mean 1) The basic rangefinder would be untouched for those of us who need speed on the street. 2) Demand for rangefinder adjustment at Solmes may be reduced releasing resources there. 3) The EVF is in the pocket for when critical focus is required 4) Potential for R lenses (or other manufacturers' classic primes) to be used on the rangefinder, including long telephoto 5) fewer focus shift issues 6) Off-center focusing accurate High ISO performance means 1) less blur with long lenses in low light 2) More depth of field in low light. I can't see how the above would be undesirable. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted July 25, 2012 Share #39 Posted July 25, 2012 The M9 seems to have achieved a resonance, much like the M3. If so, it may be quite a difficult task that Leica has set for itself to break away from its own success. It is pretty simple really. The Nikon F also was a classic but Nikon kept evolving the design. Just imagine what rangefinder cameras might have evolved into if Nikon and Canon kept updating the technology over the past 50 years instead of abandoning it. (And maybe forcing Leica to do the same via competition.) Instead, Leica didn't bother to change it significantly since the M3 because users had no choice if they wanted a good 35mm rangefinder system camera. And the market was small. Leica just has to keep adding all possible improvements and features just as pretty much every manufacturer of technological products in the world does. I feel the idea is to make any camera as useful and versatile as it can be, not leave it as some kind of arbitrarily limited icon for Leica "purists." Even view cameras - a product that one could think of as very basic and mature some time ago, experienced tremendous design changes and the addition of various technological features since 1970 at the hands of Sinar, Linhof, and others. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted July 25, 2012 Share #40 Posted July 25, 2012 This Sinar "live view" system is in my February 1993 catalog. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/184205-m10-with-live-view-im-wrong-to-yawn-about-this/?do=findComment&comment=2071337'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.