M10: A Vital Part

[sdai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The X2 did it, why not the M10?

 

The X2 doesn't have a built-in EVF ... the equivalent Olympus VF2 costs less than half than the rebadged Leica and - it reminds me of the hunchback of Notre-Dame. :-)

[sdai]

Leica did not do any electronics change when releasing the M9p, this hints to me that the M10 is arriving soon. And the MM didn't change anything about the hardware either (except leaving off the color filters).

 

Makes a lot of sense, Peter ... but it won't happen (this time) because I have a MM on order! :-)

[mjh]

By the way, there is a guy posting some interesting stuff about an alleged Leica Z1 camera on dpreview ... if true, it may be the one shown on Leica Rumors a couple of weeks ago.

 

Re: Leica Rumors - Photokina 2012: Leica Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

So there’s someone peddling truly crazy stuff to the hopelessly gullible. You’re not one of those I hope?

[rosuna]

 

To add a hybrid EVF/optical viewfinder that also preserves the rangefinder seems a no-brainer if they have the technology to do so.

 

I agree this would be a better solution, but more complex for Leica to implement.

 

The clip-on EVF is easier, and good enough for a classical styled product.

 

Anyway, the M system cannot stay as a rigid, limited and superexpensive system forever... In addition, the M system has a great potentiality for future developments. It is a mirrorless system with a large format. It is perfect basic set of parameters for a line of differentiated products with the Leica brand.

[lct]

The X2 doesn't have a built-in EVF ... the equivalent Olympus VF2 costs less than half than the rebadged Leica and - it reminds me of the hunchback of Notre-Dame. :-)

We could well have something like that on the M10 i'm afraid. Just a removable hump though.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Alan,

 

Thank you for repeating, in your 1st paragraph of # 57, what I said in # 56. Just 1 point of clarification: I think I did get it right. Keep in mind: Sometimes there can be "technological excellence" in someting that lacks "appropriateness". That was my point. A Compass was a technologically excellent camera which was not appropriate for much of anything.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[rramesh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just happened to be looking at the pictures of the new Canon EOS M and the new pancake lens EF-M 22mm f/2 STM announced with it seems to be similar to the one being sported on the early pictures of the Leica M10 on Leica Rumors. Any thoughts?

[marknorton]

Even if there is an EVF on a new Leica M camera, it's going to look through the stopped down lens which will presumably lead to a grainy image with a reduced refresh rate. Not only that, but the depth of field of the stopped down lens will make focus difficult to evaluate, a bit like looking through a DSLR with stop-down preview.

 

I see the EVF as just another shoe mounted Aux finder which happens to allow both framing and focussing. They all increase the steps to taking a picture. Currently, we focus with one finder, frame with another. The EVF will allow us to focus and frame with the same finder but may require the lens to be opened for most accurate focus.

 

Since the EVF and Rangefinder allow both focussing and framing, there are more in parallel than the Rangefinder and Aux finders today. They each will have their own good and bad points.

[pgk]

Even if there is an EVF on a new Leica M camera, it's going to look through the stopped down lens which will presumably lead to a grainy image with a reduced refresh rate. Not only that, but the depth of field of the stopped down lens will make focus difficult to evaluate, a bit like looking through a DSLR with stop-down preview.

Perhaps, in addition to the add on EVF, Leica could introduce an Aperture Control device like Nikon used to make (DS-2 EE Aperture Control Attachment F2SB). Sure there might be technical issues, and a different aperture gear might be needed for each lens, but its only technology isn't it:D.

[jaapv]

 

Anyway, the M system cannot stay as a rigid, limited and superexpensive system forever...

Why not?

[mjh]

Even if there is an EVF on a new Leica M camera, it's going to look through the stopped down lens which will presumably lead to a grainy image with a reduced refresh rate. Not only that, but the depth of field of the stopped down lens will make focus difficult to evaluate, a bit like looking through a DSLR with stop-down preview.

People have been doing that for some time now, and with some success – with M lenses on MFT cameras by Olympus and Panasonic, Sony NEX bodies, the Ricoh GXR, and the Fuji X-Pro1. Why would a hypothetical M10 fare any worse (notabene with a FF sensor)? And you wouldn’t even have to use live view for focusing as the rangefinder would still be there. Unless of course you wanted to adapt R (or other non-rangefinder) lenses.

[pgk]

In addition, the M system has a great potentiality for future developments. It is a mirrorless system with a large format. It is perfect basic set of parameters for a line of differentiated products with the Leica brand.

Whilst I can see the logic in this statement, it fails to take account of the facts. First, see my last post. M lenses in their current form have no facility to enable them to be anything other than manually focused, and manually controlled aperture lenses. Which means that they are as compromised as an R lens on Canon/Nikon cameras if an M with live-view, etc., were to be produced. And whilst some might be prepared to live with such compromises, I'd say far too few to make it a financial viability.

 

So this would mean a new lens line up. A new 'M' camera body requiring a new lens line up would be far easier to design and build from the ground up and even if it was considered feasible to build it in M mount (actually an adapter for M lenses makes much more sense) then would it be worthwhile to incorporate a rangefinder? I doubt it. So we are back to square one. A new M camera which isn't actually an M camera. I see no problem in such a camera built by Leica and if designed and built correctly it could be a very interesting prospect. But would Leica really be prepared to drop a concept which has and is serving them well by introducing a replacement system? I doubt it, and I do see a good future for an M camera in its present state - upgrades yes, change of concept no.

[lct]

Depends upon what one means by upgrade and concept. For me an EVF is just an electronic Visoflex, thus an upgrade. For others, be them right or wrong, it is a new concept.

[bocaburger]

 

The ideal solution for the Leica would be a single viewfinder that uses a hybrid switchable optical/EVF design or at worst has a mirror that moves into the optical viewfinder when you want the EVF. This would be a much slicker design than using a clip on viewfinder of any type.

 

Slicker perhaps, but it would certainly up the price for something a lot of us would use rarely if ever. If I wanted to see/focus/compose through the lens, I would have bought a DSLR. There are several which are as if not smaller and lighter than an M9, a lot cheaper, and probably more reliable. If I were interested in a mirrorless EVF camera I would (at this point) get an OMD, also much less expensive than a Leica. I paid the bloated price and put up with the M9's idiosyncrasies because the user interface is unique, that being the same as the film Ms I've grown comfortable with for four decades, except with digital capture in place of film. Yes I know there are some people for whom only the Leica glass matters, and would be fine with radical changes to the camera, maybe even welcome them. For me it would be the parting of ways between me and Leica. Maybe I'm alone in that thinking.

[pgk]

Maybe I'm alone in that thinking.

You are not.

[marknorton]

People have been doing that for some time now, and with some success – with M lenses on MFT cameras by Olympus and Panasonic, Sony NEX bodies, the Ricoh GXR, and the Fuji X-Pro1. Why would a hypothetical M10 fare any worse (notabene with a FF sensor)? And you wouldn’t even have to use live view for focusing as the rangefinder would still be there. Unless of course you wanted to adapt R (or other non-rangefinder) lenses.

 

Indeed, I was an enthusiastic user of M lenses on an early Panasonic MFT camera, but it wasn't full frame and the IQ of Leica wides on it left something to be desired.

 

The Leica Rangefinder is compromised because of it's extreme sensitivity to correct mechanical alignment, a problem solved by focussing using what the sensor is seeing. A live view M camera with/without an EVF is in turn compromised by the need to focus through a stopped down lens. It's a different set of compromises but I will welcome the additional choice it offers.

[sdai]

So there’s someone peddling truly crazy stuff to the hopelessly gullible. You’re not one of those I hope?

 

There you go ... I've got my confirmation - sort of.

[sdai]

The Leica Rangefinder is compromised because of it's extreme sensitivity to correct mechanical alignment, a problem solved by focussing using what the sensor is seeing. A live view M camera with/without an EVF is in turn compromised by the need to focus through a stopped down lens. It's a different set of compromises but I will welcome the additional choice it offers.

 

I agree with you, Mark.

 

I haven't thought about the ups and downs of different options carefully but I keep thinking focus peak is all we'll need ... my lenses are fully open (almost) always.

[rosuna]

Why not?

 

Because the world is changing and the memories of the historical contribution of Leica cameras to the art and craft of reportage photography of the XX century are slowly fading.

 

Mirrorless cameras are improving substantially in short periods of two years. Versatility and AF of reflex cameras reduced the rangefinder cameras to a downsized M system (and Leica was struggling for survive for two decades). The relative small size and high quality of the M system were appealing enough for a precarious existence. But now you have small systems everywhere, and high quality images (depending on software manipulation, not just optical finesse) can be found in a wide range of products. The M system needs a wider public.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[AlanG]

Slicker perhaps, but it would certainly up the price for something a lot of us would use rarely if ever. If I wanted to see/focus/compose through the lens, I would have bought a DSLR. There are several which are as if not smaller and lighter than an M9, a lot cheaper, and probably more reliable. If I were interested in a mirrorless EVF camera I would (at this point) get an OMD, also much less expensive than a Leica. I paid the bloated price and put up with the M9's idiosyncrasies because the user interface is unique, that being the same as the film Ms I've grown comfortable with for four decades, except with digital capture in place of film. Yes I know there are some people for whom only the Leica glass matters, and would be fine with radical changes to the camera, maybe even welcome them. For me it would be the parting of ways between me and Leica. Maybe I'm alone in that thinking.

 

Of course there already are lots of systems that are more versatile and less expensive than the M system. The idea is to add similar capabilities to the M not encourage you to buy other brands. If Leica can't produce competitive or even cutting edge technology at their already high prices, then they will have big problems in the future.