Leica M and M-E

[LucisPictor]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You don't *have* to use Live View OR the EVF... So I just don't understand where your disappointment comes from.

 

Exactly. The "M" is a "normal" M-Leica with some additional elements.

If I could afford it (or rather if I wouldn't get into trouble with my wife ), it would be the cam I'd buy.

Perhaps, if I sell all my present cams...?

[Guest malland]

...Why would the new M (a RF-based system) make you want to buy an M Monochrome (an RF-based system)?

 

They're exactly the same, except perhaps the new M's RF mechanism might be improved a bit from the M9 /MM (the illumination for framelines will be nice for sure).

It will be interesting how the B&W image quality compares between the M and the M-Monochrom.

 

—Mitch/Paris

Bangkok Hysteria (download link for book project)

[UliWer]

Once upon a time there was a Leitz/Leica philosphy based on the sentence: "Our customers don't need and they don't want it, so we don't build it in our camera."

 

This was true for light metering, for SLR-technology, for autofocus and for digital photography - "Our customers don't need it..."

 

Those at Leica who thought, said and acted so, were right - partially. Many customers didn't want it. Some other customers did - and they looked elsewhere.

 

Once upon a time - some eight to ten years ago, Leica was - almost - ruined by following this philosphy telling their customers what they didn't need.

 

Perhaps now they changed their attitude - just a little bit. Perhaps they say: "May be some customers don't need it, may be they don't use it, but we build it in our camera for those customers, who say they want it (we want their money as we need it ). For those who say, they don't want it, we offer something, which doesn't have it (we want their money as well:rolleyes:)."

 

Anything wrong with this attitude?

[rob139]

There are currently seven different M camera models to choose from. Icredible.

[jamriman]

Sorry for silly questions, does the R adapter allow AF? One of the biggest limitations of the Leica M is the minimum focusing distance. Does the R adapter allow for closer focusing distances? Thanks.

[pnoble]

About DxO. They measure camera raw output, not sensor output. This includes all in-camera processing of the file. Leica has the philosophy to leave the processing to the user and produce as unadulterated a file as possible, other brands strive to provide a polished file. Thus these tests are of very limited value. Even Canon and Nikon are difficult to compare, as these companies use very different algorithms (and thus compromises) in their firmware.

I am not aware of anybody providing a true sensor-output comparison.

 

How much does in camera RAW processing by Canon or Nikon improve high ISO noise over 'unprocessed' Leica RAW files? Isn't most of the difference in the high ISO noise level due to the CMOS sensors they use? And can in-camera processing actually improve dynamic range?

 

My questions, not opinions.

[bbbonthemoon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You don't *have* to use Live View OR the EVF... So I just don't understand where your disappointment comes from.

 

Well, exactly I dont have to, and my disappointment comes from the fact that new M lacks useful features I anticipated. Yeah, it still can be used as genuine RF camera, just as my M9, but it doesnt add anything useful for me. Thats a disappointment for a new top-level camera which is to stay for few years.

 

Why would the new M (a RF-based system) make you want to buy an M Monochrome (an RF-based system)?

 

They're exactly the same, except perhaps the new M's RF mechanism might be improved a bit from the M9 /MM (the illumination for framelines will be nice for sure).

 

Wow, 'exactly the same'? Interesting point regarding camera with unique BW sensor, and which basically got no analogue.

New M makes me want Monochrome, because MM simply looks more interesting and opening more opportunities for me in comparison.

[luigi bertolotti]

Sorry for silly questions, does the R adapter allow AF? One of the biggest limitations of the Leica M is the minimum focusing distance. Does the R adapter allow for closer focusing distances? Thanks.

 

Definitely NO AF :

- None of the Leica R lenses that have been made is autofocus

- Autofocus needs to :

1) actuate the lens' focusing system through contacts on the flange mount...

2) ...on the basis of the image caught by the sensor (or reflected to a ground glass - on SLR) and "inspected" by an electronic system inside the camera

 

Both are missing features in Leica M, so even a 3rd party can't make an AF lens for M - with R adapter or any other adapter.

 

The R adapter will allow to mount R lenses - including Macro ones (*) : it will even allow to mount accessories (bellows, tubes...) to have near focusing distances with normal lenses (and, without the adapter, you can use M bellows for the same purpose... )

 

(*) Leica Macro Elmarit 100 is considered one of the best Macro ever designed : it's an easy prediction that, when M will reach users, this forum will host MANY pics taken with it...

[JHAG]

The new M is clearly a disappointment for me. I'd second someone else on this thread, it just makes me want to buy Monochrome.

Coupled internal digital viewfinder, a-la fuji could be a real improvement: switch it on when you need critical focus, use optical for mind sanity rest of the time. The external viewfinder is bulky and looks g@y, ruins looks and feel of the camera, I'm not going to use it with Leica.

So it leaves it to live view at monitor, but to make a photo with M while holding it on raised hands like point and shoot? Please.

 

Seems a bit religious to me.

As Jamie said, you use what you need/want.

Personally, I shot a lot of items/subjects from odd PoV. For instance, with my Rollei 6008, laying camera body on a table, shooting hands. That's only possible with a viewfinder top-down or with a Live View screen.

Leica did a clever move, blending superior tradition with some updated technology.

They got me on this one – remains to see how the real M fares next january.

[markowich]

AF on the fuji XP-1 with FW 2.00 is very fast, particularly compared to the non-existent AF on the M----)))) fuji bashing is very common on leica forums these days but in reality the XP1 is a great camera system for relatively little money.

now that the leica M has become just-another-mirrorless (albeit with a 24mpx FF sensor - much appreciated for its size), all its shortcomings - partly due to the antique RF technology- will weigh in more heavily. btw, where is the live histogram which is standard in ML technology as of today? AF out of the question due to lens design.

iso 6400 max without boost? tells me that iso 1600 might be ok, 3200 bearable. and as of today i bet that the M sensor will take a serious beating from the 2K USD nikon d600, and not even get close to D800E IQ (at base iso and up). why do i believe that? supplier..... apparently leica was not able to convince a major producer like sony that it is worthwhile to produce a CMOS sensor for them with the necessary micro lens modifications.

so what justifies the price point of the M? for me the only good things are: FF mirror less albeit technologically still far behind the rest of the world, and that i can use the excellent M lenses.

i have ordered one but i know its shortcomings. curious to see whether the sensor will crack like the M9 sensor......of course the RF will develop calibration problems....i just hope that that the whole thing will not fall apart as it is really leica's first outing into modern photographic technology.

peter

ps: on my last trip to japan last february i took all my S-gear (all 4 lenses) and all my M gear (M9 and 6 lenses) along. when i arrived in tokyo my M9 sensor was cracked and my S had totally died on me, not resurectably. i went off and bought a fuji XP1 pro kit, which has worked beautifully ever since. tomorrow i shall be off to japan again, no leicas, just the fuji and my D800E. from now on i shall use the leica (M which i shall buy to acomodate my M lenses) only for fun photography not further than 1 mile from my house. hmmm, maybe i shall venture out 2 miles.

 

 

You don't *have* to use Live View OR the EVF... So I just don't understand where your disappointment comes from.

 

We're not talking a Fuji here (which has a horrible OVF and non-existent MF, IMO...and not-great AF either).

 

Why would the new M (a RF-based system) make you want to buy an M Monochrome (an RF-based system)?

 

They're exactly the same, except perhaps the new M's RF mechanism might be improved a bit from the M9 /MM (the illumination for framelines will be nice for sure).

[xjr]

Thank you Leica, this helped me make the decision to keep the old M9-P and buy a Leica M Monochrom.

 

A wise decision ! I am doing exactly that....

[colonel]

AF on the fuji XP-1 with FW 2.00 is very fast, particularly compared to the non-existent AF on the M----)))) fuji bashing is very common on leica forums these days but in reality the XP1 is a great camera system for relatively little money.

 

now that the leica M has become just-another-mirrorless (albeit with a 24mpx FF sensor - much appreciated for its size), all its shortcomings - partly due to the antique RF technology- will weigh in more heavily.

 

Yes, the Fuji is a great APS-C camera

 

However your point about the RF misses the whole point of Leica M and what makes it such a great photo experience with razor sharp focus. Not to mention the lovely build

 

You seem to be defining yet another electronic CSC. There are plenty of those.

Leica M is something special

 

I think Leica has struck a great balance with the new M

[jdlaing]

Yes, the Fuji is a great APS-C camera

 

However your point about the RF misses the whole point of Leica M and what makes it such a great photo experience with razor sharp focus. Not to mention the lovely build

 

You seem to be defining yet another electronic CSC. There are plenty of those.

Leica M is something special

 

I think Leica has struck a great balance with the new M

 

Very well put.

Some folks just don't get it and will never understand.

[Hausen17]

I am not to sure what to think. I am on the list awaiting an M Monochrom and the new M makes me wonder if I should. How soon will they be tempted to release a CMOS Monochrom I wonder or will they? The new M intriques me because it seems to me you can add the accessories to turn it into a studio DSLR type camera if you need it, add the awesome R lenses for those times you need a long lens. Thought M Monochrom + Old M9 was a good kit. But new M throws a cat amongst the pigeons.

[Ozkar]

I would be inclined to go for an M. My concern with the Monochrom is that if it proves to be popular Leica could introduce an ME-Monochrom for $500-1000 more than an ME. Since the development cost is sunk, it would cost next to nothing for them to do so and would provide a nice little earn.

 

 

I am not to sure what to think. I am on the list awaiting an M Monochrom and the new M makes me wonder if I should. How soon will they be tempted to release a CMOS Monochrom I wonder or will they? The new M intriques me because it seems to me you can add the accessories to turn it into a studio DSLR type camera if you need it, add the awesome R lenses for those times you need a long lens. Thought M Monochrom + Old M9 was a good kit. But new M throws a cat amongst the pigeons.

[Guest Kasper]

iso 6400 max without boost? tells me that iso 1600 might be ok, 3200 bearable. and as of today i bet that the M sensor will take a serious beating from the 2K USD nikon d600, and not even get close to D800E IQ (at base iso and up). why do i believe that? supplier..... apparently leica was not able to convince a major producer like sony that it is worthwhile to produce a CMOS sensor for them with the necessary micro lens modifications.

 

If that would be the case, the M will be a failure. As others wrote before, high ISO performance is something that is needed. Once the M was a great low light camera. After the bad M8 and the not so good M9 it finally is the time to get something that can compete with other ( expensive) cameras, right? Otherwise we will be years behind again.

[Jeff S]

5mm (.2 in) more than the M9...not dramatic IMO considering all the stuff inside.

 

Since my comment regarding the extra thickness (based on specs shown on the Leica site), Erwin Puts reports that the M and M9 are the same thickness. Guess I'll have to see in person. I wonder if the difference might be the new thumb rest.

 

Jeff

[ramosa]

Will the CMOS sensor hold the Leica unique look' date=' that CCD sensor was surely providing? Doubts, doubts... Photos on new M-camera page on leicacamera.com look.. hmm, strange?[/quote']

 

Strange, at best. Bad seems more fitting.

[andybarton]

Sorry for silly questions, does the R adapter allow AF? One of the biggest limitations of the Leica M is the minimum focusing distance. Does the R adapter allow for closer focusing distances? Thanks.

 

No it does not allow autofocus.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[photomeme]

I would be inclined to go for an M. My concern with the Monochrom is that if it proves to be popular Leica could introduce an ME-Monochrom for $500-1000 more than an ME. Since the development cost is sunk, it would cost next to nothing for them to do so and would provide a nice little earn.

 

if so, with release of ME just about 2 months after, would be huge disservice to early adopters. like price cuts on first iphone tha burned initial buyers.