Jump to content

Why an M 240 as rangefinder?


tadeyev

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don’t know if anyone is in the mood for philosophizing, and please don’t enter ‘flame mode’ for what I mention here. It is just that a few things popped up in my mind for better or worse….Of course, I am gobbling up all the reviews and discussions about the new 240 like all of you, but in the end a pixel here and an ISO there are not of ultimate importance to me in making photographs. But when I think ‘Leica’ I do think rangefinder, perhaps like many here.

 

Many of us chose rangefinders during the golden age of film because of the picture quality rangefinders offered with their small size and the absence of a mirror in the optic system, combined with fantastic lenses.

 

However, today I truly see no need for a new, electronic rangefinder concept as a necessity.

 

Sensors are getting bigger and cameras smaller every year. The only reason to put everything into a ‘Leica box’ is to keep the Leica diehards happy. The 240 is going to be one really fine camera, and perhaps I will even order one. But I can't help thinking the 240 is the rangefinder ‘Schwanengesang’, the last attempt to make a modern camera in a box originally designed around the 1920’s. Perhaps, if there were a present day Barnack around as inspirator, and no Leicaphiles, perhaps Leica would have made a camera that didn't even look like a rangefinder and they might re-invent the way we make photographs, like Oskar did. And I don’t mean the S cameras when I say that of course.

 

Anyway, apologies in advance for the online ruminations.

 

Theo

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Sensors are getting bigger and cameras smaller every year. The only reason to put everything into a ‘Leica box’ is to keep the Leica diehards happy. The 240 is going to be one really fine camera, and perhaps I will even order one. But I can't help thinking the 240 is the rangefinder ‘Schwanengesang’, the last attempt to make a modern camera in a box originally designed around the 1920’s. ...

 

I mistook the M9 for the last possible step in the development of the M. It wasn't

 

If I'd use an M 240 - which I won't for some time - it would be for the better built, the better electronics and the better sensor - in the 28-135mm-range which I use now with optical viewfinder. The possibilities of live-view and perhaps electronic viewfinder were just some addenda, like the old visoflex was in the past, or perhaps a tripod and a flash.

 

So I could even imagine an even better built Mxxx with even better electronics and even better sensor - sticking to the old design and without electronic aides for viewing the subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the rangefinder even though I never used one long ago before SLRs.

 

I always laughed when people complained about having to remove the baseplate for battery etc. I think it's awesome, and takes like one second.

 

Most love the M because it is what it is...love the form factor, design, the look. It's timeless.

 

Otherwise, just get a Nex!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

As Jaapv said, the M240 is a rangefinder, but perhaps not 'pure' like those older classics (because of a lot of new OPTIONAL venue should ones want to venture into). People really just generalize that this and that now do this and that and INSTANTLY compare that to what Leica M system lacks/cant do/will not do. then, they conclude that Leica M is obsolete. What those people never understood or come to think about is that RF users want exactly what a Leica M is. the only features that i REALLY want Leica to continue to improve are things related to image quality, anything else, it is good for what it is.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...Perhaps, if there were a present day Barnack around as inspirator, and no Leicaphiles, perhaps Leica would have made a camera that didn't even look like a rangefinder and they might re-invent the way we make photographs, like Oskar did...

 

Or perhaps they'd be long out of business. It is their "traditional" and high end approach that was recently combined with electronics that has turned the company around. Even if it is not the most state of the art approach to camera design. It is hard to say what Leica will need to produce in the future but they seem to understand their market very well.

 

Consider that photography and video has become ubiquitous and there is a countless variety of devices to perform those tasks. Including the very popular GoPro Hero and the soon to be released Google glasses. I am not sure what a present day Barnack could invent for Leica. (Although I think they might have evolved the rangefinder more over the past half century.) So Leica's approach is to bring a different kind of perceived value to its products... whether that actually contributes to better photos or not.

Edited by AlanG
Link to post
Share on other sites

So how what would a camera which uses Leica M lenses focus in a satisfactory manner?

.

 

I don't know, I am not a camera designer....Why not drop the whole optical rangefinder frame line idea and just feed the LCD into a small, high-def viewfinder of some kind? Why have to take the camera away to look at the screen to begin with (if you want to, that is) ?

 

I am just philosophising out loud what might be possible if Leica dropped the whole M idea and created something more radical and yet not Japanese, able to put all that wonderful glass to use.

 

Anyway, whatever they do or don't' do, I will be shooting M until I drop dead in any case ;-)

I am just questioning the use of a rangefinder concept in the 21st century- apart from the enjoyment/pleasure/history/fine pictures and deliciousness they bring of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, why don't we split this apart into two functions

 

1] a rangefinder allows to look at the world through optics rather than through a digital screen

 

2] a rangefinder allows for fast hand focussing with a directional clue built in.

 

Those are two nice features for which we pay the price in the classical M camera's by losing two other features, available in SLR and EVF camera's

 

A] view angle changes with the focal length used

 

B] no parallax, since you look through the lens

 

Now if we want to have 1] + 2] +A] + B] in a digital camera with M mount, there is a solution: make the sensor translucent, so that it can act as a ground glass like in a view camera. I know that you need room for the light sensitive wells , but if you can have a quarter of the surface between the wells translucent, you can use it as a ground glass and look at the optical image thrown on it by the lens and still be bright enough.

Edited by Lindolfi
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thoughts, undoubtly :

 

Sensors are getting bigger and cameras smaller every year. The only reason to put everything into a ‘Leica box’ is to keep the Leica diehards happy....

 

Yes, but when you have a loyal market and a top brand, this is the kind of goal which , anyway, a Company can count on for its survival and even for its growth, provided that it executes right,,, examples in other industries do exist.

 

The 240 is going to be one really fine camera, and perhaps I will even order one. But I can't help thinking the 240 is the rangefinder ‘Schwanengesang’, the last attempt to make a modern camera in a box originally designed around the 1920’s.

 

This is surely possible... and in the forum such a scenario has been speculated : to develop ANOTHER system (I mean, not the next "release" of M240) around the optical rangefinder I think is uneven.

 

Perhaps, if there were a present day Barnack around as inspirator, and no Leicaphiles, perhaps Leica would have made a camera that didn't even look like a rangefinder and they might re-invent the way we make photographs, like Oskar did. And I don’t mean the S cameras when I say that of course.

 

Leciaphiles do exist for Barnack DID live at a certain time... :)... given the present status of photographic industry, I find difficult that a "Barnack of 201x" can exist... to say, a man who around an idea developes a COMPLETE product with significant innovative contents; the interdipendence of technologies, in the digital age, makes it almost impossible... :o a new sensor, or a new shutter, or a new LCD become quickly technologies available to "anyone", and the real problem is not a step up in innovation, but the capability to invest, to integrate smartly, to develop, to market...

 

Anyway, apologies in advance for the online ruminations.

 

Theo

Link to post
Share on other sites

... Why not (...) just feed the LCD into a small, high-def viewfinder of some kind? (....) created something more radical and yet not Japanese, able to put all that wonderful glass to use. (...)

 

That's a good suggestion. That's what the so called bridge cameras have been doing for about a decade, quite a few of them of Japanese origin.

 

It's not "better" than using a range finder, it's merely different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The M8 was made purely as a digital body for to allow existing Leica users to use their M lenses on a digital platform. Their first market was the Leica diehard.

 

Obviously it attracted new users also and the M9 was the camera that Leica/Leica users wanted in the first place, i.e. FF. It brought yet more new users to Leica.

 

The M is a development which opens up other possibilities, with live view, and EVF and video, all spin-offs of the sensor. It will appeal to even more new users I suspect.

 

However I do wonder how much longer Leica will keep developing the current M system. Certainly for the foreseeable future they will, but at some point they will make a new system with AF lenses and will no longer need to fit a rangefinder.

 

As others point out, the rangefinders accuracy which was fine with film shows problems on digital with certain lenses highlighting the problems more than others.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Theo,

 

I think what you say makes a lot of sense.

 

The oddity is that the market is not necessarily for the purists.

This means that the new camera, more accessible as more similar to the current concept of contemporary equipment, will be surely a great success.

It is a shame that the new good sensor and technical improvement have been bonded to the live view and cheap electronic view finder. Because less is more. See the MM.

 

To be honest it would have been great to have something completely new, beyond the Fuji XE (or whatever the name is) where the viewfinder is completely electronic.

And for 5000 pounds (or equivalent) we could expect a great electronic viewfinder with OLED, massive resolution and superb frame rate. Something ground breaking as was the first Leica.

 

Instead we get a pimped up ME with a larger screen, more buttons.

Add of course better sensor performance.

 

But after all, who cares.... if our ancestors managed to take great photos with a IIIc, how comes we cannot be happy with a M8 or M6 or M9? Isn't this all about consumerism?

And wouldn't Leica the type of company that everybody expect to be outside of the consumerism paradigm?

 

Maybe it is time to look ahead to the future and break with tradition completely.

M11 maybe? ooops I meant M250...

:-)

 

G

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Focusing via a rangefinder is the most rapid and accurate manual focusing method for wideangle lenses. Focus peaking via an EVF or the rear screen of the M Type 240 will be great for telephotos, but it will be slower and more fiddly for wideangles. Any camera design has its compromises, but it seems that the new M camera will do a good job of traditional rangefinder focusing while adding some more flexibility for telephoto use that will help it transcend the limitations of the traditional rangefinder.

 

If Leica ever chooses to market an AF full frame mirrorless camera, it cold be something like a digital Contax G2 or a grown up Fuji X1Pro or Sony RX1, but it will be a different product line entirely than the M family. I think there will always be a market for a minimalist, easy to operate M. Even though the new M is adding a bunch of new features, it will still be as easy to operate as a rangefinder still camera as the M8 or M9 are today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the experience of working with the M, I actually think the Visoflex parallel is one of the most useful.

 

First, the M-240 is a range finder camera with the full DNA of the M system. It also has built into it all the flexibility of the Viso system, making it great for macro, architecture and considered telephoto work. I will buy one because it is a better RF camera (IMHO) than the M9, and most of the time I'll use it as an RF camera. What's great (for me) is that on a wide range of other occasions I'll be able to gain the flexibility that the built in Viso system gives me...

 

Me? I'm really looking forward to getting my 2 bodies and getting back to taking photos. :)

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...