Lets drop the M "240" altogether!

[Paulus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, but Volvo 745 for the 740 estate stuck....

 

I don't understand. Our Volvo 240 estate is called a 245 GL . Didn't' Volvo invent this name?

 

I just realise, when I will buy an "new M" camera I have two 240's!:D . And they are both taxed for € 6200,-!! What a coincidence.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[farnz]

The problems with referring to the camera as the "Leica M" are:

- how will you differentiate it from the next model (Typ 241 or Typ 260 or Typ 340 or whatever)?

- how does anybody determine that you are referring to one model of camera rather than the Leica M range of cameras that obviously includes the M3, the M2, etc up to the current Typ 240?

 

I don't like the name M240 but will continue to use it for clarity.

 

Or perhaps I'll start calling it the M√57600.

 

Pete.

[bill]

The gormless eedjit who came up with M did not have the slightest understanding how SEO works. Searching for "Leica M" is pointless. They are not the only ones, to be fair. I suspect the same numb-nuts was involved in the naming of the Ricoh GR...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Sent from another Galaxy

[jaapv]

I don't understand. Our Volvo 240 estate is called a 245 GL . Didn't' Volvo invent this name?

 

I just realise, when I will buy an "new M" camera I have two 240's!:D . And they are both taxed for € 6200,-!! What a coincidence.

Yes - Volvo tried to change it with the 700 series. In the end they gave up and went to V70, S80, etc.

[adan]

As Bill and Pete say, searching for "Leica M" on this forum and others will bring up every M ever made. If you want info specific to the current camera only, it has to be distinguished from the others, and the "240" is the only way.

 

In his first novel, "The Sands of Mars," Arthur C. Clarke gave his protagonist a futuristic Leica. Since he was writing in the screw-mount era, this advanced Leica model was designated the "XXa."

 

I presume the real Leica decided not to go down the multi-digit route to avoid such madness, and thus ended the numbered "Ms" with the "9".

[robert_parker]

Should have been 'M10'

 

'M Typ 240' is only using the same nomenclature in a new and unnecessary way.

 

A bit like the 'Mini M' ('Son of Digilux 2' would have been much better...and probably sold more cameras at the outset....).

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's also a bit like the outstanding daftness of "The New iPad". What'll the next one be called: "The Newer iPad", "The New New iPad", "The v2 New iPad", "The Next iPad"?

 

Pete.

[Peter H]

Paulus, I agree with you.

 

Ever since it was announced I've always referred to it as the M. No one, as far as I'm aware, has yet misunderstood me. I'll add a qualifying designation if and when necessary, but so far it really doesn't seem to be.

[mjh]

The problems with referring to the camera as the "Leica M" are:

- how will you differentiate it from the next model (Typ 241 or Typ 260 or Typ 340 or whatever)?

Yes, obviously. If you need to make it perfectly clear which model you are referring to (so someone reading it a few years later on would still get it) you would use the Typ number. In most cases however it would suffice to refer to the current model as ‘the M’ or, once there is a new model rumoured or announced, to differentiate between ‘the old/current M’ and ‘the new M’.

 

how does anybody determine that you are referring to one model of camera rather than the Leica M range of cameras that obviously includes the M3, the M2, etc up to the current Typ 240?

In most cases it will be obvious from the context. If in doubt, use ‘the M range’ or ‘the M series’ for a generic reference.

[Paulus]

 

 

In most cases it will be obvious from the context. If in doubt, use ‘the M range’ or ‘the M series’ for a generic reference.

 

Is that enough? The M series started IMO at the M 3:confused:

or do you mean to say the digital M range. Oh could we just name it MD. But that's a bit confusing with MDA without the viewfinder which I bought from Phillips for € 5,- !!

 

No M 10 is so obviously clear. Lets just name the next one M 11 and we are back on track. The historians can later smile on this then.

 

I can see the quotes already. " The M 5 was a fine camera but a lot of people disliked it's appearance. The M ( Typ 240 ) was a great camera, but a lot of people disliked it's name."

 

With children you aways can give the two or three names. If they dislike the one , they can always use the other.

[dwbell]

In most cases it will be obvious from the context. If in doubt, use ‘the M range’ or ‘the M series’ for a generic reference.

 

No. I don't think I will. I'll use Leica M's to represent the range. And M3, M6 and M240 to represent individual cameras. I feel no need to contort to what Leica et al would 'prefer' I use.

[Peter H]

No. I don't think I will. I'll use Leica M's to represent the range. And M3, M6 and M240 to represent individual cameras. I feel no need to contort to what Leica et al would 'prefer' I use.

 

The evidence is against you as far as I can see. I've been able to post loads of messages here and elsewhere, (and talk to real people in real life too!) about the M without ever being misunderstood. The context has always made it clear whether I'm talking generically about the class of M cameras or about the M. If absolutely necessary the qualifier "240" is available, but I haven't yet found it necessary. I know I shall one day, but I don't feel so strongly about it that I have to "contort" my use of language and say "240" each time I talk about the M.

[mjh]

Is that enough? The M series started IMO at the M 3:confused:

or do you mean to say the digital M range.

‘The M range’ refers to all Ms, ‘the digital M range’ to the digital ones. Where’s the problem?

 

In practice this isn’t as difficult as made out to be by some. In the majority of cases context is enough to pin down the intended meaning, and in the rare cases where it is not there are ways to make clear what you are referring to precisely. I think you are needlessly worrying about this.

[Paulus]

‘The M range’ refers to all Ms, ‘the digital M range’ to the digital ones. Where’s the problem?

 

 

It's clear now. I missed some context.

[01af]

The short name is: "M". The full name is: "M (Typ 240)".

 

The name should have been M10 ... but alas, unfortunately it isn't

 

But then, it also isn't M 240. Instead, it's M (Typ 240).

[magosak]

The official name is Leica "M" or the new Leica M.

 

The "240" certainly stand for "at least 240 days of waiting time" until delivery. ;-)

 

Nicolas

Good one.

[satijntje]

The metal covers for the M were already produced with M10.

Mr Kaufmann himself then decided to rename the M10 to M.

All M10 metal cover plates were destroyed by Leica and new ones were made with the M.

 

From a trustful source

 

John

[Peter H]

The problems with referring to the camera as the "Leica M" are:

- how will you differentiate it from the next model (Typ 241 or Typ 260 or Typ 340 or whatever)?

...............

 

When I have to be specific about the Typ 241 or 260, I shall. Until then, there's no need.

 

Language is a wonderful thing. We use all sorts of words that have multiple meanings and context virtually always makes our intended meaning clear. The Leica M is not some miraculous new worm-hole to misunderstanding and confusion.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[dwbell]

The gormless eedjit who came up with M did not have the slightest understanding how SEO works. Searching for "Leica M" is pointless. They are not the only ones, to be fair. I suspect the same numb-nuts was involved in the naming of the Ricoh GR...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Sent from another Galaxy

 

Well, there's your answer Bill! The 'gormless eedjit' appears to be Dr Kaufmann himself!

Allegedly.

 

edit: I'm starting to pen a different opinion about the current head of marketing at Leica. Sounds like maybe *s/he* knows what s/he's doing and gets over ruled by his know it better boss. And we've all had one of those in the past. I wonder who's idea "Mini M" was.....

[dwbell]

The evidence is against you as far as I can see. I've been able to post loads of messages here and elsewhere, (and talk to real people in real life too!) about the M without ever being misunderstood. The context has always made it clear whether I'm talking generically about the class of M cameras or about the M. If absolutely necessary the qualifier "240" is available, but I haven't yet found it necessary. I know I shall one day, but I don't feel so strongly about it that I have to "contort" my use of language and say "240" each time I talk about the M.

 

I've expressed what I will and do do. I have no need for 'evidence' or external approval.

 

However, if I was interested in evidence I would be counting the perxentage threads on the main page of a super geeky official leica hub and seeing how many refer to the unauthorised M 240 nomenclature, and how many not.

 

AND, I managed to say "do do" in a post, which pleases me in school boy ways...