Lets drop the M "240" altogether!

[bill]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

... But that's the whole point. That's the internal not the external designation - not the name Leica markets the thing by.

 

Dial M for confusion...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Sent from another Galaxy

[Leicaiste]

 

Remember the Leica M is an icon in design and it's exterior hasn't chanded much since the M3.

 

It was an icon in design until they added the ugly red dot and the big M4-2, M4-P, M6 etc.

 

And the red dot is even bigger on the M !

[Advertisement]

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

[dwbell]

I have no problem with the designation M240, IMHO Leica got it right.

 

The camera is the class M.

With the oncoming variations 240-??? etc etc, otherwise every three years you will have M 11, 12, 13,14.

 

Remember the Leica M is an icon in design and it's exterior hasn't chanded much since the M3.

 

It will always be known as the Leica M, variation or type 240.

 

Ken.

 

Two thoughts;

 

- Hold an M3 in your left hand and an M240 in your right.

- "It will always be known as....". Impressive crystal ball. What are this weekends lottery numbers please?

[250swb]

As with a lot of products there is the official dictionary and then the urban dictionary, and sometimes the urban dictionary version gains ascendency. So while we can talk of the Porsche 911 or BMW M3 as specific models, look what happens when an entire range of cars is given the same designation.

 

This happened to Ford UK in the 1960's and 70's when no matter what model you referred to they were collectively called by journalists, owners, dealers, and sometimes the builders, as 'Dagenham Dustbins'. You would get a sympathetic sigh if you said you drove a Dagenham Dustbin and wouldn't need to elaborate on the exact cause of your misery (Cortina, Capri, Transit etc.), because you were part of the club.

 

So while owners of the M may feel they have ownership of the 'M' designation, what about all the others, M3, M6, M9, that don't want to be lumped in with the reputation of strap lugs falling off, etc.? Equally why should anybody who has the skill to drive a 911 2.7RS without it going backwards into a hedge want to confuse it with a modern ABS and traction controlled electronic wonder?

 

So I think M owners can rightly aspire to the mask of anonymity and not want to call attention to their camera, all others should call the M Type 240 whatever they want, just to make sure it isn't confused with another M camera that has its strap lugs intact.

 

Steve

Edited July 29, 2013 by 250swb

[jaapv]

I suspect that was said of the M3 at the time it was released

True, but the M3 did not have sixty years of development behind it.

[edwardkaraa]

I personally dislike the M typ 240 appellation and think it is a really dumb decision from someone who was never involved in the Leica history, and by his own confession, is completely ignorant about photography. Sad times.

 

However I also agree its too late now to change it, so we'll have to live with it.

 

I think M10 would have been perfect, and completely in the Leica tradition. Also when you speak it, I much prefer to say M ten rather than M typ two hundred forty.

 

Anyhow, the name should be our last worry. This camera has much more serious design flaws starting from the sensor to the inclusion of the Movie button and useless focus peaking... etc.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I personally dislike the M typ 240 appellation and think it is a really dumb decision from someone who was never involved in the Leica history, and by his own confession, is completely ignorant about photography. Sad times.

 

However I also agree its too late now to change it, so we'll have to live with it.

 

I think M10 would have been perfect, and completely in the Leica tradition. Also when you speak it, I much prefer to say M ten rather than M typ two hundred forty.

 

Anyhow, the name should be our last worry. This camera has much more serious design flaws starting from the sensor to the inclusion of the Movie button and useless focus peaking... etc.

If you mean mr. Kaufmann, he was an avid amateur Leica photographer long before he bought the factory.....

[lct]

...This camera has much more serious design flaws starting from the sensor to the inclusion of the Movie button and useless focus peaking... etc.

Aside from its slow refresh rate, the sensor is fine for me, as well as the movie button. As for "focus peaking, etc..." what do you mean exactly?

[edwardkaraa]

If you mean mr. Kaufmann, he was an avid amateur Leica photographer long before he bought the factory.....

 

He did mention in one of his interviews that he doesn't know much about photography. Maybe he was more of a collector, or weekend photographer...

[edwardkaraa]

Aside from its slow refresh rate, the sensor is fine for me, as well as the movie button. As for "focus peaking, etc..." what do you mean exactly?

 

Leica M is about minimalism. There are 2 useless buttons on the M, the movie button which is completely out of place on an M and the front button that activates exposure compensation. As for focus peaking, it is not accurate at all, and many users find they get better results with the RF. As for the sensor, banding at iso 3200 isn't exactly up to the current standard. Also I think the M9 sensor is somewhat better at dealing with wide angles, I don't think the new microlens design is achieving the advertised results.

[jaapv]

He did mention in one of his interviews that he doesn't know much about photography. Maybe he was more of a collector, or weekend photographer...

Or simply modest... In comparison to some of the guys that work at Leica and the Leica Akademie none of us knows much about photography.

[mjh]

As a rule, camera vendors avoid changing the number of digits in the designation of a series of cameras. Rather than going from 9 to 10 they change the naming scheme.

[lct]

Leica M is about minimalism. There are 2 useless buttons on the M, the movie button which is completely out of place on an M and the front button that activates exposure compensation. As for focus peaking, it is not accurate at all, and many users find they get better results with the RF. As for the sensor, banding at iso 3200 isn't exactly up to the current standard. Also I think the M9 sensor is somewhat better at dealing with wide angles, I don't think the new microlens design is achieving the advertised results.

I don't like much the EVF personally but focus peaking seems to work fine for what it's worth. The RF is vastly superior of course but is useless for macro and long teles so i don't see any "flaw" in all that. Same for the buttons you don't like contrary to some other users including me surprisingly as i never thought i could like doing video with an M. Banding at 3200 iso, yes sometimes but 2000/2500 is enough for me and i dislike much more the smearing results of some DSLRs so no "design flaw" either imho. Microlenses? I would wait and see the forthcoming firmware update before drawing any conclusion.

[Paulus]

As a rule, camera vendors avoid changing the number of digits in the designation of a series of cameras. Rather than going from 9 to 10 they change the naming scheme.

 

I understand.

 

So you have the Pro camera Nikon F1,F2,F3,F4, Then digital D 1,2,3,4, and the other numbers are used for "pro"sumer camera's or consumers Like the D 700/ D800 and the D 7000 etc.

 

With the Digital Leica it went different. The M8 and M9 should be called: M ( D ) 1 and M ( D ) 2 .

The new M ( Typ 240 ) Camera should then be M ( d ) 3. No double digits in this way. But it went different M8, M9 so the logical thing to do was M 10 IMO. Exept if this camera proves to be a real Milestone. Then we can start from scratch?

 

Another thing is, that the M8 and M9 were not by everyone considered to be pro cameras. For instance because of the lack of sealing.....is the new M the first real digital " Pro " camera?

[dwbell]

Funny to remember that weather sealing was scoffed at by the faithful prior to the M240 as "the lenses are not sealed so what would be the point?" Now, not only is the body sealed but Dr Kaufmann tells us that the lenses are made to such high tolerances that they are effectively weather sealed anyway.

 

Classic Leica forum.

[Peter H]

Funny to remember that weather sealing was scoffed at by the faithful prior to the M240 as "the lenses are not sealed so what would be the point?" Now, not only is the body sealed but Dr Kaufmann tells us that the lenses are made to such high tolerances that they are effectively weather sealed anyway.

 

Classic Leica forum.

 

I do remember many people saying that the non-elecronic and superbly made lenses were not a problem, so that weather-sealing the camera would definitely be a good idea.

 

But you're right, a lot of people did also argue that there would be no point. As usual, the forum reflects different points of view. This is not a sign of inconsistency so much as diversity. I can't see a problem with that.

[Jeff S]

I was one who remained curious about how Leica would approach the weather sealing issue, as I posted here almost a year ago. I was actually pleased to hear that Leica's testing revealed no need to further seal the lenses at this point.

 

I thought that Leica might instead introduce a line of sealed lenses, which would offer another way for them to make money on lenses already owned, just not sealed. The fact that they didn't (at least at this point) suggests that there really isn't a need (or a market).

 

No matter what Leica says, though, I'll do just as I said in the older post, i.e., maintain insurance (and common sense). But I'll take a better made and weather sealed camera any day, regardless of lens questions.

 

Jeff

[farnz]

... I think M10 would have been perfect, ...

I think I would have preferred MX.

 

I'm sure I recall some time ago it being reported that Leica had bought the rights* to the name M10 so it seems odd that it chose not to use it. (*If that's the correct term.)

 

Pete.

[Jeff S]

I think I would have preferred MX.

 

They already combined M and X, quite unsuccessfully, in the mini M campaign.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[KanzaKruzer]

I don’t find the product naming problematic. I ordered a Leica M the day it was announced and am still waiting for my Leica M. It will be my first rangefinder, so that may be why I am not confused about the name. As a side note, my Ricoh GR does not include roman numerals in the name as the earlier models did.