imsilly Posted January 13, 2014 Share #261 Posted January 13, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) What you're describing here is a digital rangefinder as well. Nothing specific to film at all. Then the camera would not be an M anymore since M means rangefinder as you know. A digital camera like the R-D1 has no LV, so no LV aids at all. Another digital camera like the M8 has no LV either, so no LV aids either. Same for later and current bodies like M9, M-E and MM. And finally, sorry to repeat, but the M240 in classic mode has none of those things either. If you agree with me then i apologise for having misunderstood such an agreement. English clearly isn't your first language. I think you should take more care when reading my posts because you don't seem to understand what I'm saying in the slightest. Of course what I described isn't specific to film photography, that is what I said in the first place. My whole point was it seems idiotic to create a camera like a R-D1 or digital Leica M that doesn't ad focusing aids used by nearly all other mirrorless digital cameras. Why have all those capabilities and ignore them. The new Sony, Ricoh and Fuji mirrorless cameras have a much better focusing capabilities. It's a reactionary choice by Leica to stick to such anachronistic mechanisms as a rangefinder and ignore better electronic systems. I could understand having both, but only a rangefinder seems recklessly shortsighted. These cameras are for photographers who prefer a rangefinder camera but also prefer digital over silver-halide (or have customers that do). There is no intrinsic connection tying rangefinders to silver-halide photography. It just happened that when the rangefinder was invented, silver-halide film was the only game in town. What has silver-halide film got to do with anything? Rangefinders and the M camera design is intrinsically linked to film photography, by the fact the rangefinder systems were only developed to get around the problem of focusing a film camera. The Leica M would not exist if it wasn't for the fact film was used as the medium the camera shot. It is an anachronism relating to film photography. In the past decade of digital photography the rangefinder has been made obsolete and to burden modern cameras with it seems pointless. Any subjective preference for an optical rangefinder is nothing, but that. There exists no objective reason why Leica couldn't create a camera with a smaller, cheaper, more effective hybrid optical/EVF viewfinder and keep everything good about old M viewfinders and remove the hopelessly out of date parts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 13, 2014 Posted January 13, 2014 Hi imsilly, Take a look here What do you want in the next digital M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rodluvan Posted January 13, 2014 Share #262 Posted January 13, 2014 The point is simple: Leica builds what their customers want, to a larger degree than any other manufacturer I do believe it's often the other way around; the customers want what Leica builds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 13, 2014 Share #263 Posted January 13, 2014 English clearly isn't your first language. […] My whole point was it seems idiotic to create a camera like a R-D1 or digital Leica M that doesn't ad focusing aids used by nearly all other mirrorless digital cameras. Why have all those capabilities and ignore them. Because this idiot foreigner prefers rangefinders and lives very well w/o those facilities, if you don't mind. Which doesn't prevent me to use them from time to time on the M240 and all the time with DSLRs. But an M is an M i.e. a rangefinder again and a rangefinder has nothing to do with live view or live view aids per se. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbo Posted January 13, 2014 Share #264 Posted January 13, 2014 English clearly isn't your first language. I think you should take more care when reading my posts because you don't seem to understand what I'm saying in the slightest. Oi, no need for that sort of attack until you can speak his language as well as he speaks yours Any subjective preference for an optical rangefinder is nothing, but that. Leica have clearly spotted these idiots and decided to take their money from them. I'm really not sure why you would have a problem with that. Of course, once you have taken over the world, you can tell them to stop! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted January 13, 2014 Share #265 Posted January 13, 2014 English clearly isn't your first language. I think you should take more care when reading my posts because you don't seem to understand what I'm saying in the slightest. Of course what I described isn't specific to film photography, that is what I said in the first place. My whole point was it seems idiotic to create a camera like a R-D1 or digital Leica M that doesn't ad focusing aids used by nearly all other mirrorless digital cameras. Why have all those capabilities and ignore them. The new Sony, Ricoh and Fuji mirrorless cameras have a much better focusing capabilities. It's a reactionary choice by Leica to stick to such anachronistic mechanisms as a rangefinder and ignore better electronic systems. I could understand having both, but only a rangefinder seems recklessly shortsighted. What has silver-halide film got to do with anything? Rangefinders and the M camera design is intrinsically linked to film photography, by the fact the rangefinder systems were only developed to get around the problem of focusing a film camera. The Leica M would not exist if it wasn't for the fact film was used as the medium the camera shot. It is an anachronism relating to film photography. In the past decade of digital photography the rangefinder has been made obsolete and to burden modern cameras with it seems pointless. Any subjective preference for an optical rangefinder is nothing, but that. There exists no objective reason why Leica couldn't create a camera with a smaller, cheaper, more effective hybrid optical/EVF viewfinder and keep everything good about old M viewfinders and remove the hopelessly out of date parts. Such narrow mindedness is, in my mind, more of an anachronism but I suppose it's no surprise coming from someone who calls them self silly. Buy a Sony and shut up will you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george + Posted January 13, 2014 Share #266 Posted January 13, 2014 Hello I. M., or if you prefer, Dear Mr. Silly, thanks for the entertainment. Your imaginative moniker and matching arguments neatly parody what can happen on some forums. Or is it fora? Great fun indeed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted January 13, 2014 Share #267 Posted January 13, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) My whole point was it seems idiotic to create a camera like a R-D1 or digital Leica M that doesn't ad focusing aids used by nearly all other mirrorless digital cameras. With CCD cameras like the R-D1 or the M8 and M9, adding digital focusing aids wasn’t an option. With the M (Typ 240) it became possible and that’s why the M offers live-view with magnification and/or focus peaking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 13, 2014 Share #268 Posted January 13, 2014 Maybe I'm not interested in buying a man-toy or fashion accessory, so that excludes me from discussing future Leica designs, I dunno... Why don't you step over to a traditional canoe forum and whine that they still do not include, by default, solar powered motors? Maybe to to a fly-fishing site and suggest they switch to nets and dynamite? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerard Posted January 13, 2014 Share #269 Posted January 13, 2014 I entered th M market because the camera operated and performed in a way that met my exact needs. I love using the rangefinder. I have no need for autofocus or focus peaking. My current M, an M9p seems pretty damn cutting edge in what it can deliver. I guess my only frustration on occasion is the slow buffer clearance speed. If I wanted an improvement in this area, the 240 would deliver it. If I needed autofocus, there are a wealth of cameras that offer such a function. It may well be an opportunity for Leica to build an af camera range, but I don't agree that such functionality should really be an aim of the next M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted January 13, 2014 Share #270 Posted January 13, 2014 I'm not saying you can't shoot how you want, I'm just saying it's irrational to want a company to produce inferior products for the sake of tradition. As this is a thread about new digital cameras, rather then existing ones, it does worry me how insistent people are on having Leica repeat the same mistakes they made in the past. Frankly they change their rangefinder mechanism every model, LED frame lines anyone? I can't understand the opposition to updating them further. Updates that would actually add a lot of utility seem a no-go here. When has pointing out the bleeding obvious become attacking someone? If he goes through the bother to replying to me, I think the least he should do is actually make an attempt to understand me. Well the moment, I start talking random bullshit on a french language forum I hope you are there to stick up for me. I think that was smart, but it was kinda like a person buying a VHS player after DVDs had replaced them. Look at the Fuji X series for instance in terms of hybrid optical viewfinders where you can choose how you want to be aided in the viewfinder. Also how Canon has added phase detection to sensors that enable continuos autofocus in live view. Those things open up new possibilities, that Leica should really think about in a new camera. I'm pretty certain you don't know what an anachronism is. Maybe you are a bit of a walking anachronism yourself. I don't know, maybe Leica has realised that the majority of their customers are bald, old, retired, white dudes with too much time and cash on their hands. Maybe that is why they price their products so high and pander to the conservative tastes of reactionary baby boomers. I kind of suspect they have found a decent cash cow to milk, until they all forget to pop their statins one morning and croak one afternoon playing golf. Maybe once that happens they actually try and design a modern camera? For most people who get paid to photograph and who actually find their products a little lacking in the performance and reliability stakes it would be nice if they actually bothered to implement forward thinking ideas. You know stuff like autofocus, something that every other mirrorless camera seems to be equipped with and maybe some metering that goes further then a single sensor somewhere in the middle of a frame. Maybe I'm not interested in buying a man-toy or fashion accessory, so that excludes me from discussing future Leica designs, I dunno... Not only is your bigoted and egocentric dribble an anachronism, it's also a cliche. Every troll who has the world figured out regurgitates the same mind numbingly boring crap. To the point it has me wondering if you are that same person that is continually banned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted January 15, 2014 Share #271 Posted January 15, 2014 my current fantasy next digital M body (until that one materialises it seems the M Mono is a body, long, long time satisfying my needs): - M Mono CCD sensor - please don't change a thing - more compact body (Leica M6/ MP) - re-introduction of manual advance lever cocking when using body only without Digital Leicavit - re-introduce battery + card indicator display on top deck - manual ISO selector in full stops (ISO 100,200,400,800,1600,3200,6400,A) - when selected "A" define in menu a Auto ISO program OR use specific ISO value instead (half stops, values out of range of ISO dial, etc …) - rear LCD max 2.5" with sapphire cover glass - have available finishes: black lacquer or silver chrome (via a la carte programme maybe more finishes, if desired like black chrome, black powder coating, Safari, hammer tone grey, etc …) - re-introducing different magnification finders (0.58, 0.72, 0.85) via a la carte - bring back one flash sync port on the body - accessory Digital Leicavit: adding additional battery, flash sync ports, hotshoe, motor drive for shooting without manual shutter cocking with single shot and continuous, GPS, WiFi - Leicavit could be designed in two stages - compact bare bones (size of film Leicavit with just flash sync + hotshoe and motor drive and a model with all features (and more bulk obviously) - do not forget the frame preview lever - this is an essential feature of the M - remove the bottom plate safety switch and let me operate all camera functions with the bottom plate removed (I hate to prepare my gear and have to re-attach the bottom plate for bulk formatting SD cards or syncing camera clocks - remove USB connector Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londonmember Posted January 15, 2014 Share #272 Posted January 15, 2014 I really only have one thing I dont like about the current one, that is a hang over from the M9. Very poor indication that an EV has been set. In fact I would redesign the whole viewfinder info strip as a small LCD to show ISO, EV VALUE and shutter speed continuously. I so frequently forget setting EV +/- that i now just switch to manual mode instead. It would also be nice to have a built in dioptre adjustment rather than having to spend an extra £100 on one! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lethbrp Posted January 15, 2014 Share #273 Posted January 15, 2014 I really only have one thing I dont like about the current one, that is a hang over from the M9.Very poor indication that an EV has been set. In fact I would redesign the whole viewfinder info strip as a small LCD to show ISO, EV VALUE and shutter speed continuously. I so frequently forget setting EV +/- that i now just switch to manual mode instead. It would also be nice to have a built in dioptre adjustment rather than having to spend an extra £100 on one! I totally agree. The only indication that an EV is set is a tiny flashing dot in the viewfinder. Also the front button to set it is not very convenient to use. The little M button would be easier. I also agree regarding the diopter (having bought one). Almost every other manufacturer can do this, I don't know why Leica can't. Perhaps its something that compromises ultimate quality of the viewfinder. I suspect you are an ex-DSLR user like myself, adjusting to the minimalist rangefinder world Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertekijker Posted February 10, 2014 Share #274 Posted February 10, 2014 With every new model, the M has increased a few mm in size, and gotten heavier. A digital M that: - weighs less and is - a smaller size, like the M6 for example would be my dream camera. ------------ Frans Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted February 12, 2014 Share #275 Posted February 12, 2014 Such narrow mindedness is, in my mind, more of an anachronism but I suppose it's no surprise coming from someone who calls them self silly. Buy a Sony and shut up will you? Sony's are fine cameras and should not be used to attack an unreasonable post The idea that the previous poster put forward that RFs are linked to film is clearly false. They were, and still are, an excellent idea for focusing on a plain receptor using converging parallax. I would point to the DSLR box as far more archaic and linked to the film era. Focus peaking is wonderful but is not a catchall as different levels and colours are required depending on the scene. This auto control has not been invented yet. Even if available there is no point of focus indicator, like the contrast pop supplied by the Leica system. Lastly no "fly by wire" focus system does and can probably ever match the tactile, and ultimately super fast, manual Leica M mechanism. Finally I love the idea, conceptually in use, and practically of an all manual metal lens. As this thread is about the next M and seems to have been hijacked I will end on this topic. Please keep the same battery design (up the MaH if you want). Best rgds Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brt Posted February 13, 2014 Share #276 Posted February 13, 2014 - no lockups - no SD card troubles - a lighttight bayonet - a camera working in a hot climate - a camera working in a cold climate - less cameras delivered defective - a camera attracting less dust - a sensor sporting less line defects - up to date components, i.e. EVF2 was old when Leica announced it - a faster camera; using the EVF and LV is S L O W - a hybrid finder - a user friendly placement of buttons, wheels etc. - I would not miss the outdated bottom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dant Posted February 13, 2014 Share #277 Posted February 13, 2014 my current fantasy next digital M body (until that one materialises it seems the M Mono is a body, long, long time satisfying my needs): - M Mono CCD sensor - please don't change a thing - more compact body (Leica M6/ MP) - re-introduction of manual advance lever cocking when using body only without Digital Leicavit - re-introduce battery + card indicator display on top deck - manual ISO selector in full stops (ISO 100,200,400,800,1600,3200,6400,A) - when selected "A" define in menu a Auto ISO program OR use specific ISO value instead (half stops, values out of range of ISO dial, etc …) - rear LCD max 2.5" with sapphire cover glass - have available finishes: black lacquer or silver chrome (via a la carte programme maybe more finishes, if desired like black chrome, black powder coating, Safari, hammer tone grey, etc …) - re-introducing different magnification finders (0.58, 0.72, 0.85) via a la carte - bring back one flash sync port on the body - accessory Digital Leicavit: adding additional battery, flash sync ports, hotshoe, motor drive for shooting without manual shutter cocking with single shot and continuous, GPS, WiFi - Leicavit could be designed in two stages - compact bare bones (size of film Leicavit with just flash sync + hotshoe and motor drive and a model with all features (and more bulk obviously) - do not forget the frame preview lever - this is an essential feature of the M - remove the bottom plate safety switch and let me operate all camera functions with the bottom plate removed (I hate to prepare my gear and have to re-attach the bottom plate for bulk formatting SD cards or syncing camera clocks - remove USB connector If they.came out with a 'classic edition' they could incorporate some of these suggestions. I'd prefer a 'basic' and less expensive model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted February 13, 2014 Share #278 Posted February 13, 2014 I've dipped in and out of this thread, so I hope this hasn't been said before [since when has that held anyone back?] Does the next M have to have a metal body? Suppose it was (e.g.) carbon fibre, then: - it would be much lighter - it would be better insulated and so may perform better, or for longer, in heat and cold. Just a thought, launched into the air, to be blown away by more informed minds Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffry Abt Posted February 13, 2014 Share #279 Posted February 13, 2014 1. Higher ISO capabilities ....for low light work! 2. A HDMI mini-pin connector 3. Connector for external microphone (2&3 would make the M's video capabilities useful... They could be added to the multifunctional handgrip. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted February 13, 2014 Share #280 Posted February 13, 2014 What do you want in the next digital M? A breathing space of at least 3 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.