jaapv Posted February 25, 2015 Share #821 Posted February 25, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I disagree about your focusing remark, Wilson. I even get unproblematic focusing on considersbly longer lenses with the EVF, better than most SLRs actually. It is a matter of practice and tricks, my favorite one being to identify a structured area like grass in the same plane of focus as the subject and "walk" the focus into place using the structure. It is no different than a rangefinder, really, one must find something circumscript to focus on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Hi jaapv, Take a look here What do you want in the next digital M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wlaidlaw Posted February 25, 2015 Share #822 Posted February 25, 2015 I disagree about your focusing remark, Wilson. I even get unproblematic focusing on considersbly longer lenses with the EVF, better than most SLRs actually. It is a matter of practice and tricks, my favorite one being to identify a structured area like grass in the same plane of focus as the subject and "walk" the focus into place using the structure.It is no different than a rangefinder, really, one must find something circumscript to focus on. Jaap, I just find it not a very quick process and in the absence of split image or micro prisms, the point of maximum sharpness on the EVF is a matter of a fine judgement. This especially applies on a telephoto lens where the margin of error is very small, meaning you have to "hunt" backwards and forwards a few times to be sure you are at the point of maximum sharpness and hand holding and/or moving subjects makes it that much more difficult. Now I have not tried it since having my cataracts done in December, together with laser correction and I may be better at it now. However, for very long lenses over 400mm, especially with moving subjects or from moving vehicles, this is the only time I actually like auto focus. The better VF4 EVF on my Olympus EP-5 (over double the number of pixels and a larger screen compared with the EVF-2) makes a noticeable improvement in the ease of manual focusing for long lenses. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcbo Posted February 27, 2015 Share #823 Posted February 27, 2015 I think it is time for a complete redesigned M, feeling better in the hand (thinner), but more importantly MODULAR in design like the Hasselblad so that you don't have to buy an entire "system" every 4 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted February 27, 2015 Share #824 Posted February 27, 2015 I think it is time for a complete redesigned M, feeling better in the hand (thinner), but more importantly MODULAR in design like the Hasselblad so that you don't have to buy an entire "system" every 4 years. It is already modular. Body can be matched to any lens. Lenses will last more than 4 years, I hope. (sorry, it is Friday here). :) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted February 28, 2015 Share #825 Posted February 28, 2015 Seems to me the bottom line here is that nobody will ever build a camera that makes everyone happy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted March 2, 2015 Share #826 Posted March 2, 2015 The R.I.P. phone manufacturers used to say the same before the iPhone was released.Granted, their products were crap. But simplicity was and still is the key factor in Apple's products. Apple and Leica share a similar philosophy. Indeed this quote from Steve Jobs rings true for Leica as well: "Look at the design of a lot of consumer products — they're really complicated surfaces. We tried to make something much more holistic and simple. When you first start off trying to solve a problem, the first solutions you come up with are very complex, and most people stop there. But if you keep going, and live with the problem and peel more layers of the onion off, you can often times arrive at some very elegant and simple solutions. Most people just don't put in the time or energy to get there. We believe that customers are smart, and want objects which are well thought through." Except for one important difference. Apple started as a company in a garage that was providing affordable computers to hobbyists in an age of expensive mainframes. That is rather like Leica's history in terms of providing a small compact camera in an era of large format. However the difference is the idea of the first Apple computer was not merely that it was small and more usable, but also that it was affordable for regular people. Apple's philosophy is that you shouldn't need to be rich to be able to have the best. Apple's philosophy is that perfection should be affordable for regular people. And this is why the brand is so universally loved. If Apple was Leica, they would put a lot of effort into retaining the design and technical quality while trying to bring the price down to Canon/Nikon levels (Though Apple doesn't have magic they tend to achieve this by lowering quality control, note how full the Genius Bar is). Leica is happy to stick to the high end/luxury market. Perfection at any price. Ohh and in terms of the original question 'What do you want in the next digital M?' There is little the Leica M has not got right, however it needs a better sensor. Better High ISO performance (Canon bodies these days, you can get usable shots at ISO 12800). And higher resolution, lenses like the 50mm APO would have no issue providing enough detail for a 36MP or even 50MP sensor. The current 24MP sensor is not delivering on what the lenses are capable of. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 2, 2015 Share #827 Posted March 2, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) After almost 30 years of use i don't recall Apple bringing prices down to its competitors but i may be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnfell Posted March 2, 2015 Share #828 Posted March 2, 2015 I want a bug free M9 with a choice of sensors: either a ultra high resolution version or a or a high iso version. Perhaps even a monchrom version if they feel so inclined. And how about making them factory interchangeable/replaceable? (Leica should have pretty solid expertise in sensor swaps by now.) I know it is utopian but, you asked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted March 2, 2015 Share #829 Posted March 2, 2015 After almost 30 years of use i don't recall Apple bringing prices down to its competitors but i may be wrong. Well. Their premium over competitors is generally rather mild given the brand name and product quality, usually no more than 20%. They are careful to not price themselves out of the high volume mainstream. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 2, 2015 Share #830 Posted March 2, 2015 Keyword: High Volume. I don't think we can apply that to Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcbo Posted March 3, 2015 Share #831 Posted March 3, 2015 I think that for a viable future the M should become modular so that the mechanical part, which is less prone to technology changes, is separated from the parts which are in constant progress. This way we don't need to spend all that money on a completely new M every 4 years Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 3, 2015 Share #832 Posted March 3, 2015 I think that for a viable future the M should become modular so that the mechanical part, which is less prone to technology changes, is separated from the parts which are in constant progress. This way we don't need to spend all that money on a completely new M every 4 years It is unlikely to happen and, besides, the digital body can be seen as the 'disposable' part of the modular system. Keep the lenses, change the body when it no longer does what it is meant to do or Leica no longer provide support (which, in both cases, is much longer than most people actually choose to keep their M body). We might complain about the lack of longevity of the digital bodies but there are, in fact, very few people who have actually been caught out in the sense that they have an M body that they want to continue using but cannot for whatever reason. Even the M8 LCD fiasco only really affected the small minority of cases where an M8 suffered total LCD failure – the more common "coffee stain" being essentially an annoying cosmetic problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted March 5, 2015 Share #833 Posted March 5, 2015 I think that for a viable future the M should become modular so that the mechanical part, which is less prone to technology changes, is separated from the parts which are in constant progress. This way we don't need to spend all that money on a completely new M every 4 years A mechanism for a removable sensor and associated circuitry is difficult to achieve in a device in which size and weight is at a premium. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 6, 2015 Author Share #834 Posted March 6, 2015 A mechanism for a removable sensor and associated circuitry is difficult to achieve in a device in which size and weight is at a premium. Not necessarily. Leica specifies the electronics to fit the camera. At its simplest, they simply need to maintain a supply, and ensure that all future iterations and upgrades maintain the same dimensions. Sure, the electronics aren't cheap, and dismantling the camera takes some skill, but they're doing that already. To my mind, a company which can squeeze a full frame sensor into an M body can do anything! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayewing Posted March 6, 2015 Share #835 Posted March 6, 2015 The nearest to a modular Leica was the Ricoh GXR with the M mount. Unfortunately development of the system has been abandoned presumably because it proved to be unprofitable. The system consisted of a camera back containing the LCD, controls,battery and clip-on EVF and a number of modules containing the sensor and lens. The M module was the exception consisting of a sensor specially designed for rangefinder lenses and the M mount to take rangefinder lenses. Presumably a similar system incorporating a rangefinder back could be devised though there would be difficulty making it sufficiently compact and commercially it might in the long run result in fewer camera body sales. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted March 6, 2015 Share #836 Posted March 6, 2015 When you buy a camera, what you pay is not much the cost of the components. You pay for engineering, marketing, and brand name (especially if it is a Leica). Customers are expecting to pay much less than a full camera just for a new "sensor". But in reality, a new sensor usually requires a huge hardware and software re-engineering effort. Something that marketing has problems making customers understand. So why should a company sell only sensor modules for $X in a world where customers are willing to buy it for for $X*3 inside a cheap enclosure that marketing boasts as "the new amazing Leica M360 camera" ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 6, 2015 Share #837 Posted March 6, 2015 High-end cameras have little reason to sell for low or middle-end prices i'm afraid. There will still be more affordable M-E bodies hopefully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 6, 2015 Author Share #838 Posted March 6, 2015 Theres a distinction to be made between modular sensors (which is apparently unrealistic) and being able to replace and ungraded sensors. The M body hasn't really changed form that much since the M3. If Leica could standardise the body form, I can see no reason why future electronic developments (sensors and processors with better dynamic range etc) could not be specified to fit the available space. I'm not talking about huge MP, just improved development. If Sony can produce three different sensor versions of the A7, why can't Leica. The trick is to justify the beauty and cost of the body by allowing us to potentially continually replace sensors in the same body. I'd have been a lot happier if my M9 had been able to take Leica's latest sensor offering rather than ditching it because of some crappy electronics failure. I'm sure that there are lots of very good reasons for why this is impossible/uneconomic/stupid. But consider this, how smart is it offering very expensive cameras that few people actually understand that are let down by cheap electronics? M8 coffee stain, M9 sensor, M(240) EVF and lock-ups etc. Speaking entirely personally, if I've spent $10,000 on a camera body and bought into a system, I will pay to keep that camera going. Why wouldn't I? The M9 took pictures as good as I would want. Sure, there will always be newer and better, but why can't I keep repairing and upgrading my very expensive paperweight to keep it going, and to instal upgraded sensors and other disposable bits which have been improved. I'm not saying upgrade from 18MP to 50MP (though I'm sure there are many who would like that). I'm saying same MP but glass that properly filters IR, doesn't crack, doesn't corrode, doesn't band at high ISO and long exposure, has better dynamic range, or high ISO, or even few MP (eg, the A7S). Despite my dislike of the A7, I do think Sony have a point. My M60 will become a paperweight before I'm ready, and it will be let down by some piece of crap that can't/won't be repaired. That piece of crap shouldn't be in there because it is inconsistent with the beautiful package it comes in. The M-A is the best Leica on the market at the moment. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piblondin Posted March 6, 2015 Share #839 Posted March 6, 2015 Yes, I think the iPhone would have sold a little more if it had a more grippy design. Remember the original iPhone 4 antenna issue ? That was because aesthetics was given priority over functionality. Several people went Android because of that. And I chose Apple. I still use my 4S now and then. I think it's the best looking of all the iPhones, and that matters to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted March 6, 2015 Share #840 Posted March 6, 2015 I want this camera, but I want it made by Leica. Digital Rangefinder | Konost Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.