What do you want in the next digital M?

[marchyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Assuming that you will always be carrying all your additional tools around.

 

 

Notice that one of those tools is my phone.   I'll be more likely to be without my M (or Q, or other camera) than I will be without my phone.  The phone takes pretty good video, too.

[jaapv]

I am always looking for my phone - that I put somewhere... My M is always within reach... I would be better off with an M that had phone functionality

[david strachan]

I am always looking for my phone - that I put somewhere... My M is always within reach... I would be better off with an M that had phone functionality

Exactly, would be good...

[Steve Ash]

I would love to have a M like the M-D but with connectivity to my iPhone. The connectivity to phone would give the chance to do the rare settings like clock etc and - more important - to review the images at the end of the day and transfer the images to Instagram, Dropbox or the LUF website. This would also save me from lugging my laptop around during my trips.

Steve

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[jaapv]

Wouldn't that destroy the concept of the camera? The whole idea is not to  (be able to) do that.

The argument: "then don't use your phone" is akin to the argument: "then switch off your screen".

[Steve Ash]

Wouldn't that destroy the concept of the camera? The whole idea is not to  (be able to) do that.

The argument: "then don't use your phone" is akin to the argument: "then switch off your screen".

To review the images on location would be too cumbersome. But to review the images and transfer the images to the web in the hotel without extra computer would be nice.

[marchyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To review the images on location would be too cumbersome. But to review the images and transfer the images to the web in the hotel without extra computer would be nice.

 

 

I think you can do that today -- they make memory card readers that you can plug into your phone.  Remove memory card from camera and put into reader in your hotel.  Plug reader into phone.   Something like that.  Never used one.

[IkarusJohn]

Wouldn't that destroy the concept of the camera? The whole idea is not to  (be able to) do that.

The argument: "then don't use your phone" is akin to the argument: "then switch off your screen".

 

Is that the whole idea of the camera?  I didn't realise that.  So M-D stands for M-Don't chimp?

 

Here's what Leica says the camera is about:

 

 

 

Photography in its purest form. Simplicity personified, photographers using the Leica M-D for the first time will instinctively and intuitively know how to use it. With the deliberate omission of anything but the essentials, the Leica M-D provides the greatest freedom to focus on creativity and capturing the decisive moment every time.

 

I appreciate that reducing discussion to the silliest and lowest possible denominator is entertaining, but for me, this camera isn't about not chimping - I don't chimp that much anyway (with the SL).  It's about reducing the image taking process to the bare essentials and getting rid of the irrelevant stuff - like having a stereo that doesn't have bass, mid-range and treble control, equalisers, surround sound settings or flashing lights.  Just a source and volume knob, and making the best possible sound from vinyl/CD/computer file/radio signal, to the speakers.

 

Reducing the discussion to "chimping" works at one level, but it's a bit like feeding trolls don't you think?

[Printmaker]

When Leica makes a new M with a 36 MP sensor that is quiet and of a size comparable to a M9 - certainly no larger than a M240 - I'll rearrange my gear and buy one. Until then my M9/MM/S2 serve me well.

[Peter H]

I don't agree that removing elements from a camera necessarily makes it simpler, and plenty of the proposed solutions to small problems suggest it actually can complicate matters.

 

Many of the problems I've had with Leica's most recent releases haven't been with the products themselves but with the imposdible claims Leica have been making for them.

 

I can perfectly accept that it's a valid camera to be enjoyed in its own right. I have difficulty accepting that it's a particularly "simple" camera, and I cannot accept that it represents anything like "purity".

[sblutter]

Pretty darn pure to me, at least when judged by speed of to get the exact shot you want:

 

DNG uncompressed, lens coding off (is pointless, appropriate ISO, auto SS, f: desired, meter on spot.  Grab a SS from a mid range area, lock it, focus where you want, frame - done

 

Can't be any simpler than that while maintaining full control

[jaapv]

Is that the whole idea of the camera?  I didn't realise that.  So M-D stands for M-Don't chimp?

 

Here's what Leica says the camera is about:

 

 

I appreciate that reducing discussion to the silliest and lowest possible denominator is entertaining, but for me, this camera isn't about not chimping - I don't chimp that much anyway (with the SL).  It's about reducing the image taking process to the bare essentials and getting rid of the irrelevant stuff - like having a stereo that doesn't have bass, mid-range and treble control, equalisers, surround sound settings or flashing lights.  Just a source and volume knob, and making the best possible sound from vinyl/CD/computer file/radio signal, to the speakers.

 

Reducing the discussion to "chimping" works at one level, but it's a bit like feeding trolls don't you think?

Actually you are describing my amplifier exactly... Well, it has a balance control.

[Peter H]

Pretty darn pure to me, at least when judged by speed of to get the exact shot you want:

 

DNG uncompressed, lens coding off (is pointless, appropriate ISO, auto SS, f: desired, meter on spot.  Grab a SS from a mid range area, lock it, focus where you want, frame - done

 

Can't be any simpler than that while maintaining full control

 

 

Yes, exactly what I imagine most M users do with whichever M they have.

 

It's exactly how I use my M except I have lens coding on, because I occasionally find it a little bit helpful much later on. If that is an impediment to photographic purity, my idea of photography is a very different thing from yours. But so what? It probably is anyway.

 

And this is the heart of it: it's great that we can each indulge our personal interpretations and preferences. But I'm uncomfortable with popular the habit of adopting Leica's market-lead definitions of what photography is or is about. 

 

You can feel that one approach is pure, but that must remain a subjective and personal opinion, no more or less valid than mine for example, (I know you don't claim otherwise) and Leica should, as a maker of important photographic instruments, stop meddling with subjective notions of this sort in the crass way they do.

 

It's like encouraging the notion that B&W is "purer" than colour. Just stop it Leica.

 

(I overstate all of this, but I do actually believe it!)

[lct]

Some people need to suffer to be happy. They should be delighted with the M-D .

[pop]

I, too, often overstate what I believe or believe what I overstate.

 

I think Leica's strategy is quite transparent. They have their reputation for fine optics and for special editions. One year they turn out green cameras with pink polka dots. The next year they turn out cameras which don't do colours. Then a camera with practically all settings fixed and no controls to alter them.

 

Each special edition requires a bit of special prose. Daring to be different. The directness of children. The essence of photographing. The purity of the sheep. The only requirement is to keep a straight face.

 

The prospective customers will convince themselves that this particular edition is the one thing which fits their desires. The prose is there because there has to be prose.

 

I admit that I find the M (Typ 240) desirable. I also like the colourless one and the one without the controls very much, in principle. I won't buy those because they do not particularly fit the way I photograph and I don't have the spare cash.

 

They are clever. They produce special editions nobody else dares even thinking of, and each time (well, nearly so) they find people whose genuine wishes are fulfilled by those very editions. 

[John Ricard]

If the M-D shot RAW + JPEG, it would have been a simple matter to use an Eye Fi card in the camera and transfer the JPEG files.  I understand where Jaapv is coming from but I think having the option to download the JPEGS onto a phone occasionally, wouldn't ruin the concept of the camera.  You can indeed transfer RAW files from some Eye Fi cards, but the large DNG files take quite a while to transfer.

[IkarusJohn]

I don't agree that removing elements from a camera necessarily makes it simpler, and plenty of the proposed solutions to small problems suggest it actually can complicate matters.

 

Many of the problems I've had with Leica's most recent releases haven't been with the products themselves but with the imposdible claims Leica have been making for them.

 

I can perfectly accept that it's a valid camera to be enjoyed in its own right. I have difficulty accepting that it's a particularly "simple" camera, and I cannot accept that it represents anything like "purity".

 

Peter,

 

I understand your point on "purity" - that depends on definition and what your particular preferences are.  I don't agree with it at all, but I understand the point you're making.  Some would argue that adding the features offered by the M(240) or the SL, photography is quicker, simpler and more "pure".  That hasn't been my experience.

 

But to say that the M-D is not "simpler" than the alternative M manifestations is a stretch (however qualified your statement may have been).  Leica forum users asking for this or that feature to be added or removed from every M camera is pretty much business as usual.  To say that "complicates matters" looks to me like sophistry.  Yes, adding iPhone compatibility would complicate matters, but that request doesn't mean the camera is not simple as offered.  It is the essence of simplicity for so long as setting sensor sensitivity, aperture, shutter speed, focus and framing is a requirement for photography.  Provided you set those appropriately, not one of the features omitted from the M-D is required for capturing an image - that is the essence of purity and simplicity; whether or not that makes photography harder or you have to think more it another issue entirely.

 

I did think about iPhone connectivity for making adjustments to the camera's settings, and the ability to add the EVF.  

 

On the first, I realised that there wasn't a setting I would need to change after I'd set the date.  All my lenses are coded, but one and I have to make adjustments for that lens anyway (I would set up a profile for it if I used it a lot, knew how and wasn't so lazy).  

 

As for the EVF, I could see the benefits if the EVF was up to an appropriate quality, primarily for framing lenses wider than 28 (of which I have two) or longer than 90 (of which I have one).  But when I thought about it, I was rather pleased that this was not an option.  The camera is a rangefinder, and I don't want anything more on it.  The M60 is primarily a camera I use only with the supplied 35 Summilux.  If I want to, I will use the 28 or 50-75-90.  Beyond that, it becomes something complicated that I don't want for this camera - it's a rangefinder, and that is best for me with the 28-35-50-75-90 lenses I have.  If I want to use other lenses or additional functionality, I will use the SL - it's better at all that, and I will accept its greater complication and slightly bigger size for those benefits.

 

If I was happy just in the 28-90 range (where most of my photography is) then I would be happy with just the M60 - there is nothing the other cameras offer which I would want or need.  Optical rangefinder, fabulous lenses, excellent sensor and 4 adjustments - simple, and yes, pure.

 

But, the Monochrom offers fantastic resolution and I still like the discipline (crippled if you prefer) of black & white.  The SL offers weather sealing, zooms, AF, IS and lens options limited only by size and the depth of your pockets.  So, I have more than one camera because I have GAS, I don't like anyone's efforts at providing a camera that does everything.  When I want life to be really difficult, I use my SWC - the camera is totally pure in its functionality and simple in its operation; getting a good picture from it, however, can be difficult, and balancing the lack of dynamic range of slide film, the lack of focusing aids, lack of anything but vague guidance on framing and total lack of any metering is a challenge.  I'm also stuck with one ISO setting for an entire 12 frames and I need to develop and scan before I can process; but, a good result is very rewarding.

 

Part of the reason why the M(240) doesn't appeal is that it lacked the purity of purpose of a rangefinder because it offered so much more; and when compared to other cameras with similar functionality, those additional features weren't as good.  So, by offering more (despite the fact that you didn't have to use them or you could turn them off) diluted the traditional strengths of an M camera with an optical viewfinder.  It was no longer simple, with a purity of purpose revolving around the optical view finder.  This may seem odd, as the M(240) offers exactly the functionality of the M-D and M60; but it offers more, and that dilutes its purity and makes it less simple (in ways which for me are not a positive addition).

 

The M-D and M60 have that purity of purpose, and by reducing inputs in the image taking process, they are simpler (and the M-A even more so).  Taking a picture might not be simpler, but as I say, that is another issue.

 

I must say I find it strange some posters saying that removing the LCD from the M(240) "crippling", when the optical rangefinder with manual focus lenses imposes limitations of its own.  If you want all that electronic jiggery pokery, the SL does it so much better and isn't that much bigger.  But then, that is just my opinion ...

 

Cheers

John

 

PS - I've just seen how long this post is.  My apologies - I don't have the time to edit it, and I understand if people don't have the time to read it..

[Peter H]

Peter,............................

 

But to say that the M-D is not "simpler" than the alternative M manifestations is a stretch (however qualified your statement may have been).  ...........................

 

 

I can see your point of view, but I don't quite share it.

 

The crux of the matter is that "Simplicity" is a personal quality: it depends on how you use a camera. Just one example: If you need to check your images as you go along, even just from time to time, a screen on the back of the camera simplifies life for you.

 

The whole argument about whether you need to check your images is a separate question. It's a question in which all sorts of value judgements about style, expertise, and other personal perspectives get dragged in all the time. So my point is that if the M-D suits your personal style, great, it makes things simpler for you.  If it doesn't, and if it requires other work-arounds like an external screen, iPhone or whatever,  it could make life less simple and thus more complicated for you.

 

But there is nothing objectively and indisputably simpler (and absolutely not purer)  about it just because it suits one person's photographic style better then another's, and has fewer knobs that might be useful knobs to someone else.

[pop]

...

The crux of the matter is that "Simplicity" is a personal quality: it depends on how you use a camera.

...

I think that's the difference in your POV from John's.

 

I think John says that a device having fewer functions is a simpler device. You, OTOH, appear to be saying that a simpler device does not automatically make working with the device simpler.

 

I don't think you can argue with the technical side of the argument. How the complexity or simplicity of a device affects the user working with the device is - again IMO - up to the user and his habits.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[IkarusJohn]

I'm not so sure thar simplicity is subjective.