What do you want in the next digital M?

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Would be amazing if they could somehow give us a decent flash system and a faster sync speed.

[ModernMan]

First, the design team must be given the charter to design simply the most effective photographic tool passible for use with M lenses. To create that, here's my top 10 list of what I think the design team needs to incorporate:

 

1 State of the art (or at least state-of-the-market) EVF built in, and then...

2 Improve the EVF focus assessment until it is as (or more) effective than the optical coincidence rangefinder: make the focus peaking work, first make it work decently then make it great, and then add focus confirmation by contrast and/or phase detection. Then..

3 Get rid of the optical coincidence range/viewfinder,

4 Make a deal with Sony to get their image sensors (the camera will be premium priced so why settle for less than the best image sensor available?)

5 In-body-image-stabilization

6 Sensor self-cleaning

7 Serious firmware quality improvements. The firmware design and development has to be brought in house. This has to become a Leica core competence since the design of the software is so essential to the design of the camera.

8 Faster start-up (2 seconds is a feeble effort)

9 Dispense with the M3 form factor making it no larger than it need to be, and starting with a blank sheet design it (both the physical camera and the firmware) with superlative ergonomics, with usability the top priority. This naturally includes sensible access to the sd card and battery -- the bottom plate concept is ridiculous

10 And of course all the "permission to play" design items: fast frame rate, better battery life, perhaps an articulated LCD, quiet shutter, GPS, WIFI, Bluetooth...

 

 

I've enjoyed using Leica's for a lot of years (since my IIIa with SCNOO winder and Summar, which was quite a bit smaller than my M's). I like the Leica glass, the absence of bloated lens mechanics and other Leica qualities. I was fine with the optical coincidence rangefinder when it was the best technology for the job, but that time is, I think, over.

 

I like the M240 because it illustrates how useful a great Leica EVF would be. But form follows function, and the M240 feels to me like it was formed as a tribute to a 60 year old design.

 

I don't need a tool for digital re-enacment of my joyful M shooting experiences 40 years ago. What I do need is Leica to apply their full undiluted attention to designing the most effective photographic tool possible for use with M lenses.

[jdsheepdog]

I don't need a tool for digital re-enacment of my joyful M shooting experiences 40 years ago.

 

Ummmm, so what you want is like this, sort of.

http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com:

[jaapv]

Here is what I really want to see in the next M

 

A small detonator built inside the body to automatically explode in the face of anyone that wants an articulating screen ,GPS , and Bluetooth in their next M

It is already implemented in the M240 - it will activate as soon as the next M comes out.

[NZDavid]

No gimmicks. Main thing would be a big, clear optical viewfinder with a big rangefinder patch. Like the M3, or the Zeiss Ikon rangefinder is reported to have.

 

Why the unnecessary use of the f-word?

 

Yes, totally gratuitous use of the word "fortune".

[jaapv]

Just buy a spare red dot and stick it on one of he multi gimmick wonders that are available

First, the design team must be given the charter to design simply the most effective photographic tool passible for use with M lenses. To create that, here's my top 10 list of what I think the design team needs to incorporate:

 

1 State of the art (or at least state-of-the-market) EVF built in, and then...

2 Improve the EVF focus assessment until it is as (or more) effective than the optical coincidence rangefinder: make the focus peaking work, first make it work decently then make it great, and then add focus confirmation by contrast and/or phase detection. Then..

3 Get rid of the optical coincidence range/viewfinder,

4 Make a deal with Sony to get their image sensors (the camera will be premium priced so why settle for less than the best image sensor available?)

5 In-body-image-stabilization

6 Sensor self-cleaning

7 Serious firmware quality improvements. The firmware design and development has to be brought in house. This has to become a Leica core competence since the design of the software is so essential to the design of the camera.

8 Faster start-up (2 seconds is a feeble effort)

9 Dispense with the M3 form factor making it no larger than it need to be, and starting with a blank sheet design it (both the physical camera and the firmware) with superlative ergonomics, with usability the top priority. This naturally includes sensible access to the sd card and battery -- the bottom plate concept is ridiculous

10 And of course all the "permission to play" design items: fast frame rate, better battery life, perhaps an articulated LCD, quiet shutter, GPS, WIFI, Bluetooth...

 

 

I've enjoyed using Leica's for a lot of years (since my IIIa with SCNOO winder and Summar, which was quite a bit smaller than my M's). I like the Leica glass, the absence of bloated lens mechanics and other Leica qualities. I was fine with the optical coincidence rangefinder when it was the best technology for the job, but that time is, I think, over.

 

I like the M240 because it illustrates how useful a great Leica EVF would be. But form follows function, and the M240 feels to me like it was formed as a tribute to a 60 year old design.

 

I don't need a tool for digital re-enacment of my joyful M shooting experiences 40 years ago. What I do need is Leica to apply their full undiluted attention to designing the most effective photographic tool possible for use with M lenses.

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wonder if a decent flash system could be built from reading the focus distance from the position of the rangefinder arm in conjunction with lens coding....

[Guest jvansmit]

- stiffer speed dial with a detent at Auto (for changing shutter speed by feel at night)

- easier to read ISO selection (like the array on M8/M9/MM)

- faster on the fly +/- exposure compensation

- delete movie button

- delete large red Leica logo

- faster start-up

- programmable front button

- an old-fashioned shutter re-cock lever

- an EVF that looked as beautiful as a Leicameter !

[menos I M6]

I am actually really surprised by the many mentions about:

 

- smaller form factor (back to M6/ MP dimensions)

- less gimmicks

- external ISO dial

- no movie function

- no external EVF

- smaller screen (even no screen was contemplated a few times)

 

I thought, that such people, who would want these points above accomplished in a new M would be too rare indeed (these are EXACTLY the points, I would want the M to include again, since the first time, I handled a M8).

 

my dream list:

 

- size of M6 classic/MP

 

- speed dial with end stops for faster setting (as classic Leica speed dials)

 

- speeds: 1s - 1/4000 + A only on the dial (people who have the time for a tripod can elaborate with extensive additional functions including "B", long time exposures and activating self timer via menu system (see the self timer activation with Leica S via menu)

 

- external mechanical ISO dial with 1 stop click stops only (ISO 100 − 6400 + A)

 

- bring back the Leica M7 on/off switch with a STRONG detent (no more accidental switching to different drive modes, no more fiddling, despite never using continuous or self timer)

 

- bring back the battery meter and card indicator on top deck (Leica M8, bonus: relocate to M3 - M7 film counter window)

 

- shutter re-cocking via M3/M2/MP style advance lever (same feel as film body under load, single stroke with slightly shorter travel than film M)

 

- introduce Leicavit that adds: motorised shutter cocking, continuous mode including truly fast frames, GPS, second memory card slot, additional flash sync/ remote release, additional ISO hot shoe under a cap for radio triggers, additional vertical shutter release with interlock

 

- increase the flash sync speed (what about an industry first of providing a true high speed syncing focal plane shutter, faster then the competition ?)

 

- re-introduce optional different finder magnification including a true 1:1 finder (finally settling the discussion of which M finder is the best finder for 50mm lenses)

 

- offer finder body in magnifications of: 0.58, 0.72, 1.0 or EVF

 

- re-introduce black lacquer finish optionally (same as Leica M8.2 and MP BP)

 

- re-introduce Vulcanite

[Steve Ash]

Here is what I really want to see in the next M

 

A small detonator built inside the body to automatically explode in the face of anyone that wants an articulating screen ,GPS , and Bluetooth in their next M

 

... or requests to remove the rangefinder

[elmars]

[quote name=j

- an EVF that looked as beautiful as a Leicameter ![/quote]

 

+++

The EVF is ugly.

 

Elmar

[enigmart]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

... please bring the photo counter back ...

 

philipp

[mwilliamsphotography]

I've increasing become confused regarding whom a M camera is made for (?).

 

I've owned and used every standard production iteration of the M since the M4. I went along with the M8, just happy they even started thinking digital. The M9 was a natural progression of the traditional rangefinder to full frame ... a place where technological advancements were necessary to do so.

 

IMO, the M9 produced the most evolutionary step from the Leica look established in the film era. There was at least some consistency of how the M lenses rendered color and contrast. Strikingly different look and feel from all the other cameras out there.

 

Now consumer centric technology seems to be the driving force ... adding lesser used do-dads that now dictate the form of the M camera. To add these consumer centric abilities required moving to the CMOS sensor ... making the camera larger ... adding even more stuff ... while contributing nothing to the distinctive rendering of all previous Ms, film or digital ...and IMO, homogenizing it with other CMOS cameras.

 

Not that I hate things like CMOS, live view, clip on EVF, and movie modes ... I hate them on the M.

 

The camera is barely shipping, and the EVF is predictably outdated and antiquated ... other than checking lenses, who uses live-view to do work with a rangefinder? Who would shoot serious video when so many other far more advanced options are available? Those are highly specialized do-dads a few rangefinder photographers may use occasionally, but wouldn't miss if they were never added.

 

So, my answer to the next M question is ... make a dedicated rangefinder ... again.

 

Install the next level of CCD. Put the new M rangefinder in it. Offer Black or Silver Chrome. Put a decent LCD on it. Better power management. Make it smaller like a M6 or MP ...

 

In short, make a sleek lean thoroughbred M rangefinder ... not a lumbering awkward electronic-camel.

 

Then make a M mount e- camel with a built-in EVF, Video, Touch Screen, GPS, Wifi, Social Media buttons, and a live person SOS button to connect the user with a real person who'll tell you how to take the photo. The well healed gamers and techno-snappers WILL LOVE IT! Charge $10,000 for it so the real M rangefinder can be priced more resonably.

 

Darned good thing they made the MM is all I can say.

 

- Marc

[Guest Emile de Leon]

Leica should just buy up all the A7r stock they can get their hands on...

And take the guts out and stuff into their new model..the new Leica M 343.5769...

Bring the price up a couple of K to cover the costs..

And they are in business..

Maybe an add on would be nice too..

A couple of tiny lil rocket jets..located right in the baseplate..that when ignited by the special Leica remote control..jettisons the cam right out of my camera bag..right into my wealthy waiting hands..

[JimKasson]

There are two directions to go, and they are incompatible:

 

 

• The best delivery system for the simple rangefinder experience.
  
• The best camera using the existing line of Leica M lenses.
  

 

One camera can't be both, IMHO.

 

Jim

[Ecar]

There are two directions to go, and they are incompatible:

 

 

• The best delivery system for the simple rangefinder experience.
  
• The best camera using the existing line of Leica M lenses.
  

One camera can't be both, IMHO.

 

Jim

Not sure Leica will be able to compete for long on option 2 (if "best camera" means "most technologically advanced"). This leaves the first direction as the most sensible one (fingers crossed).

[tobey bilek]

I want a simple basic M like the M9P, no cheap paint and a better processor and 36 MP like my Nikon. Put the USB back on.

 

Leave off video and all the rest. Basic no frill camera that does what a RF camera does and does it well . Basically a MP that is digital

 

FiIX FIRMWARE SO A DEAD PIXEL DOES NOT MAKE A LINE AND REQUIRE A TRIP TO BE REPAIRED LIKE EVERY OTHER CAMERA HAS. One Nikon D200 has one dead px I just clone out and it only shows up at 400 or higher which I never use.

 

I know I`ll never see it. May look for a ME.

 

.

[JimKasson]

Not sure Leica will be able to compete for long on option 2 (if "best camera" means "most technologically advanced").

 

Here's my list of features for a "best" camera for M lenses.

 

 

• Accurate focusing at all focal lengths.
  
• Accurate framing at all distances.
  
• Accurate presentation of intra-scene geometry (if it's lined up in the finder, it's lined up in the shot).
  
• Fast operation.
  
• Sensor that can take full advantage of all the resolution the lenses can deliver over a broad range of light levels.
  
• Direct, no-menu, access to frequently-used functions.
  
• And, admittedly a personal idiosyncrasy of mine, both eye and waist-level operation.
  

 

Jim

[algrove]

Not one suggestion of a simple but effective diopter adjustment incorporated into the VF? We are all getting older.

 

A "P" model of the M which looks nearly like the Monochrom.

 

By the time we get what we desire, probably 60MP will be de rigueur, but half that would please me just fine.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[JimKasson]

Here's a far-out thought about a "get the most of out of the M lenses" camera. A 36x36mm sensor and an aspect ratio control like the D4, so you could have:

 

36x24mm (35mm hor)

24x36mm (35mm vert)

33.08x27.4mm (8x10 hor)

27.4x33.08 (8x10 hor)

30.6x30.6mm (square)

36mmx36mm (crop in post)

 

All within the M lens imaging circle, except for the last one.

 

Compromises weight...

 

Jim