lct Posted January 28, 2014 Share #61 Posted January 28, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Back LCDs are useful but can be distracting as well. Good to be able to forget them like with the R-D1. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 28, 2014 Posted January 28, 2014 Hi lct, Take a look here A digital M6. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
zlatkob Posted January 28, 2014 Share #62 Posted January 28, 2014 How often do you change your settings, anyway, and what kind of setting did HCB need to change frequently during his outings,which have not been allowed by the TO? If he were working in the digital era, a world traveler like HCB would have been changing time zones. He might have to synchronize the times on his cameras. Working on a short deadline, he might want to choose jpeg + raw and adjust contrast settings based on the weather and the light that day or that hour, etc. These might not be frequent changes, but it certainly is simplest to do those things in-camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted January 28, 2014 Share #63 Posted January 28, 2014 No, it's not. Not in this thread. the point was to have a digital M6. Not a smart phone with a lens. Someone with a little bit of skill don't need to chimp ever single photo. If you're using your camera on assignment, may I suggest you don't consider this camera? Or better still, use a camera that most photographers on assignment where you need to work fast and have all the bells and whistles; a digital SLR? This camera doesn't exist. But if it ever does, I'll be sure not to choose it. No one suggested they need to "chimp every single photo" — that's not a factor. The smart phone with a lens wasn't my idea. The smart phone came into this conversation as a way to make a "digital M6" more functional, given that it lacked a monitor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 28, 2014 Share #64 Posted January 28, 2014 If he were working in the digital era, a world traveler like HCB would have been changing time zones. He might have to synchronize the times on his cameras. Working on a short deadline, he might want to choose jpeg + raw and adjust contrast settings based on the weather and the light that day or that hour, etc. These might not be frequent changes, but it certainly is simplest to do those things in-camera. But HBC did not work in the digital age. Why introduce such a posit? He was also casual regarding his exposures, leaving the difficulties to the printer. Sent from my DEC Alpha 4000. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 28, 2014 Share #65 Posted January 28, 2014 Well, that Sony is extremely un-Leica-like and un-film-like. It may be a lot of fun otherwise.. If a person wants a film-like camera then he can use a film camera. Given the price of a digital M one can hire out a lot of processing, or do it himself. Sent from my DEC Alpha 4000. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJH Posted January 28, 2014 Share #66 Posted January 28, 2014 It is obvious of course that for now Leica has the minimalist base covered with the MP, it doesn't seem to make much sense for them to develop a digital MP that would likely only take sales away from their own film MP. I don't think the likely low demand is the problem but the fact that I just can't see how such a camera could make any kind of commercial sense for the company, can anyone see anyway in which it would grow Leica's sales overall? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jank Posted January 28, 2014 Share #67 Posted January 28, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Whole argument seems to be just about at what point the image is digitized, i.e. where the A/D processing should happen. 1/ Should we start with film M, with original M6, then A/D process is shifted to perhaps very high quality Scanner , the A/D processor. It ends up with digital representation. 2/ Should the sensor A/D processor be shifted to M6 ( digital version) then much more primitive digital circuitry is employed for digitalization of the image. The limiting factor is complexity, power consumption, size ( need for batteries) and many other. But it all ends up with a digital representation of the image. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 28, 2014 Share #68 Posted January 28, 2014 It is obvious of course that for now Leica has the minimalist base covered with the MP, it doesn't seem to make much sense for them to develop a digital MP that would likely only take sales away from their own film MP. I don't think the likely low demand is the problem but the fact that I just can't see how such a camera could make any kind of commercial sense for the company, can anyone see anyway in which it would grow Leica's sales overall? I cannot fathom why anyone would buy an MP when functional equivalent Leica's are commonplace. MP is a fancy downgrade. Downgrade an existing digital Leica? Insanely risky, neigh impossible to succeed . Sent from my DEC Alpha 4000. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geotrupede Posted January 28, 2014 Share #69 Posted January 28, 2014 Look at how many comments. Seems an exciting concept. At least everybody seems to have an opinion and if so there might be potential buyers. Going to the point, I like the idea, and I think that with a good WIFI transmitted in the camera you could use all sort of gadgets to display a preview. Another thing is that you could have a HDMI plug for video and a small bracket to allow connection. Question would be about size and specifically at the difference between film, which is a rather slim medium and a sensor with pins and motherboard. Functions, like ISO, speed, f and shutter are ok, but then it would be odd without menus to set time / date / format a card, etc. But again with a good wifi... Look at the gopro app on the iPhone for an example. G PS let's make it cheaper than the ME and let's see.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted January 28, 2014 Share #70 Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) It is obvious of course that for now Leica has the minimalist base covered with the MP, it doesn't seem to make much sense for them to develop a digital MP that would likely only take sales away from their own film MP. I don't think the likely low demand is the problem but the fact that I just can't see how such a camera could make any kind of commercial sense for the company, can anyone see anyway in which it would grow Leica's sales overall? I agree. Let's go back to the problems raised by the original post: the M240 is thicker and heavier than the M6. This is a problem of the the current technology. The solution to such a problem isn't to take technology (such as the LCD) away, but to improve it. For example, Nikon & Canon responded to the problem of electronics being sensitive to moisture by developing better sealed cameras & lenses. Sony responded to the problem of full frame cameras being too big by making smaller full frame cameras. Panasonic responded to the problem of laptops being too sensitive for some work environments by developing their line of rugged Toughbooks. Apple responded to the problems of computers & phones being too complex by improving the user interface. Even Leica responded to the problem of the easily scratched LCD by introducing tougher glass. Other manufacturers have offered a flip out LCD that can flipped to a closed & protected position. In each case, the solution was not to take technology away, or to go backwards to a simpler technology (e.g. laptop to typewriter). Instead, the solution was to improve & refine the existing technology. I imagine and hope that the digital M6 — in size, weight, thickness, toughness, minimalism, etc. — can be achieved at some point by improvements in technology rather than by elimination of technology. Edited January 28, 2014 by zlatkob 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted January 28, 2014 Share #71 Posted January 28, 2014 Fot those who think that a displayless digital camera is something unheard of which is perfectly unusable and with absolutely no chance in the market: google for Sony DSC-QX10 Has that one been successful in the marketplace, I wonder? As it happens I have got a QX10 – everyone who attended Sony’s press conference at IFA walked away with one. At first I had thought it was a fun idea, but in the end it was a disappointment. The app is severely limited in functionality, compared to the camera the QX10 was derived from, and with the irritating lag of the display it is indeed just barely usable. There is an upgrade in the works that might improve things, but so far I don’t see myself actually using it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted January 28, 2014 Share #72 Posted January 28, 2014 I couldn't agree more about the size and the feeling in the hands as well as the sound of the M6 and I would certainly buy your M6D ( although I preferred an M4 above an M6 in terms of sturdiness, but that's beside your essential point). One specification though: I would prefer the M6TTL above earlier versions because of the shutterdial and the leds inside. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 28, 2014 Share #73 Posted January 28, 2014 Has that one been successful in the marketplace, I wonder? As it happens I have got a QX10 – everyone who attended Sony’s press conference at IFA walked away with one. At first I had thought it was a fun idea, but in the end it was a disappointment. The app is severely limited in functionality, compared to the camera the QX10 was derived from, and with the irritating lag of the display it is indeed just barely usable. There is an upgrade in the works that might improve things, but so far I don’t see myself actually using it. If it was any kind of success, I'd be much surprised. I brought it into the discussion because there was doubt as to whether any camera maker would dare offering a displayless camera. I had it in my hands in the super market and I found it terribly funny. After a few seconds of reflection I put it back. Now had there been a decent VF or even an RF, I'd have taken more time to decide. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 28, 2014 Share #74 Posted January 28, 2014 Let's go back to the problems raised by the original post: the M240 is thicker and heavier than the M6. Heavier? Are you. Wimp? Sent from my DEC Alpha 4000. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted January 28, 2014 Share #75 Posted January 28, 2014 Boy, you seem eager to insult everyone tonight! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 28, 2014 Share #76 Posted January 28, 2014 Heavier? Are you. Wimp? It's not as if the camera body was the only object I'd be carrying. Even if it was, a small difference in weight can make itself felt after some time. Ask anyone with back problems, perhaps someone who just happened to fall off a bike or some such. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 28, 2014 Share #77 Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) It's not as if the camera body was the only object I'd be carrying. Even if it was, a small difference in weight can make itself felt after some time. Ask anyone with back problems, perhaps someone who just happened to fall off a bike or some such. My friend (if I my presume) I have a long history of spinal issues. I apologize if I have diminished the extent of our issue. Sent from my DEC Alpha 4000. Edited January 28, 2014 by pico Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 28, 2014 Share #78 Posted January 28, 2014 You don't presume at all. I'm not offended as I was also trying to pull your leg which is easy to do when the victim is sitting on a tall pony. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJH Posted January 28, 2014 Share #79 Posted January 28, 2014 I imagine and hope that the digital M6 — in size, weight, thickness, toughness, minimalism, etc. — can be achieved at some point by improvements in technology rather than by elimination of technology. Agree 100% with that and Leica must surely be thinking along such lines otherwise their digital M system will be loosing one of its key differentiators. The current M is already so heavy that really its not that much more weight for a Canon 6D, 24, 40 pancake and 85 compared to the similar kit made with Leica components. This is what makes me laugh when guys on here say stuff about an M with a grip only being a bit heavier than the older cameras well yes that is true but so is a 6D or a Df. With that EVF stuck on the top its even starting to look like one of those things as well. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted January 28, 2014 Share #80 Posted January 28, 2014 Umm, how does a histogram show up in an optical viewfinder? You are asking for an EVF. No, I'm not. That is your conclusion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.