Paul J Posted January 29, 2014 Share #101 Posted January 29, 2014 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I would love this camera, more an M3 sort of deal, but I don't feel the rest of the world shares my enthusiasm for it. I don't think the M9-P is far from it and there is obviously a reason why Leica have moved away from old school simplicity. I know many long time photographers that can't be bothered with an M9 because it is too manual and basic. They want a dSLR that is autofocus and a range of auto exposures options and 9.9/10 people want an LCD. I would love a camera without it bout its not going to happen any time soon unless you commission Leica to make it yourself and have the money to do it. Worst of all, when you take away all this automation away, it's not only is still easy to use but better, IMO. It's just marketing and peoples fear for missing the shot. There are we freaks, the niche of niche, but to say the amount of people in this category is minuscule would be an understatement. You just have to look at the Nikon Df to see how "reduced for purity" actually means just a redesign of the buttons, a retro aesthetic and an ad campaign. Edited January 29, 2014 by Paul J 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 Hi Paul J, Take a look here A digital M6. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
swamiji Posted January 29, 2014 Share #102 Posted January 29, 2014 I would love a camera without it bout its not going to happen any time soon unless you commission Leica to make it yourself and have the money to do it. I guess I am too much of an optimist. The M Monochrom came to be without such sponsorship, so why not a Digital M6? Only Leica could do it, but it would take guts, and a bit of risk. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick_S Posted January 29, 2014 Share #103 Posted January 29, 2014 (edited) I guess I am too much of an optimist. The M Monochrom came to be without such sponsorship, so why not a Digital M6? Only Leica could do it, but it would take guts, and a bit of risk. Less risk if they follow the lead of the Sony QX10 and QX100 smart lenses by enabling the linking up for wireless review and playback to a user's preferred smartphone or tablet. To be honest, I am surprised that the M240's optional handgrip does not enable this kind of wireless tethering. Nick Edited January 29, 2014 by Nick_S 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted January 29, 2014 Share #104 Posted January 29, 2014 This is exactly what the TO does. .... Besides, calling a device with a permanently attached bulky display "more modern" than one which distributes its functions with the most up-to-date wireless transmission over several nodes is debatable. There are quite a few photographic situations where taking the display or view finder off the camera would be of great benefit: Architecture, close-up work and at times even portraits come to mind. What is "TO"? A thinner & lighter camera makes perfect sense. I think it will come when the technology allows, not by removal of the LCD. Recent cameras like the Olympus E-M1 and the just announced Fuji X-T1 allow operation of the camera via a smart phone, but they don't remove the LCD from the camera. The only feature I would welcome in a "digital M6" would be a return to the classic size, otherwise I prefer my M240. That makes sense. The classic size is a beautiful thing. Otherwise the M240 is a good blend of retro (rangefinder) and digital. You continue to propose this false dichotomy, it's not either exactly like an M6 or nothing at all, neither is it everyone is happy with the design or none at all. You're hyperbolizing with infantile straw-men. A nay-sayer trying to shoehorn assertions into a preconceived conclusion. .... And please stop invoking HCB, I'm sure he wouldn't have touched a digital M with a ten foot pole and certainly not given a rats a$$ what time zone he was in and if that corresponded correctly with his camera. Speaking of the thread getting "heated". Your response is to invoke HCB with your own presupposition as to his preferred digital camera settings, imagining that he wouldn't care if the time & date were off or that his cameras were synchronized. As if time & date don't matter for a photojournalist. Does that imply, that for the next iteration of the M, I should hire a sherpa to carry my gear?.... M T??? - Slightly Larger yet again and much heavier as more features are added, needing even more power. I don't see why this is the future. Leica may find the means to trim down next M. That's what Canon did with the 6D and SL1 — smaller and lighter than prior cameras, but without removing important functions (like the LCD). Olympus offers an example of reduction with the E-M10 — slightly smaller & simpler than the E-M5 or E-M1, but still quite functional. You just have to look at the Nikon Df to see how "reduced for purity" actually means just a redesign of the buttons, a retro aesthetic and an ad campaign. The Nikon Df disappoints for a number of reasons. It would be much more appealing if it achieved the actual size of the FM which was a nicely compact SLR. But the Df would not be better or more coherent if they removed the LCD in order to achieve the look of the back of a film camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted January 29, 2014 Share #105 Posted January 29, 2014 A Leica M film camera - then SCAN the film and job done. I actually like processing HP5 Plus or TRI-X from my film Leicas. If I want the full digital experience then I shoot the M9 or Monochrom. Easy really!! I wish! Where I live there is only one good film processor. One that understands the words push and pull. Recently he closed his shop, and moved it to his house. Film is slowly fading away. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted January 29, 2014 Share #106 Posted January 29, 2014 (edited) i agree that the M has gotten just that bit too big. Summicron 40 looks a little lost on it. M6 has much better - superior hand feel, heft. It's right. I have said it before; I will bore you again: I think a small(er) body DRF with a simple minimal body like the Konica Hexar RF or the M6: would be the best. Obviously with an LCD on it- and while they are at it ruggedize the thing. Print the body shell from ABS plastic for all I care. Make all the leading edges bouncy. Make the RF more shock resistant.... Make it all matte black (no branding) and edge-rounded like a cubist pebble. Engrave all (metal) button markings- glow in dark (subtle) white and red... Protect RF windows with metal frames like on the M3 already-... And it definitely doesn't have to be Leica brand or price... C'mon Sony/Fuji... I am thinking millitary type form/functionality ethos. Something you pull out of a hard tropical hard case like a round of ammunition- take off the body cap and and go... a field camera. After all a camera body milled from solid brass is all very well - until you drop it on a hard surface... Edited January 29, 2014 by jaques 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted January 29, 2014 Share #107 Posted January 29, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) What is "TO"? I don't see why this is the future. Leica may find the means to trim down next M. That's what Canon did with the 6D and SL1 — smaller and lighter than prior cameras, but without removing important functions (like the LCD). Olympus offers an example of reduction with the E-M10 — slightly smaller & simpler than the E-M5 or E-M1, but still quite functional. Since when did Leica follow, Canon or Olympus? All along Leica has said that the digital bodies could not be thinner, because of the LCD screen. Eliminate that and it's possible to obtain M6 size. Don't forget that much of the weight gain is due to the battery to power LV/Movie mode/EVF/etc. These function take power... But you don't need to be so concerned, I don't think for a moment Leica will abandon the M T??? in it's current state of development, but as a specialty camera like the Monochrom. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterP Posted January 29, 2014 Share #108 Posted January 29, 2014 Retro appears to be 'in', as the newest Fuji entry shows. Although Leica marches to its own beat. Jeff RETRO ? HAH!!! What is retro about the new Fuji X-T1, if you want to describe it as that ( 'retro' seems to be the new 'catch' word in marketing), is the fact that the camera is styled like an SLR. I do like the fact that all of the functions I need to use are on the top of the body as opposed to scrolling through a menu. But it stops there doesn't it. Did you notice the tillable LCD (is that retro), the advanced EVF (is that retro), shall I go on. There is nothing 'retro' in features about this camera. If you want retro all you need to do is look at your M, the camera hasn't changed much in 60 years - still the same 'retro' body style. You are confusing styling with features (and in this case technology). Perhaps we could have an 'M' that can accommodate glass plates? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted January 29, 2014 Share #109 Posted January 29, 2014 (edited) Since when did Leica follow, Canon or Olympus? Not at all. Except that they show that a succeeding model can be smaller than its predecessor and yet still retain functionality. They show that your assumption of each succeeding model being bigger isn't necessarily true. pop mentioned a new Sony as an example of what Leica could do, and you mentioned Sony yourself in post #83, and yet Leica won't follow Sony either. But the lesson of Sony is that they have a history of shrinking technology, going back to the Walkman and earlier. And Apple has done it over and over again. So, thinking ahead, it's not hard to imagine that the LCD may get thinner and the battery may get smaller. I think Leica hears these complaints about body size and will respond with a thinner & lighter camera when the technology permits. Edited January 29, 2014 by zlatkob Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted January 29, 2014 Share #110 Posted January 29, 2014 ... I think Leica hears these complaints about body size and will respond with a thinner & lighter camera when the technology permits. Too late... Sent from another Galaxy 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJH Posted January 29, 2014 Share #111 Posted January 29, 2014 The body is fatter (nearly 4mm M6 vs M8) to allow for the sensor package and screen to add to the distance from the film/sensor plane to the lens mount. Easy solution: put the lens mount on a small throat that just out from the body a few mm, then you can make the bit of the body that you hold a few mm thinner back to how it was with the film Ms. It will be interesting to see of they do that in the future or insist on form over function. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted January 30, 2014 Share #112 Posted January 30, 2014 They've been trying since the M8. They won't stop trying. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 30, 2014 Share #113 Posted January 30, 2014 As I've already said, put down some hard cash and Leica might agree to make a screenless body for those that want one. It will cost a lot more than an M of course due to a lower production run, but if you can get 5000 like minded people together they'd have to consider it. They won't make it for the few on here who want one though. Why are you ignoring me?!?! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 30, 2014 Share #114 Posted January 30, 2014 You are confusing styling with features (and in this case technology). You're confusing me with someone who cares. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted January 30, 2014 Share #115 Posted January 30, 2014 Why are you ignoring me?!?! You have not been ignored, your statement has been replied to. I would be willing to purchase the camera discussed. As far as a deposit on a dream, I am still waiting on my 50mm APO-Summicron... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 30, 2014 Share #116 Posted January 30, 2014 The body is fatter (nearly 4mm M6 vs M8) to allow for the sensor package and screen to add to the distance from the film/sensor plane to the lens mount. Easy solution: put the lens mount on a small throat that just out from the body a few mm, then you can make the bit of the body that you hold a few mm thinner back to how it was with the film Ms. Leica have already done this to an extent with the existing digital M bodies (the mount sits a couple of millimetres proud of the body shell). I suspect, however, that they cannot move the lens mount any further forward (in relation to the main body) and maintain the usual geometry of the mechanical linkage between RF and lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick_S Posted January 30, 2014 Share #117 Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) So perhaps they could save 2mm on the depth of the camera body by omitting the screen, which would still be a welcome reduction. Nick Edited January 30, 2014 by Nick_S 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 30, 2014 Share #118 Posted January 30, 2014 You have not been ignored, your statement has been replied to. I would be willing to purchase the camera discussed. As far as a deposit on a dream, I am still waiting on my 50mm APO-Summicron... No it hasn't. The OP needs to do some work, get at least 5000 names registered who are ready to put down hard cash if Leica say yes (and expect the price to be substantially higher than the price of a standard M body). No point in discussing something which no one is actually prepared to pay for IMHO. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted January 30, 2014 Share #119 Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) So perhaps they could save 2mm on the depth of the camera body by omitting the screen, which would still be a welcome reduction. Nick Well the screen thickness of the M240 is about 2mm so add that to 2mm of reduced body size, that shaves 4mm of the total thickness... and maybe a wee bit more. Remember the film transport plate on the M6 sticks out 1mm or so. So we give 1mm added thickness for electronics, then we are at about 1mm thicker than the M6... that would be a welcome reduction indeed. Edited January 30, 2014 by swamiji Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 30, 2014 Share #120 Posted January 30, 2014 No point in discussing something which no one is actually prepared to pay for IMHO. If Leica marketed the digital "M6" properly (and they are pretty good at appealing to the vanity of their customers) – something along the lines of "a camera for the true photographic purist", "real photographers don't chimp":D, etc. – I suspect they would sell an awful lot more than you seem to think. You were probably among those who dismissed as fanciful the idea of a black and white only model (which was touted here as an idea for years before it became a reality). As an aside, James, I've noticed that whenever someone here tries to discuss the possibility (or simply the desirability) of a "screen-less" thinner digital M, almost without fail you and Zlatkob dive into the thread to dismiss the idea. Almost like you both feel threatened by such a notion. 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.