Rumor: Leica to Announce Digital Rangefinder Without an LCD Screen at Photokina

[CheshireCat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Flange distance plus sensor plus motherboard plus body shell.

 

I am sure the Leica guys can come up with a nice solution.

They did a good job with the T in that regard, and I guess it has a sensor, a motherboard and a body shell too

[jaapv]

Sure, but even they cannot get around 4 mm for the sensor- motherboard assembly and 2 mm for the material of the body shell. Probably more as you need some space between the parts as well to prevent short-circuits and a possibility to adjust the sensor.

With the design of the T they could choose the short register distance to make the camera thinner. They still have those 4 mm sensor and at least 3 mm LCD in there.

As you can let the bodyshell out locally if you use an LCD the gain will be only 1 mm, 2 at most for an LCD-less camera.

[Mike Rawcs]

I wonder how many would have bought the T if it had been a miniature version of the M instead of iPhone-like touch screen?

[jaapv]

I might.(as it is I nearly bought the T)

[timde]

Sure, but even they cannot get around 4 mm for the sensor- motherboard assembly and 2 mm for the material of the body shell. Probably more as you need some space between the parts as well to prevent short-circuits and a possibility to adjust the sensor.

With the design of the T they could choose the short register distance to make the camera thinner. They still have those 4 mm sensor and at least 3 mm LCD in there.

As you can let the bodyshell out locally if you use an LCD the gain will be only 1 mm, 2 at most for an LCD-less camera.

 

All these distances relate to the optics part of the body, i.e. from the mount surface to the back of the camera. There is no practical reason why the rest of the body cannot be narrower. This seems more than anything to be what they did with the T, perhaps they do something like that with the next M, just a little.

[jaapv]

True, and if you look at the M digital series you'll see that the mount does protrude slightly.

[mjh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And still the main factor accounting for the thinner body of the T is its shorter flange distance.

[menos I M6]

My fantasy digital M always has always had

- no rear display

- manual wind (a digital Leicavit providing auto wind, continuous, mode and others)

- ISO dial

- battery meter + frame counter in a top LCD

- classic shutter speed dial with end stops

- film M like dimensions

- shoots only RAW - no JPG junk on the cards

- no menu system (format SC card with button press next to SD card slot)

- ISO dial has only full ISO stops (are there really people out there who find the messy ISO menus we know from the M9 + MM convenient or elegant?)

- no more lens code menu nonsense (bring lens corrections entirely into RAW converter, finally make EXIF data conveniently editable and allow picking your lens in the RAW converter if not coded at the lens mount)

- Digital Leicavit with shutter cocking motor, drive mode selection, flash sync ports, additional battery power, camera connectivity (camera time sync, SD card download when preferred over pulling cards), WiFi, GPS, … whatever is meaningfully possible in a reliable package of the size not taller than a film M Leicavit

 

 

How to control menu settings?

No menu necessary.

 

The very only two things I use my digital Leica M bodies menus for are:

 

- set ISO sensitivity

I hate to have to use the menu for this.

I only use the left most bank of ISO speeds with my M9 + MM in order to simplify the terrible mess these menus are. Bringing back a proper ISO dial would be highly welcome.

 

- format the SD card

I hate to do this in menu and much prefer the fast and simple operation of this with my Nikon bodies.

(add a button under the bottom plate next to the SD card slot which needs to be held depressed for a short time.

A small beep of the camera confirms the format being started with quickly flashing LED showing the progress, two short beeps signal successful finish.)

 

It would certainly be possible, if not especially convenient, to do everything you need to though an EVF, focussing and framing, menu settings, image review.

… so imagine too if that was to replace the rangefinder and be built into the camera.

 

I will not buy a Leica M without optical finder.

This finder is 1/3 of what a Leica M is for me. Another 1/3 is the compact size and another the lenses.

Alter any of those three and you loose the essence of what the Leica M is.

The growth both in size and complexity of the digital M bodies are indeed border lining of damaging that essence of the Leica M to me.

 

I did not and will not buy the current Leica M10 for this very reason.

A digital Leica, simplified from the current M10 would be very welcome to me.

 

I honestly can't see any real advantage in getting rid of the big, clear, helpful LCD unless you want to pretend you're using a film camera without actually having to use a film camera.

It is not about pretending to use a film camera.

It is not for nostalgic purposes (even my wanted manual wind is not).

 

It is about a certain feeling, procedure or discipline one gets accustomed to when using a film Leica that is lacking in the added technology in modern digital Leicas.

On all my digital cameras the Auto Image Review function is turned off, yet I find myself occasionally to chimp. Always when reflecting afterwards I found that there was really no reason for checking the image afterwards other than insecurity.

 

Using film cameras for a while does give back a security about having a shot, it hardens your senses and provides trust in your experience of feeling if you got a shot or not.

It also does teach about valuing each frame and because of this teaches about reading your environment (and THE LIGHT) better.

 

You simply KNOW at some point if a certain scene with lighting and contrast will clip the latitude of your film (or digital sensor) and operate your camera in order to preserve the image content you value.

Digital cameras with LCD screens and histograms have trained away from us this reliance on our own acquired skills and have provided convenience for a price.

 

I love to use film cameras from time to time - I still have a several drawer full of them in all formats, a full fridge of film stock and a workshop container full of chems and development gear.

 

I only shoot digital because of convenience, not because it is sharper, cleaner, has truer colours, … or even the immediacy of having a little picture on a bad quality tiny (and yes, even the largest, best camera displays are still tiny) LCD.

 

I heard a rumour about a month ago that the lcd is going to be replaced by a very large screw.

Hehe ;-)

 

P.S. To everyone who thinks an LCD-less digital camera is a great idea ... I want to see you actually buy it, use it, and then see if you still think it's a great idea!

I placed a definite order on a M Monochrom the day it was announced - a camera still today with many people a concept of debate.

 

The M Monochrom is about halfway to my dream digital Leica. The remaining missing bits are listed above.

 

If a LCD-less digital M is meaningful resembling what I listed above and is available as a regular production camera much as the M Mono was, I will buy one without doubt.

 

I wait for this camera since I bought my M8.2 way back a few years.

 

I would be interested in a Leica without a rear screen if it were cheaper than the current cameras.

 

However, I don't think a camera without a screen is worth more (or even the same) as the current crop of cameras. I wouldn't buy a "special edition" without a screen.

 

This is very much my thinking, unfortunately in 2014 a LCD-less digital Leica M is such a radical idea that I do not see Leica developing and marketing such a model in a large scale, making low asking prices possible.

It is unfortunately more realistic that such a camera would be much like the M Monochrom planned as a limited production product to "test the waters" and it's production scaled once demand is confirmed.

The other chance to get this camera is as mentioned as a very limited product at a very high price much like formerly seen "special edition" kits.

 

It is not unlikely to test customer reaction by introducing a special edition item first.

 

 

What a dichotomy between 21st century technology and Luddite Leica users

…

There are only two current features that I would miss. I find the histogram to have been the biggest single advance in camera use since going to digital. If I go to the screen whilst shooting it is primarily to check the histogram - I assume it would be abandoned or perhaps some version displayed with the other essential information). There are also times when Auto ISO is very useful by allowing me to fix shutter speed and aperture. However I otherwise don't change Auto ISO settings so if this feature was somehow maybe I could/would be preset.

…

Now they jut need a Monochrom version

You would be surprised how well you will judge light all by yourself once you get accustomed to not use the histogram any longer.

For one such a LCD-less (and histogram-less) digital camera still inherits one major advantage over it's similar film based cameras - it is digital! You can machine gun exposure variations all day long at a difficult lit scene to make sure you got the right exposure until you run out of SD cards ;-)

 

On a serious note - the histogram is indeed a crutch introduced as to counteract the weakness early digital sensors had in dynamic range and help us to not burn highlights and place the few bits in data we have with those sensors in a range where they are used best for image processing.

Do we really need histograms any longer?

 

A Monochrom version would also be my preference.

 

I can see who a camera of this sort would appeal to, it is the photographer who see's photography as a test rather than an art.

 

Proving they have the best lens, the best camera bag, and the best camera body, ideally designed to test their manhood, are what makes that photograph of the sunset they grabbed so very special.

 

I can see why Leica would be tempted to sell a camera without an LCD, because they know their client base very well.

 

Steve

The absolute opposite is the case in fact.

While promoters of such a camera (myself included) want the LCD removed to simplify the camera and remove extraneous clutter, helping us to focus our senses while using, critics of such a LCD-less camera nameplate it as an anachronistic joke, meaning to prove superior photographic technical skills?

 

This makes no sense at all.

There are really just a few people around who simply do not use the LCD and wish for some improvement of the current crop of digital M.

 

For myself, I would count the addition of a proper ISO dial a HUGE improvement over the annoying fiddling in a menu as an improvement.

I would count simplifying the photographic tool by removing it's unnecessary LCD display and menu clutter ENTIRELY an improvement.

I would call re-introduction of a proper battery meter and frame count where it belongs on the M (hint: on top) an improvement.

 

 

I had an R-D1 for a short while. Shooting with the display folded out of the way and cocking the shutter after each shot can do things to your mind. The extra movement required to prepare the camera for the next frame made me much more aware of each single frame I was taking.

Exactly my thoughts whenever switching back to a digital M after using a film M.

[colonel]

Whilst I understand your arguments for ISO dial, simplicity, etc. I don't understand the argument for no LCD or options on jpg, etc. you can turn the LCD off, you can select DNG, the whole advantage of digital is flexibility. As long as this flexibility is sufficiently subtle in its implementation.

I believe the M240 is a paradigm of simplicity. I set focus and, ISO and aperture for every shot. Nothing else. What's more, focus and aperture can be set if the camera is on or off. All the other settings I set up when I bought the camera and effectively never change.

 

A key difference between a picture on an M6 and a M240 is the processing time for film which is a great handicap and fills me with no joy.

[jaapv]

I am rather puzzled by that last sentence. It took me far longer to develop a film ( or have it developed in the case of colour ) and make a good print in the chemical darkroom than to develop, process and print a digital image.

 

Added to which the better control and more precise outcome of a digital print are very satisfying.

I still remember the struggle to get the colour balance of negative film consistent...

[pop]

Apart from the biased comparison (the other side of the NEX7, much thinner, is not shown in the pictures),...

 

Yes, it is much thinner. Good luck holding it with the left hand.

 

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!

[jaapv]

And notice the "tower" on the front that is created by the flange distance....

Btw, Philipp, that configuration is the one I prefer as well.

[colonel]

I am rather puzzled by that last sentence. It took me far longer to develop a film ( or have it developed in the case of colour ) and make a good print in the chemical darkroom than to develop, process and print a digital image.

 

 

Sorry that's what I meant. Have cleared up text

[pop]

And notice the "tower" on the front that is created by the flange distance....

Btw, Philipp, that configuration is the one I prefer as well.

 

Actually, that lens normally lives on my NEX-5N which makes a really nice and compact package.

[lct]

The "tower" (adapter) is handy to hold the camera with the left hand i feel.

[M-Mount]

My dream would be just an FF sensor in an "Leica I" body with M-Mount. Without display and rangefinder but with ISO wheel. Build like a tank and priced at $2000. A real tool for photographers....

[MarkP]

 

 

You would be surprised how well you will judge light all by yourself once you get accustomed to not use the histogram any longer.

For one such a LCD-less (and histogram-less) digital camera still inherits one major advantage over it's similar film based cameras - it is digital! You can machine gun exposure variations all day long at a difficult lit scene to make sure you got the right exposure until you run out of SD cards ;-)

 

On a serious note - the histogram is indeed a crutch introduced as to counteract the weakness early digital sensors had in dynamic range and help us to not burn highlights and place the few bits in data we have with those sensors in a range where they are used best for image processing.

Do we really need histograms any longer?

 

A Monochrom version would also be my preference.

 

Thanks for commenting on my post.

 

I grew up in the film camera days so the histogram is new to me since my first digital camera, an M9 in 2010. I rarely chimp, or expose my next shot from the histogram of the previous photograph. However, if in difficult lighting situations it does allow me to optimise my exposure then I consider it a very useful feature not a crutch. Despite your experience do you always nail the exposure in difficult lighting conditions because I certainly don't?

 

I agree with you about the discipline of film photography and the Leica digital cameras, even the M240 do that better than most digital cameras. I've been using a CL (no battery in the meter) and 50mm lens with BW400CN this week. Only 36 exposures and lack of light meter certainly focuses the mind

 

BTW I agree with you about the Monochrom.

 

Regards,

Mark

[menos I M6]

Whilst I understand your arguments for ISO dial, simplicity, etc. I don't understand the argument for no LCD or options on jpg, etc. you can turn the LCD off, you can select DNG, the whole advantage of digital is flexibility. As long as this flexibility is sufficiently subtle in its implementation.

I believe the M240 is a paradigm of simplicity. I set focus and, ISO and aperture for every shot. Nothing else. What's more, focus and aperture can be set if the camera is on or off. All the other settings I set up when I bought the camera and effectively never change.

 

A key difference between a picture on an M6 and a M240 is the processing time for film which is a great handicap and fills me with no joy.

For me this is both a wish based on engineering and feeling towards an improved Leica M.

 

- the size saving,

- energy consumption saving (albeit small)

- and specifically improvement in user interface (a return to the Leica M7 ISO/EV correction dial by eliminating the LCD, menu, button array, scroll wheel and terrible ISO menu would to me be a HUGE improvement in user interface)

 

The need to use the menu slows my workflow down in it's current implementation.

I need longer time and more difficult procedure to change ISO or EV correction with the current menu vs a ISO dial. Much worse though I am FORCED to break my attention and LOOK down on the LCD while changing ISO to confirm my change while both hands are involved in doing so.

Inarguable the old Leica M7 ISO dial would be an improvement in all accounts.

 

Now there are other very elegant ways to implement a mechanical ISO dial (the way it is done on the EPSON R-D1 for example is absolutely brilliant - an interlock allows to implement the actual ISO dial into the shutter speed dial and can be set on the fly).

The down side though is that this approach would need a separate EV correction dial.

In this regard I find the Leica M7 dial the most elegant method (truly a Leica design btw.).

 

I never ever for once used JPG files generated by my M9 or MM - I never had a use for them at all. Cutting away these files and their linked accessory functions and menu options would mean for me an improvement. It would mean to declutter a fantastic tool from unnecessary ballast and distraction.

 

Next to my Leica M digitals I still use film M cameras, a modern Nikon DSLR system, diverse medium and large format film cameras, a Leica S system and any other means of producing images as I feel on any day.

 

Every single time when I grab one of the Leica cameras the very essence of what these cameras mean to me strikes me:

 

The very simplicity and lack of unnecessary complications inherited by design.

 

The film based Leica M bodies do have more of that quality than any of the digitals, although the Leica M8 based bodies to date in fact have the most of this very quality from all digital Leica Ms (simply to the fact that their ISO selection method is a tiny bit better designed than on later cameras and that the essential battery meter and frame counter is visible at the blink of an eye).

 

The proposed rear LCD less Leica M camera does seem radical for the people who hail Leica's evolution into the direction of mainstream digital cameras with added functionality and performance.

It is the opposite though for the people who value Leica M cameras for the qualities I stated. This is not backwards thinking or, romantic or nostalgia.

 

 

Thanks for commenting on my post.

 

I grew up in the film camera days so the histogram is new to me since my first digital camera, an M9 in 2010. I rarely chimp, or expose my next shot from the histogram of the previous photograph. However, if in difficult lighting situations it does allow me to optimise my exposure then I consider it a very useful feature not a crutch. Despite your experience do you always nail the exposure in difficult lighting conditions because I certainly don't?

 

I agree with you about the discipline of film photography and the Leica digital cameras, even the M240 do that better than most digital cameras. I've been using a CL (no battery in the meter) and 50mm lens with BW400CN this week. Only 36 exposures and lack of light meter certainly focuses the mind

 

BTW I agree with you about the Monochrom.

 

Regards,

Mark

 

Mark, I do not argue about the helpfulness of the histogram functionality (it is limited though as we know), I also do not necessarily argue about the very helpfulness of verifying one's photograph on a display directly after taking it (although there is a philosophical conflict here for myself while using a digital camera, as I know from experience how LCD displays with an image review just a button press away can spoil).

My point about a simplified Leica M digital is simply that I do not see a technical sound solution with 2014 technology to have back a Leica M6/7/MP sized M body with LCD display included. The display goes, the histogram goes with it and neither is essential in use to me.

 

I would truly love to see such a camera

[MarkP]

 

Mark, I do not argue about the helpfulness of the histogram functionality (it is limited though as we know), I also do not necessarily argue about the very helpfulness of verifying one's photograph on a display directly after taking it (although there is a philosophical conflict here for myself while using a digital camera, as I know from experience how LCD displays with an image review just a button press away can spoil).

My point about a simplified Leica M digital is simply that I do not see a technical sound solution with 2014 technology to have back a Leica M6/7/MP sized M body with LCD display included. The display goes, the histogram goes with it and neither is essential in use to me.

 

I would truly love to see such a camera

 

I actually agree with you on this - I too would like a less bulky digital M and could cope without the histogram (certainly I could do without a screen for image review). But it is the one feature I'd like retained even if via some form of small information window on the top deck which the camera will require regardless for even the most basic digital/electronic information.

 

If an M without the screen is released I would be very surprised if the chassis dimensions are altered (other than the rear panel) as producing a new model would be prohibitively expensive for a camera with such a limited market.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[menos I M6]

If an M without the screen is released I would be very surprised if the chassis dimensions are altered (other than the rear panel) as producing a new model would be prohibitively expensive for a camera with such a limited market.

 

This is unfortunately exactly also what I think will make the proposed camera unlikely to become reality at a current Leica M price point - a one off or very limited edition why not.