Jump to content

Why would anyone want a Leica with no screen?


dant

Recommended Posts

x
  • Replies 264
  • Created
  • Last Reply
That rather looks like a conclusion looking for an argument.

 

What would be more compelling would be to disregard the price and the white gloves (and the Audi design, if you prefer), and look at the camera as a proposition. Actual use and efficacy is not necessarily defined by marketing purpose ...

 

Sorry John, I think we're going round in circles here, and that is largely my fault.

 

I can see no photographic advantage whatsoever in an M60 over an M, on which the screen can be turned off but is available should the need arise. I think it panders to ("caters for" would perhaps be a less loaded term) a sort of nostalgic and object-driven fetish (preference!) that has little to do with creating photographs. It perhaps is no more of an issue than the choice of an a la carte skin, but It is the side of Leica I have least sympathy with.

 

I understand and, believe it or not, respect the fact that people might like to own one and of course doing so hurts no one else so perhaps I should leave i be. But I cannot escape the feeling that any photographer who is so distracted by a blank panel on the back of a camera that happens to be glass rather than metal, and is so driven to spend a very large amount of money for a less functional camera than is already available to satisfy this desire, must have his priorities so radically different from mine that I think we are talking about totally different subjects altogether.

 

And that is fine but I am surprised enough by it to keep coming back to it. For which I apologise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to apologise. I don't see these discussions as competitive, nor do I think it is about persuading the other, or being right.

 

Perhaps it's a bit dialectic, but I find these discussions informative and sometimes entertaining, depending on how they proceed.

 

In electronics, every thing electronic, there is a tendency to offer more than is needed, and for those offerings to be based on what is theoretically possible, rather than what actually contributes to taking a picture. I don't know about you, but I have had many Sony products (sorry to pick on Sony, but they are generally the worst) which offered a plethora of functions that barely worked if at all. There are also many recent complaints on this forum about software and electronics not matching the quality of the lenses or the rest of the camera. I still wonder about the sense of cheap electronics (less than state of the art) cased in hand crafted, chrome plated brass bodies.

 

So, with complaints about the quality of the LCD on the M9, the failure to support the LCD on the M8, the indifferent video and EVF on the M(240), why is it such a surprise that some want these cameras reduced to the bare essentials needed to take a picture?

 

Then again, the price and marketing are off putting; perhaps even blinding?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Both you gentlemen above make good points. I too fail to see how a blank screen could be such a distraction. However, although autoreview can be turned off, and the LV button disabled, the rest of the buttons remain live, and can be pressed unintentionally which then lights up the screen like a Christmas tree...which if it happens while, let's say surreptitiously photographing at a concert or theatre, presents a distraction for others as well as the possibility of getting oneself thrown out. At the very least I would like to see a menu feature whereby, if enabled, all the buttons could be disabled by (let's say) 3 quick presses of the movie button and reenabled by 2 quick presses.

 

There are some advantages to the M60 design. Not having the LCD and its buttons means that much less to possibly go wrong and need replacement. No screen to get scratched, or buy protectors for.

 

But by the same token, the camera should be able to be thinned down. And even if the parts don't cost Leica that much (although, recall that the sapphire screen glass alone is several hundred bucks by Leica's own estimation) the labor to assemble it all is not insignificant. Check how much it costs to replace it, divide by 2 and that will give you a reasonably good rough idea of about how much the deletion should subtract from the cost.

 

I really don't have any quarrel with the concept of this camera, merely the fact it re-uses the same fattened chassis unnecessarily, and threatens to cost more than a more optioned-up version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After I pared down all mine to the best, I'm left with a few. ;)

 

A plug for the Mayo. :) I wish to add that the thumb in the photo was a gift of the Rochester, Minnesota Mayo clinic. It was severed, then grafted iback by one of their genius hand surgeons. albeit with no mobility (hence no wrinklies).

 

Someday if i should live so long I will open a thread for others among us who might have hand disorders. My left hand is left with two working digits. Getting old sucks but it is better than the alternative. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A model without a screen would be cheaper to make than one with only if that was the only model you made. Having two production lines, especially where one is very low volume must surely increase costs above the component savings.

 

That would surely be correct but only if the assumption a second dedicated line would be necessary is also correct. Historically Leica has always produced in batches--different models and even black vs chrome of the same model--utilizing the same assembly line and workers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A plug for the Mayo. :) I wish to add that the thumb in the photo was a gift of the Rochester, Minnesota Mayo clinic. It was severed, then grafted iback by one of their genius hand surgeons. albeit with no mobility (hence no wrinklies).

 

Someday if i should live so long I will open a thread for others among us who might have hand disorders. My left hand is left with two working digits. Getting old sucks but it is better than the alternative. :)

 

Sounds like a good thread. I suspect many of us have solutions to physical challenges that would benefit the community.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would surely be correct but only if the assumption a second dedicated line would be necessary is also correct. Historically Leica has always produced in batches--different models and even black vs chrome of the same model--utilizing the same assembly line and workers.

 

I suppose you are right for the hand assembly stages, but what about the casting (or whatever happens) to make the chassis?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about you, but I have had many Sony products (sorry to pick on Sony, but they are generally the worst) which offered a plethora of functions that barely worked if at all.

 

There are also many recent complaints on this forum about software and electronics not matching the quality of the lenses or the rest of the camera. I still wonder about the sense of cheap electronics (less than state of the art) cased in hand crafted, chrome plated brass bodies.

 

 

 

Two points

 

1. To leap to the defense of Sony. Owning the RX1R, RX100ii and A7S and owning plenty of Sonys before from the Mavica digital camera in 1997 thru Nex and others I can't say too much how wrong this statement is. Sure Sony makes a lot of commercial stuff but the quality control, build, handling and intuitive menus of its current range is impeccable. My vote still goes to the RX1 as the best camera ever made IMHO as a sum of its parts.

 

2. The fact that there have been some issues previously with Leica's electronics is unfortunate but not a reason to dispense with functionality.

 

Like some others I see no reason to remove the LCD screen but an also happy for Leica to make such a camera and for it to sell well.

There are multiple tastes in the world and I am still amazed how such a small company as Leica can have so many products appealing to so many different audiences. Well done!

Thus my previous call for Leica to have a custom camera service - just add the functionality you want (a la Red)

 

Unfortunately there is no incentive for any manufacturer to make upgradable items. They need to sell you something new every few years, brass or not. Apple is the prime example, all soldered, no memory slot, no removable battery, etc. Still didn't prevent me buying an iPhone 6 plus - damn them to hell ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

However, although autoreview can be turned off, and the LV button disabled, the rest of the buttons remain live, and can be pressed unintentionally which then lights up the screen like a Christmas tree...which if it happens while, let's say surreptitiously photographing at a concert or theatre, presents a distraction for others as well as the possibility of getting oneself thrown out. At the very least I would like to see a menu feature whereby, if enabled, all the buttons could be disabled by (let's say) 3 quick presses of the movie button and reenabled by 2 quick presses.

.

 

Photographers in the 'I don't want' school of thought are fast enough to put some black tape over the Red Dot, so why would that not translate to blanking off the LCD if they were really serious about not wanting a display? How many have we heard of that did it before the M60 surfaced? I'd would guess we heard of no photographer who blanked out his display.

 

And this points to the fact that it is just novelty driving any enthusiasm for the M60 rather than a crying need, it is the camera creating dreams of heroic actions where the heroic photographer is against the digital world and turning his back on digital crutches, and yet, if he really had a gripe, he could have done it anyway with his M9 or M.

 

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Harold - there are many who say the A7 cameras are also the best on offer, and the new Nikon D810, and the new Canon 5D and so on and so on.

 

For me, it's not quality control - it's irrelevant promises falling short - confused products.

 

Different strokes, as they say. Waiting for my 6 Plus to arrive :-)

 

Steve - heroic? Crikey!

 

My M9 was my first camera with an LCD. I don't mind it, but I'd be happy without it. I didn't have The option at that stage. I don't have an M(240).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why indeed would anyone want a digital camera without a screen:rolleyes: I have no idea.

I now have as my main camera's the Sony A7 and A7s and the M 240. While the Sony's are certainly not perfect the sheer versatitliy of these cameras for me makes them very useful. The high iso on the A7s and file quality are for me are without parallel, the A7 is a very competent performer and the M again has lovely files but some severe limitations and M without a screen would be of absolutely no use to me. I mean be reasonable people if you don't want to use the screen on the M just don't use it. I can see no way in which the M 60 makes it a better camera, If the weight and size came down considerably due to the lack of screen and say if the camera was totally silent then there maybe a vague point in it. Anyway each to his owns so if people want to spend their hard earned cash on such machine that is totally their choice

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Harold - there are many who say the A7 cameras are also the best on offer, and the new Nikon D810, and the new Canon 5D and so on and so on.

 

For me, it's not quality control - it's irrelevant promises falling short - confused products.

 

Different strokes, as they say. Waiting for my 6 Plus to arrive :-)

 

Steve - heroic? Crikey!

 

My M9 was my first camera with an LCD. I don't mind it, but I'd be happy without it. I didn't have The option at that stage. I don't have an M(240).

 

Personally I would a say if there has ever been a really confused product it is the Leica M60. a digital camera pretending to be a film camera:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would a say if there has ever been a really confused product it is the Leica M60. a digital camera pretending to be a film camera:)

 

I may be being totally unfair, but (conversely) that has always been my view about the M(240). People I respect on this forum tell me that the rangefinder is a revelation, and the files are superb. Pretty universal opinion also suggests that focus peaking is tricky and perhaps not as reliable, the EVF is disappointing, Sony probably does liveview better, and video not really a positive addition. The M(240) thread is full of complaints about the camera, none of which interests me even remotely.

 

Remove these "add-ons", and you have a different proposition - colour balance isn't an issue as there are no JPGs, the raw files sound pretty good, and the electronics are so limited that many of the problems identified are also not relevant. I appreciate the limited appeal, but contrary to what many assume here about this camera, as a possible buyer, my interest is in taking photos - I don't chimp, and provided I have control over focus, framing, ISO, aperture and shutter, I'm very happy.

 

To my mind, that is the masterstroke by Leica - choice. Sure this camera will attract collectors - Leica has always made collector's items, and the profits they generate are great for the rest of us. I'd be surprised if this camera attracts that many people who already use an M(240), but there will be a few like me to soak up who didn't get the M(240), and just don't like all the stuff surrounding it.

 

Assuming that you're "over the hump" when less is more, and if it's Leica it costs waaay more, then there is real choice - the X cameras for people who want a small fixed lens camera; the T camera for those who want an EVIL that is a bit different (with the option to use M & R lenses); and real choice with the M cameras - Monochrom, M(240), M-E, M7, MP & M-A; then the S cameras ...

 

I really don't think the M Edition 60 will morph into a production model, but then I'm usually wrong about these things. There might actually be photographers (like me) who find this a more interesting proposition than the M(240).

 

Cheers

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting point about no jpegs, and if a production model of the M60 couldn't shoot them, I would not be a buyer. The ability to capture DNG and jpg-fine gives me the option to save time on what to me is a tedious and uninspiring process for the majority of photos, and only if I have something really special and which I want to print, then I can fiddle with post processing.

 

 

 

Photographers in the 'I don't want' school of thought are fast enough to put some black tape over the Red Dot, so why would that not translate to blanking off the LCD if they were really serious about not wanting a display? How many have we heard of that did it before the M60 surfaced? I'd would guess we heard of no photographer who blanked out his display.

 

Doing that would leave no way to change ISO and check battery and card capacities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the quality control, build, handling and intuitive menus of its current range is impeccable. My vote still goes to the RX1 as the best camera ever made IMHO as a sum of its parts.

I have used the RX1R close to a year now, and I can't quite agree. The things I like about the camera (and reasons why I own and use it) are the excellent image quality, the size, the leaf shutter, and it having at least some physical controls (including the custom settings on the mode dial).

 

A great device, an average camera. It feels and looks solid. However, the manual focus wheel on mine got bent by simply sharing the bag with my M8. I don't mind the dent otherwise, but it basically killed the manual focus. Thankfully, it wasn't very good to begin with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The M(240) thread is full of complaints about the camera, none of which interests me even remotely.

 

Every camera forum on the web is full of complaints, most of them personal opinions, some of them the 1 in 1000 issue you get with every mechanical or electronic device.

If one reads them all then one wouldn't buy any camera.

 

I think the M240 has less complaints then most other cameras I read about.

Alot of the complaints I do see are sometimes fed by the sheer price of the thing, where people who do have genuine issues often feel doubly aggrieved.

 

A few more "I love my M240" threads would be nice ;)

 

IMHO I think the M240 is the best camera Leica has ever made, and I like the design of the base model, including the red dot.

 

Flame resistant shield activated ......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...