The next speculation

[indergaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I hate to assume your definition of "many" but I suspect it's different from mine.  Ik many people who use the M glass they already own on mirrorless bodies more affordable than the Leica M.   Not personally acquainted with anyone who recently went out and paid multi thousands of $ for new M lenses to use on mirrorless bodies though.

 

The way I see it you just described a rangefinder.

 

Well I personally know many photographers who love M glass. Be it Leica glass, Voigtländer, Zeiss. There's lots of great M-mount glass out there. Most of these photographers find the Leica M cameras too limiting and inaccurate in use, especially for the cost, so they rather get manual Zeiss glass for their SLR's or mirrorless cameras with adapters, for example, and actually prefer that experience to rangefinder experience.

 

A M Modern would be great for these customers. It can be what the T should have been. The T is just a big failure in my opinion. It should have been a modernized Leica M without the OVF, but rather with a high quality EVF, regular M-mount flange but with electronic contacts for new generation lenses.

Edited May 3, 2015 by indergaard

[thighslapper]

The T is just a big failure in my opinion

 

pardon ?

 

are you currently using one ?

 

I took some great photos of a pigeon nesting in our garden with the 55-135 zoom this morning....... pictures of birds feeding using the remote app on my iphone whilst sitting at the other end of the garden ..... then some terrific macro shots with a Marumi +5 lens on the 18-55 this afternoon ..... and just finished printing some A2 falconry images that look every bit as good as those from the M240 ........ Whilst my preference is my M-P I would hardly rate the T as a failure ......... overlooked and under appreciated - yes ..... but it is a very good camera in it's own right and a pleasure to use compared to some of its competitors .....

Edited May 3, 2015 by thighslapper

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[indergaard]

The T is just a big failure in my opinion

 

pardon ?

 

are you currently using one ?

 

I took some great photos of a pigeon nesting in our garden with the 55-135 zoom this morning....... pictures of birds feeding using the remote app on my iphone whilst sitting at the other end of the garden ..... then some terrific macro shots with a Marumi +5 lens on the 18-55 this afternoon ..... and just finished printing some A2 falconry images that look every bit as good as those from the M240 ........ Whilst my preference is my M-P I would hardly rate the T as a failure ......... overlooked and under appreciated - yes ..... but it is a very good camera in it's own right and a pleasure to use compared to some of its competitors .....

 

It's a failure from a marketing standpoint. It's trying to compete with much better and more affordable options out there. And there's lot's to choose from. Going all in for a crop sensor camera system in 2014 by a premium company is just weird. As I said, a M Modern, a modernized M, is what most people wanted, not a new crop-sensor system which messes up every focal length with the use of adaptors, and at a hefty price premium at the same time, while the market is flooded with much cheaper, much more established systems with equal or better image quality. I would rather buy any Sony, Fuji or Olympus system rather than buying the T.

 

I would love a modernized M though. With a full frame sensor, EVF/OVF option, slimmer body, wifi connectivity, M-mount mount with backwards compatibility, but also new electronic contacts to support future full frame lenses with or without AF or IS. The T is just an alternative to the Sony A6000, Fuji X-T1/X-E2, Olympus OM-D EM1/5... And those are just as good, for a much cheaper price, and they also take adapters... So... The T makes absolutely no sense from a marketing standpoint.

 

Hopefully the new CEO will shift the focus back to what actually Leica makes money from - the M-system, and ditch all the other stuff that the company most probably just looses money on. The T being one of them, I'm quite sure.

[IkarusJohn]

By limiting the M camera, Leica's flagship product, to manual focus and rangefinder, Leica is hobbling its product line up. From the outside, these limitations are quaint and self imposed. 

 

The more critical question is, what would a mainstream product look like?  Would it be based on the T mount or the M mount. That is a technical question as much as anything. The benefit of the M mount is that it is established, there are lots of lens choices, and there is an established market of reasonable size. Cannibalisation is a red herring - it's a sale to Leica either way, and hopefully profitable. If every M(240) owner (bar the diehard loyal) switches to a new M system, why would this matter to Leica?  It's still selling cameras to Leica owners, and providing M rangefinder appeal (I can't imagine a company that offers three film cameras - MP, M7 & M-A - not offering a classic digital rangefinder camera). 

 

I probably won't go for it. I like the rangefinder at its most basic. But then, I seem to like "failure" cameras like the M60, the M-A and the T. Those are failure cameras I like ...

Edited May 3, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[mjh]

The more critical question is, what would a mainstream product look like?  Would it be based on the T mount or the M mount.

Any mainstream camera would have to support AF which rules out the M mount. The M mount is also too small for a modern mirrorless camera whereas the flange distance could be even shorter. I suppose the M line will never become mainstream and I’m OK with that.

 

So the actual choice is between the T mount, the S mount, and a new mount. Assuming that Leica actually considers another camera line. Currently there are three camera systems (M, S, T) plus a line of compact cameras (X) – quite a diverse portfolio for a small vendor.

[pico]

I suppose the M line will never become mainstream and I’m OK with that.

 

I am of the same mind, and that's why I might buy a T or two.

(The T would be the first of uncountable Leica Ms I've had for over forty years.)

.

Edited May 3, 2015 by pico

[bocaburger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think it's fun to speculate on what Leica may have in the offing, but when it comes to criticizing or second guessing them I think it's not prudent to ignore the fact the M9 and M240 have been (in Leica terms) very successful.   At one time, one might have made a compelling argument that the cameras sold well despite the "antique" rangefinder concept, because they were the only full-frame option with which to use M lenses.  However that's less compelling now that there are full-frame mirrorless cameras from other makers which can take M lenses, and in most cases handle them well (and in many cases where they fall short, there are PP options to mitigate).   At this point I think it's more difficult to dismiss the possibility that the rangefinder is a major selling point. 

[stevieg]

I would put money on:

 

32-36mp with better high ISO performance

Fast Leica S derived processor .... with everything working much quicker

Leica T viewfinder

Contacts on camera for AF ..... with a range of AF lenses either connected direct or via an adapter

Ability to move focus point as in T in LV

On board camera memory like the T for use without an SD card

Lighter, but more powerful battery

 

Like others ...... I would like:

 

IBIS or similar

Sensor auto clean .......

 

but I doubt the space constraints will allow this without making the camera even fatter .... and to be honest it could do with losing 5mm+ ...... but I fear this is impossible without a big ugly protruding lens flange like the A7 and similar .....

.... and I wouldn't be surprised if the sensor came in at the more modest figure of 32mp ........ not a lot more is gained by 50% more pixels but it does come at a cost ...... lower light gathering power and having to use higher shutter speeds.....

 

Pretty much what I would love to upgrade to.

 

Not too essential for the higher MP count, though. My D800 files get a bit tedious loading up in LR

Moveable focus point on live view (will make my landscape use almost complete so the Nikon gets mothballed)

I understand that the Leica T viewfinder also has GPS, which again would be great. (Doubt I would use the EVF bit though, just need GPS. I use an Arca Swiss mount on the camera base, currently RRS L-bracket)

Not too bothered about AF contacts or IBIS

Sensor Clean would be good.

Faster processor - yes please (faster start up)

Would prefer not to buy new set of batteries. My M240 batteries are just fine.

[IkarusJohn]

Any mainstream camera would have to support AF which rules out the M mount. The M mount is also too small for a modern mirrorless camera whereas the flange distance could be even shorter. I suppose the M line will never become mainstream and I’m OK with that.

 

So the actual choice is between the T mount, the S mount, and a new mount. Assuming that Leica actually considers another camera line. Currently there are three camera systems (M, S, T) plus a line of compact cameras (X) – quite a diverse portfolio for a small vendor.

 

Thank you for clarifying that, Michael.

 

I never really bought into AF, even back when it was first introduced - I only ever had one AF Nikkor lens with my F5.  It was very good, but AF just wasn't for me.  Can you explain why the M Mount is too small?  The AF mechanism is in the lens, and surely all you need is the electronic contacts ...

 

I agree that the T mount is more logical, which rather raises the question - is indergaard right when he describes is as a "failure"?  I guess his comment is based on flawless empirical evidence like the number of people he knows who have one and what he reads on the internet, or maybe what he reads in his tea-leaves.  Certainly, I've never seen any sales figures published by Leica or anyone else.  

 

But, assuming he is right and the Leica T hasn't sold as well as Leica had hoped and certainly not as well as they need to gain the 1% of market share, the question is why?  I can think of a number of reasons:

• cost - that depends on what part of the market Leica was aiming for.  If they were competing with the other mirrorless products available, then yes, it is too expensive.  The Sony A7 range of cameras knock the Leica T out of the park on paper for considerably less.  But if Leica was aiming the camera at Leica owners, or people interested in Leica but not rangefinders, rebadged compacts or the S line, the price is unlikely to be the issue.

• the sensor - even though I am pleasantly surprised by the output, for a new buyer a 16MP Sony APS-C sensor, available in any number of other cameras isn't enough.   On paper, it is well behind what Sony is offering, it isn't full frame and potential buyers aren't convinced that the sensor makes the most of Leica's strengths - beautifully made cameras with fabulous glass.  The T is perceived as a lovely camera, but with indifferent electronics.

• the glass - Leica makes some of the best lenses in the world, and that is as good a reason to buy a Leica camera as any.  But, the T lenses aren't up there at all.  They're good, but I get better results with my M lenses.  There is no reason to buy a T and then buy M lenses to go with it.  If Leica wanted T buyers to consider M lenses, it would have been better to have had an M mount (taking into account Michael's comment above).  A camera like the T (or a rangefinderless M) with some AF zooms and direct access to M lenses without the adapter would have been a better bet, in my view.

Look over the fence at Sony (save the comments about Leica not competing with Sony - it's competing will all camera manufacturers and it is not really getting properly in to the mirrorless market - a market where it has a natural advantage with its M lenses).  Sony has good electronics, terrible camera manufacture, terrible menus and a really awful habit of changing everything with every new product release (how many proprietary storage cards and other systems has Sony foisted on its customers), but access to truly fabulous glass with its Zeiss partnership.  Sony understands that the camera is basically disposable, and their purchasers don't actually mind the short redundancy of their products.  Leica buyers are different, but the electronics have to match.

 

The problem for me with Leica's strategy is that they have this product segment the wrong way round.  They have fantastic glass.  They know how to make fantastic AF lenses (S lenses).  Yet, unlike Sony, they make a fabulous camera like the T which isn't linked to their strengths (the glass), with an average sensor and average lenses.

 

Now, I've been taking pictures long enough to know that none of this matters in the slightest to my images.  I like the camera, the sensor is good enough and I can use my M lenses.  But, that is not enough.  The smart thing is to offer the best solution to people who want the best, playing to Leica's strengths.  It may be that they can put the T system into that space, but that's a far longer and more expensive row to hoe than finding a way to put the next iteration of their full frame CMOSIS sensor and processor (and 2GB buffer) into a mirrorless body with an M mount.

 

I know that I don't understand the technicalities of the limitations of the M mount, but I like to think that Leica can achieve the impossible and develop a line of AF M lenses which can fit that mount.  This need have no impact on the existing M line at all (if you add buyers of both cameras together), and it could remain compatible with existing manual focus M mount lenses, but it will have a huge impact on Leica's customer base.  It would be expensive, but it would show that Leica can produce a high tech camera which sits alongside the M cameras, with access to the same lenses and its own AF line (like small S lenses).  

 

Why would fit be better than one of the numerous A7 cameras?

• Leica lenses

• full frame CMOSIS sensor

• far better thought out in terms of quality of manufacture and user interface, and Leica support forever (which is 10 years, by definition)

I know, won't happen.

 

Cheers

John

Edited May 3, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[A Almulla]

Back to wishing:

 

No one want a "Slo Mo" more like the iPhone ?

 

 

On a more serious note I'd wish for

1) Banding at high ISO to be a thing of the past, irritates me more than noise.

2) 2 more ISO stops

3) A few more dynamic range stops

 

 

Don't really care about more megapixels, the marketing trend will force that on us anyway.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Non of the Leica M models have a flash off-take jack. No viewfinders can be used on the M cameras, if you want to use a flash.

It seems almost like a conspiracy M owners have not asked for better flash control.

I have raised this before and got no takers... ...the conspiracy continues...

cheers Dave S

 

The expensive multi function grip allows this. I use it every day. Adding this and the flash cord/bracket was a big additional expense but it works well and the cost was soon forgotten because of this.

 

Gordon

[Peter Kilmister]

The multi function handgrip is expensive but works well. It really does make the camera so much easier to handle and gain a good grip.

 

Re flash: What's the point if one can avoid it? Recently I heard that Manfrotto have some excellent Lumie series LED lamps that can light a subject from any angle and you don't need to sync the shutter.

Maybe I am a bit simple but it appears to be a great idea ... and a lot easier and cheaper than flash.

 

Anyone tried them?

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I don't know what will be in the next M. But if I were CEO....

 

1. The next T would look like an X-Vario with a lens mount and an articulated screen. 24MP Sony sensor. More excellent lenses including some fast AF primes.

 

2. There would be more push for the T compatibility with M lenses in marketing the T as an M backup.

 

3. There would be 4x M type cameras. The Monochrom, The M, the ME (M with no rangefinder and an EVF) and the type 60. All based on the same chassis and sensor. 90% of the parts would be interchangeable to keep costs in line.

 

4. M would have 36-40MP sensor and the EVF from the T (w' GPS) (or even better Sony's next 50MP sensor). It would have the extra TTL socket built in (not in a grip).

 

5. The processor needs two generations of improvement. Faster processing, buffering and the ability to live view off centre at least. And a proper long exposure mode.

 

6. Optional shutter speed in the viewfinder as a menu option. Option to reassign the movie button. An ISO dial on the camera body under the 4 way controller.

 

7. Move all video functions to an external grip (like the current MF grip) which could also have all the sound (internal and external mic input and output), HDMI and video functions on it (even the record button?). The video menu could be invisible until it's connected to the camera which would simplify the menus.

Edited May 3, 2015 by FlashGordonPhotography

[FlashGordonPhotography]

The multi function handgrip is expensive but works well. It really does make the camera so much easier to handle and gain a good grip.

 

Re flash: What's the point if one can avoid it? Recently I heard that Manfrotto have some excellent Lumie series LED lamps that can light a subject from any angle and you don't need to sync the shutter.

Maybe I am a bit simple but it appears to be a great idea ... and a lot easier and cheaper than flash.

 

Anyone tried them?

I use LED lights. But for people flash is preferred by me. LED lights need to be really bright and subjects don't like looking at them. The also don't stop movement. Flash is better here. Mostly I use a set of Elinchrom Quadra Rangers in manual. Occasionally I will use a pair of Leica 58's but they're quite unwieldy on the M, even with a grip. And I can't set them up to fire a second flash wirelessly.

 

Gordon

[IkarusJohn]

I like the sound of that, Gordon.

[ohwahahaha]

1."Wind lever"

(yap, just like Epson RD-1)

The main purpose is for power saving.

If the next generation M240 could use old version motor winder(like M4's), that be great!!!

 

2."M3~M6's shutter module"

I have to say that I don't really like M240's shutter sound and the feeling.

 

3."Touch Screen"

Old school iso plate could display on the LCD monitor, how great is it?

 

4."Old school looking EVF"

 

5."Wireless shutter remote function"

[thrid]

I wonder if Leica could add a RAW histogram option to the next color M.

 

Also a menu option to show shutter speed in the viewfinder like on the M7. 

[Peter Branch]

The way I see it you just described a rangefinder.

Hardly.  A range finder depends on the visual judgement of the user - there is no right or wrong setting.

 

Focus Confirmation tells you when the image is "In Focus" by means of a binary signal - Yes or No.

 

There are many different solutions but all are electronic.

[lct]

The RF patch of a rangefinder does tell yes or no in a sense, in-focus or out-of focus, while the magnification window or a mirrorless camera shows more or less sharpness actually. Hence the RF's inferiority as a WYSIWYG device, but its superiority when DoF is wide besides its lack of tunnel vision.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[bocaburger]

Hardly.  A range finder depends on the visual judgement of the user - there is no right or wrong setting.

 

Focus Confirmation tells you when the image is "In Focus" by means of a binary signal - Yes or No.

 

There are many different solutions but all are electronic.

Ehh, but originally you said : "(Focus Peaking only much better)".  Focus peaking is not yes or no, if you look closely it crescendos and decrescendos within a range, leaving the user to judge visually when it's truly at it's peak.  And the green-dot focus confirmation in dSLRs remains fully lit even if you play the focus ring back and forth a tiny bit.  Personally I have never found either to be anywhere near as consistently trustable as a properly-calibrated rangefinder.  And I am quite nearsighted, have astigmatism, wear progressive lenses and keep a +1 diopter on the eyepiece.  YMMV of course.