Agent M10 Posted June 26, 2015 Share #1 Posted June 26, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have a couple of Ms, well, just sold one of them and have the Q on order. Considering the idea that Leica will eventually release 50mm and 75mm models of the Q in the future, does that portend the death of the M? It seems to me that the only material difference between a few Qs and an M with a few lenses would be the optical viewfinder. Why spend so much on a thick M with a .68 viewfinder when you can spend less on a couple of Qs with close to the same IQ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 Hi Agent M10, Take a look here Does the Q Portend the Death of the M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pgk Posted June 26, 2015 Share #2 Posted June 26, 2015 No. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted June 26, 2015 Share #3 Posted June 26, 2015 I agree, No....While it is a nice camera the Q, I would not want to carry around several of them simply to have another lens in the bag. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted June 26, 2015 Share #4 Posted June 26, 2015 Leica is making a lot of money selling M lenses . I doubt they will kill the chicken with the golden eggs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted June 26, 2015 Share #5 Posted June 26, 2015 Let's analyze that theory. Instead ad of one body and several lenses I now carry several cameras with different focal lengths? Let's be realistic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted June 26, 2015 Share #6 Posted June 26, 2015 Leica has said the M will continue and will continue to have an optical vf. That to me means at least the next iteration perhaps later this year, but no long term promises. The speculation here (hope?) is that Leica will keep the M with its RF but also produce an EVF Q-like camera that accepts M lenses. That would seem to make business sense, with Leica capturing lens sales for a wider group, but really, who knows? I would think that the M and an interchangeable Q that took M lenses could peacefully and profitably coexist, but then Leica is not asking me for advice. If Leica were Apple they would tell us what we need and want (and probably be right), but Leica is tiny compared to Apple and is more likely to see how the market reacts first. If M sales stay profitable in the face of the introduction of the Q, that is going to keep the M going. If not, Leica will act accordingly like any company would. The bottom line is that it is in the hands of we, the customers, who vote with our wallets. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted June 26, 2015 Share #7 Posted June 26, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Realistically I do not want to carry around 21, 24, 28, 35, 50, 75 and 90 Q's. I have enough back and knee troubles as it is..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted June 26, 2015 Share #8 Posted June 26, 2015 The Q won't kill the M, but I suspect an M-mount Q could, depending on what Leica's minimum unit-sales are for a body to be deemed profitable enough to continue producing. A lot of newbies seem perplexed and/or daunted by the optomechanical rangefinder, and a lot of oldtimers complain their "aging eyes" aren't up to the task anymore. (I chalk up the former to the current generation of wanting technology to obviate the need for effort, but I don't get the last one. I'm an oldtimer, never had great eyesight, and to me an EVF is a distant third after OVF and SLR). So there would seem to be a ready market for an EVF-only M-mount camera, especially if it was more svelte and less expensive than a rangefinder M. And I'm pretty certain Leica knows that, and producing such a camera is a matter of when, not if. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted June 26, 2015 Share #9 Posted June 26, 2015 I think it would only be a consideration if sales of M bodies and M lenses irretrievably dried up. I can't see that happening. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sls Posted June 26, 2015 Share #10 Posted June 26, 2015 No. But Leica might learn a thing or two from its customers if the Q is as popular as it seems it will be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loren Posted June 26, 2015 Share #11 Posted June 26, 2015 No. Leica gets too much revenue from the sales of M lenses to kill the cameras that use them. That would be stupid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
prk60091 Posted June 26, 2015 Share #12 Posted June 26, 2015 The 'T' line didn't kill the 'M'. The 'Q' won't either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbuckley Posted June 26, 2015 Share #13 Posted June 26, 2015 Betteridge's Law of Headlines states that "any headline that ends in a question can be answered 'no.'" So, the answer is no, the Q won't kill the M. The better question, posed already in a different thread, is what does the Q mean for the M series? It won't kill it, won't replace it, but it likely could portend changes to it. The most likely one is an integrated electronic viewfinder. As for how the Q system will morph, I think the better speculation is that, over time, it will also have 35, 50, and 90 focal lengths in a single lens, and fully become what it seems poised to be: a modern, fantastic version of that wonderful camera of yore, the Digilux 2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted June 26, 2015 Share #14 Posted June 26, 2015 The Q won't kill the M. Sony will Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted June 26, 2015 Share #15 Posted June 26, 2015 The only thing Sony kills it itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted June 26, 2015 Share #16 Posted June 26, 2015 I get the impression that many M users are pretty immune to considerations of price — and don't want to carry a couple of Qs. An interchangeable lens version of the Q would likely be very popular, but the M's optical viewfinder seems to have a strong following that's unlikely to diminish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted June 26, 2015 Share #17 Posted June 26, 2015 I get the impression that many M users are pretty immune to considerations of price — and don't want to carry a couple of Qs. An interchangeable lens version of the Q would likely be very popular, but the M's optical viewfinder seems to have a strong following that's unlikely to diminish. Agreed. And the solidness, and the lenses, and the satisfaction of shooting with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted June 26, 2015 Share #18 Posted June 26, 2015 Well the Q covers 28/35/50 so if they release a new one with a native 75mm lens covering 90 and 135 as well then you're all set! I do think we are seeing the likely future of the M - or rather what the M will be replaced by - in the Q. Everyone loves the EVF (it's the best thing since sliced bread) that's not prone to getting knocked out of alignment, AF, focus peaking MF. The T when launched was available everywhere from stock. Look at the Q, waiting lists at all dealers. Tells you something doesn't it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted June 26, 2015 Share #19 Posted June 26, 2015 I do think we are seeing the likely future of the M - or rather what the M will be replaced by - in the Q. Everyone loves the EVF (it's the best thing since sliced bread) that's not prone to getting knocked out of alignment, AF, focus peaking MF. Sadly I agree with the 1st assertion. I strongly disagree with the second, I think the EVF is an accessory that can be helpful when carrying multiple ultra wide lenses, or wanting to do extreme closeups. My rangefinders have never gotten knocked out of alignment, and EVF's can fizzle out like any electronic device. I find focus peaking less precise than merely judging sharpness visually. When I had a bunch of R lenses I used them on Canon bodies and found it much more convenient than the M240. I still prefer using my Nikkors on the 5D far better than the M240. As long as Leica makes a rangefinder body I'm in. When they stop, I'm out. I see no reason other than the rangefinder to pay what Leica asks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 26, 2015 Share #20 Posted June 26, 2015 Well the Q covers 28/35/50 so if they release a new one with a native 75mm lens covering 90 and 135 as well then you're all set! Poor 50mm users... 7.5 MP, 1.8x crop factor... aside from digital noise, i'd prefer an M8 by far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.