IkarusJohn Posted August 8, 2015 Share #321 Posted August 8, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I joined this forum in 2010, shortly after I bought my first M, an M9. Over the next 18 months, there was a lot of discussion about what the next M was going to be like, should Leica produce an EVIL, and the Monochrom was released. Then in 2012 the M(240) broke cover, and many here said, thank you Leica for listening. These discussions were usually a mix of guesswork about what might be released, and telling Leica what we wanted, and saying what Leica needed to do to survive, or to achieve its 1% of market share. At the same time, senior members here started mocking some contributors with the "armchair ceo" comment, with the clear implication that this was a bad thing. I must confess to finding this deeply patronising; not because I felt I was the target of these comments (I probably was, but that didn't concern me much). What bothered me was the underlying message (often explicit) - you've never run a camera company, you've never worked in electronics, optics, glass, coding etc etc. leave it to Leica, they know best. These were generally the same people who said, with much wisdom, there would never be a full frame M. I'm sure I'm not alone in finding such conceit distasteful. The truth of the matter is that Leica has survived through the support of its customers - many on this forum. Many of their business decisions, supply chain management, product selections, R&D decisions (remember who came up with AF first) and customer support handling has shown that actually, often they don't know what they're doing; it is pressure from this forum that has often put them onto a more productive path. If anything, I'm sorry to say, it's the stick with the past conservatism we often see on this forum that encourages Leica to just plod along doing the same old without really thinking about what the future holds. How can I say such a disrespectful thing? Well, it was brave decisions which put Leica where it is today - the Barnack camera, the M3, the M9 and the Monochrom spring immediately to mind. I can't imagine such mediocre thinking resulting in the M-A or the Edition 60. Now, you may dislike these cameras (many here apparently do), but thankfully Leica was brave enough to make them. I hope we're on the eve of another such step. That's what we're speculating about, and I guess Jono has been firing away happily for the last few months, and is now busily editing his review and the images to go with it (along with Sean Reid and others). Some here will also be readying themselves to pour scorn on those reviews. Who knows, maybe Digilloyd has already half written his critique of the failings of RF. But nothing we say here will affect this camera - but I fully expect that some one at Leica is looking at what we're asking for for the next camera. This group is not just full of customers, and people who can afford and use these products; we also have photographers (professional and keen amateurs), retired CEOs, engineers, and professionals who have run their own businesses. Successfully. They're worth listening to. People who resist change, and who keep telling you you're doing the right thing, generally aren't (I think Bonaparte had something to say about the worth of such advisors). The World is changing, so now would be a good time to pay attention. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 8, 2015 Posted August 8, 2015 Hi IkarusJohn, Take a look here NEW M.. This year.. This Fall.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter Kilmister Posted August 8, 2015 Share #322 Posted August 8, 2015 An ox propelled aircraft sounds like a serious challenge. Good luck with that one. However, the Romans knew which side of the road was best to drive on. They weren't daft. They drove on the left. I may be old but I can't remember them doing it. Scientific research has proven it. Entrances and exits of Roman quarries have proved that empty carts came in on the left and laden carts also went out on the left. Sinister is good, dexter is wrong ... if you remember your Latin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted August 8, 2015 Share #323 Posted August 8, 2015 All I know is in the US you can't use the term, "Redneck" anymore. It's politically incorrect. You now must say, "Appalachian American." Well, we all know that in the US, policially correct has been taken to the negative. Now original US history is being changed state by state. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted August 8, 2015 Share #324 Posted August 8, 2015 I always thought you kept left on horseback so your sword hand was free on the side of any approaching rider, for the same reason staircases spiral upwards clockwise. The French and the U.S. preferred driving on the right for trade protection reasons - keeping out English cars ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kilmister Posted August 8, 2015 Share #325 Posted August 8, 2015 As you in NZ know, via All Black success, the best line of attack is on the left with your right hand free. The Maoris knew that before Europeans arrived. Napoleon Bonaparte changed things in Europe. He decided to march his armies on the right side. Odd chap, no wonder he lost! Strangely enough every (French built) Bugatti until the latest (German built) model was RHD. All race circuits in Europe are clockwise so it is better to sit on the right side of the vehicle. Most countries drive on the right now. Most camera users use DSLRs or Point & Shoot. I prefer to stay in the minority and use MF and drive on the left. Some things are natural, the Romans taught us that. The only MF digital camera I could find that felt natural was the Leica M. I love it. Thank you, ancient Rome and good luck with ox powered aeroplanes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted August 8, 2015 Share #326 Posted August 8, 2015 As an owner of the Q and two M240 platforms Leicas, I see the best features of the Q coming to the M system. AFA an M with AF who knows. Leica does need an interchangeable FF system with AF and the Q platform could just be the one. I for one will still keep using my manual M lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted August 8, 2015 Share #327 Posted August 8, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Stick to New Zealand history which you probably excel at. Driving on the right in the United States has to do with Teamsters and dominance of the road. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted August 9, 2015 Share #328 Posted August 9, 2015 Stick to New Zealand history which you probably excel at. ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted August 9, 2015 Share #329 Posted August 9, 2015 According to the Federal Highway Authority: The Federal Highway Administration has often been asked about the American practice of driving on the right, instead of the left, as in Great Britain, our "Mother Country." Albert C. Rose, who served as "unofficial historian" of the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads during much of his long career with the agency (1919-1950) researched why. Rose found that, "All available evidence seems to indicate that the RIGHT-HAND travel predominated in Colonial America from the time of the earliest settlements." The ox-team, the horseback rider, the handler of the lead horse, and even the pedestrian all traveled to the right. Travelers with hand guns carried their weapons in the hollows of their left arms and traveled to the right, the better to be ready if an oncoming stranger proved dangerous ... For the French and most of the rest of Europe, it seems Napoleon is the reason (though it does include some level of speculation). Interesting, but way off topic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted August 9, 2015 Share #330 Posted August 9, 2015 What ended up happening to force the switch in the 18th century were teamsters in the United States, who would drive large wagons with a team of horses, as the name implies. These wagons tended to dominate the road and force everybody else to abide by the rule of the road they were using. Very importantly, in many of those old, large American wagons, they did not include a seat on the wagon for the driver. Rather, the driver would typically sit on the rear left most horse, when the driver was right handed. This allowed them to easily drive a whole team of horses with a lash in their right hand. This then forced the issue of having oncoming traffic on your left as the drivers would want to make sure any part of their team or wagon didn’t collide with oncoming traffic. When sitting on the rear left most horse, this was much easier to do when using a keep-right rule of the road. Just as important, if you wanted to pass a wagon in front of you, or at least see further down the road when you are sitting on the left side, it is much easier done if you are using the keep-right rule; this would give you much greater visibility of oncoming traffic when sitting on the left of your wagon. Gradually, this system spread so that by the late 18th century, the first laws in the United States were passed, starting in 1792 in Pennsylvania, where the rule of the road was now officially a keep-right rule. This quickly spread throughout the United States and Canada. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted August 9, 2015 Share #331 Posted August 9, 2015 ...for the same reason staircases spiral upwards clockwise. Designed so a right-handed swordsman could better defend from above. So one was at a major disadvantage being a left-handed defender or right-handed attacker! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted August 9, 2015 Share #332 Posted August 9, 2015 Wel I'm a left-hander, we drive on the left hand side of the road, and I was thinking that with my right shoulder out of action post-surgery that I can't even use my Contax T3 P&S to photograph - Oh for a camera with the shutter release on the other side :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert blu Posted August 9, 2015 Share #333 Posted August 9, 2015 As a slightly (?) confused Leica lover desiring to buy a new digital to complement or substitute both the M7 and X1 I am very interested in the new developments, I think if the new system would use the T mount which seems to be large enough for FF lenses and make an interchangeable AF lens Q body it seems me to be a good idea. The camere should be able to use via adapter the M lenses. The new AF lenses could be used both on the new system and on the T. Owner of M manual lenses could use their precious lens if desired on the new system. Anyway Leica should produce a few more APS.C T mount lenses for user who appreciate small size and weigh on their T (a 50 eq, a macro, a 80-200 F 2,8 eq) using the T mount. User could have two systems (T and new) using the same lenses (of course keeping in mind the crop factor) which could means a more rational investment in lenses, maybe I feel as photographer we are not always rational when buying, at least me! At the end I see these lines: analog M so long it is required, digital M RF based for the "traditionalist" who appreciate the benefits of digital, T based on APS-C for the ones who do not need FF and appreciate small size and weight (I'm one of them), Q series which could include the actual Q (I never tried it but for what I read it seems to be very good) and an interchangeable AF lenses Q body, S for photographer who needs its IQ. Not sure where to put the X serie...beside the T having both an APS-C sensor. X more traditionalist, T more innovative. Could this give everybody the possibility to select the best for him system/camera? Could Leica being relative small company support all this production lines? And we should not forget the Pana Leicas...the D serie... Just my thinking, robert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted August 9, 2015 Share #334 Posted August 9, 2015 I joined this forum in 2010, shortly after I bought my first M, an M9. Over the next 18 months, there was a lot of discussion about what the next M was going to be like, should Leica produce an EVIL, and the Monochrom was released. Then in 2012 the M(240) broke cover, and many here said, thank you Leica for listening. These discussions were usually a mix of guesswork about what might be released, and telling Leica what we wanted, and saying what Leica needed to do to survive, or to achieve its 1% of market share. At the same time, senior members here started mocking some contributors with the "armchair ceo" comment, with the clear implication that this was a bad thing. I must confess to finding this deeply patronising; not because I felt I was the target of these comments (I probably was, but that didn't concern me much). What bothered me was the underlying message (often explicit) - you've never run a camera company, you've never worked in electronics, optics, glass, coding etc etc. leave it to Leica, they know best. These were generally the same people who said, with much wisdom, there would never be a full frame M. I'm sure I'm not alone in finding such conceit distasteful. The truth of the matter is that Leica has survived through the support of its customers - many on this forum. Many of their business decisions, supply chain management, product selections, R&D decisions (remember who came up with AF first) and customer support handling has shown that actually, often they don't know what they're doing; it is pressure from this forum that has often put them onto a more productive path. If anything, I'm sorry to say, it's the stick with the past conservatism we often see on this forum that encourages Leica to just plod along doing the same old without really thinking about what the future holds. How can I say such a disrespectful thing? Well, it was brave decisions which put Leica where it is today - the Barnack camera, the M3, the M9 and the Monochrom spring immediately to mind. I can't imagine such mediocre thinking resulting in the M-A or the Edition 60. Now, you may dislike these cameras (many here apparently do), but thankfully Leica was brave enough to make them. I hope we're on the eve of another such step. That's what we're speculating about, and I guess Jono has been firing away happily for the last few months, and is now busily editing his review and the images to go with it (along with Sean Reid and others). Some here will also be readying themselves to pour scorn on those reviews. Who knows, maybe Digilloyd has already half written his critique of the failings of RF. But nothing we say here will affect this camera - but I fully expect that some one at Leica is looking at what we're asking for for the next camera. This group is not just full of customers, and people who can afford and use these products; we also have photographers (professional and keen amateurs), retired CEOs, engineers, and professionals who have run their own businesses. Successfully. They're worth listening to. People who resist change, and who keep telling you you're doing the right thing, generally aren't (I think Bonaparte had something to say about the worth of such advisors). The World is changing, so now would be a good time to pay attention. I agree, though I diverge on a detail or two. I often suspect that the Edition 60 and the Monochrome are Leica's way of playing to the most conservative element of its digital-user customer base. Of course not all users of these cameras are driven by conservatism but it's probable that very many are. (Photos provide some evidence here.) But those who want change, who want Leica to manifest its best and sometimes unique qualities in truly technologically advanced cameras instead of nostalgic comforters for the aged-in-spirit should hope that the Monochrome and 60 are the very cameras that, by satisfying that market, leave the rest of the company's time free to concentrate on the future and the technological opportunities that it offers. In other words, a camera that combines the best of the incomparably marvellous M with the best technology can offer. Well, I hope so anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted August 9, 2015 Share #335 Posted August 9, 2015 But those who want change, who want Leica to manifest its best and sometimes unique qualities in truly technologically advanced cameras instead of nostalgic comforters for the aged-in-spirit should hope that the Monochrome and 60 are the very cameras that, by satisfying that market, leave the rest of the company's time free to concentrate on the future and the technological opportunities that it offers. In other words, a camera that combines the best of the incomparably marvellous M with the best technology can offer. Well, I hope so anyway. So do I. Exceptionally well put... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted August 9, 2015 Share #336 Posted August 9, 2015 17 pages later and thousands of threads I still see the same old arguments on one side saying that Leica should make a CSC like everyone else, and the world has moved on from RFs. Like the world moved one from RFs 50 years ago.... Did u miss it ???? The RF continues to sell as a platform as some people love it. If you don't like it buy one of the 100s of other cameras competing for the main space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted August 9, 2015 Share #337 Posted August 9, 2015 ............... The RF continues to sell as a platform as some people love it. If you don't like it buy one of the 100s of other cameras competing for the main space. But there's the potential, and s strong desire, for better than that. Which is why the subject won't go away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted August 9, 2015 Share #338 Posted August 9, 2015 But there's the potential, and s strong desire, for better than that. Which is why the subject won't go away. For better then what ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted August 9, 2015 Share #339 Posted August 9, 2015 For better then what ? For a better choice than you propose. You suggest a rather take it or leave it attitude, whereas many Leica users value the qualities of both the M cameras and the highly technologically advanced cameras that are available elsewhere but which, for so many reasons, do not suit their purposes. Is it so unnatural that many people might yearn for a camera that combines the main virtues of the two approaches? In many ways the M9 and the M did that, but time moves on very rapidly in digital-word, and something new is called for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted August 9, 2015 Share #340 Posted August 9, 2015 For a better choice than you propose. but time moves on very rapidly in digital-word, and something new is called for. +1. With Leica lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.