LocalHero1953 Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1421 Posted October 4, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Leave the M system as the higher end system. Why does this have to be? What's wrong with a top end AF system? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 Hi LocalHero1953, Take a look here NEW M.. This year.. This Fall.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1422 Posted October 4, 2015 The R system was always presented ahead of the M one in Leica catalogues. I guess it won't happen for the "SL" before long. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1423 Posted October 4, 2015 The M systems is complete. The lens catalogue is very rich, and the rangefinder camera is now, in film and digital, very mature. You can improve small things, but that is all. I think Leica could offer an electronic body with M mount, with EVF. It is an interesting direction for Leica to explore, and M users would be delighted. Maybe this would bring the possibility of new zooms. The manual focus lenses are the weak and strong point of this system: many people don't want MF lenses, but these lenses are appreciably smaller. The M user base is small and difficult to expand, but it is very loyal. The system is unique. The new system with AF lenses is aimed to a wider, more conventional base of potential photographers. Therefore, the price and specifications will be a key factor here. People will compare this system with the alternatives in the market. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGodParticle/Hari Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1424 Posted October 4, 2015 Whomever is the head of marketing at Leica right now, if he or she is reading this, is, first, laughing uproariously at this speculative fever, and next, anticipating a bonus. I've been tuning into this forum since 2003, when there was eager speculation about what the Digilux 2 would be like, and never have I seen such wild speculations as can be found on the previous 35 -- 35! -- pages of this thread. This makes anticipation of the M8 seem so last decade... All that is certain is that if --when? -- a new M is released this fall, there will be a furious eruption about its strengths/deficiencies, with an End Times Coming series of pronouncements worthy of a cult fearing doom. And if there also is, or instead is, a new platform camera, prepare for the same! One way or another, Leica's most engaged customers are working themselves into a speculative lather. Well done, Leica marketing honcho! It is a very nice lady and thankfully she isn't aware of these doomsday threads / threats Hmmmmm to think of it, could be a nice amusing read for her - a printed booklet over coffee on a rainy day Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1425 Posted October 4, 2015 I never thought I would ever say this, but I would be willing to switch completely to the SL system if it turns out to be well thought without the weaknesses of the A7 series. However I have a lot of doubt that it is going to be up to my expectations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1426 Posted October 4, 2015 Why would M users be delighted with a EVF ? I am delighted with an EVF on my A7, I don't want it near my M. Perhaps a hybrid but for me this is not a deciding feature. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1427 Posted October 4, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Why would M users be delighted with a EVF ? [...] Because the WYSIYG features of a good EVF are very appealing for those who don't need really a rangefinder i suspect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1428 Posted October 4, 2015 Why would an M user want an EVF? I don't, but others do. So they could use macro, zooms, non-rangefinder coupled lenses, lenses longer than 135mm and, umm, let's see ... I don't see the M changing a huge amount (hopefully). If anything, I'd like to see a lot that's on the M(240) ditched, but that s just me. The new "SL" (or whatever it's called) - I don't see that having anything to do with the M at all. But I do see that as a far more attractive proposition than the hopeless compromise that the M(240) is. As a rangefinder, fine - but two viewfinders, live view, view and that Swiss Army knife multi-function grip? No thanks ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1429 Posted October 4, 2015 Because the WYSIYG features of a good EVF are very appealing for those who don't need really a rangefinder i suspect.But that's not an MThat's a CSC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1430 Posted October 4, 2015 I do see that as a far more attractive proposition than the hopeless compromise that the M(240) is. As a rangefinder, fine - but two viewfinders, live view, view and that Swiss Army knife multi-function grip? No thanks ...You are in a minority of a minority here The M240 has a near perfect blend of features IMHO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1431 Posted October 4, 2015 Why would an M user want an EVF? I don't, but others do. So they could use macro, zooms, non-rangefinder coupled lenses, lenses longer than 135mm and, umm, let's see ... I don't see the M changing a huge amount (hopefully). If anything, I'd like to see a lot that's on the M(240) ditched, but that s just me. The new "SL" (or whatever it's called) - I don't see that having anything to do with the M at all. But I do see that as a far more attractive proposition than the hopeless compromise that the M(240) is. As a rangefinder, fine - but two viewfinders, live view, view and that Swiss Army knife multi-function grip? No thanks ... I agree. Sometimes I miss close focus abilities of non RF lenses, as well as accurate framing, and of course tele lenses. The M is unbeatable for fast street shooting though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyalf Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1432 Posted October 4, 2015 Why would an M user want an EVF? I don't, but others do. So they could use macro, zooms, non-rangefinder coupled lenses, lenses longer than 135mm and, umm, let's see ... I don't see the M changing a huge amount (hopefully). If anything, I'd like to see a lot that's on the M(240) ditched, but that s just me. The new "SL" (or whatever it's called) - I don't see that having anything to do with the M at all. But I do see that as a far more attractive proposition than the hopeless compromise that the M(240) is. As a rangefinder, fine - but two viewfinders, live view, view and that Swiss Army knife multi-function grip? No thanks ... Hi, For *me* the M is the best compromise so far. The RF for street / people and EVF / LV for slow tripod work. Unbeatable. I can see that others outside the RF camp might be interested in a new SL. For me it will just be another mirrorless competing with a myriad cameras made for menu-fondlers and well-made DSLRs for action. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1433 Posted October 4, 2015 Thank you Colonel... But Ikarus John has a history of over exaggerating the 'unnecessary functionality' of the M(240)... but uses an M60... Which is essentially a stripped down M-P (240) no matter how much he argues about it. I understand his reasoning though, I have a similar approach to things... so I don't use live view, nor do I have a multifunction hand grip, I dont use the add on EVF... even though I have one... and the 'movie' function is permanently off... so much so that every time anyone mentions it I have to think hard to remember it is actually there...! It is as simple a camera as you want it to be... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1434 Posted October 4, 2015 I agree. Too simple and it's just a hindrance to use. Too complex and it is not so fast to use. I find the M blindingly fast to use. For example a EVF would mean the camera would have to be on to look through the VF. A major slow down and flaw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterv Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1435 Posted October 4, 2015 But why would anyone want to look through a camera that is shut off? (Presuming the photographer has developed some feeling for what FOV a given lens provides. And besides, the M viewfinder is not particularly accurate, anyway.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1436 Posted October 4, 2015 But why would anyone want to look through a camera that is shut off? (Presuming the photographer has developed some feeling for what FOV a given lens provides. And besides, the M viewfinder is not particularly accurate, anyway.) the same reason you can change aperture and speed when the camera is off. It means you are always ready. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterv Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1437 Posted October 4, 2015 Hi colonel, I don't know about 'always ready'. How long does it take to check the FOV, aperture and shutter time, presuming one does not need to check other settings like white balance, exposure compensation, etc. And once the photographer has decided his/her FOV, shutter and diaphragm are OK, how long does it take for the M to start up? I guess it's all personal preference and that it could be argued that a camera with EVF, zoom lens, AF, auto ISO and in P(rogram-mode) may be faster. Regards, Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1438 Posted October 4, 2015 You might always be ready, but the camera isn't. It's off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1439 Posted October 4, 2015 The camera is on if its startup / wakeup times are fast i.e. if it is neither the M240 nor the latest Sony EVIL i've been told. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 4, 2015 Share #1440 Posted October 4, 2015 The camera is on if its startup / wakeup times are fast i.e. if it is neither the M240 nor the latest Sony EVIL i've been told. Indeed... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.