earleygallery Posted November 5, 2015 Share #61 Posted November 5, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Ugly... I looked at the link and immediately thought of this camera…..http://www.scottbirdphotography.com/Other/Vintage-Camera-Collection/i-qMVMfwr/3/L/Studio%20Session-070-L.jpg Some people have very strange ideas! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 5, 2015 Posted November 5, 2015 Hi earleygallery, Take a look here interview with Dr. Kaufmann and CEO Kaltner on the SL. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted November 5, 2015 Share #62 Posted November 5, 2015 I looked at the link and immediately thought of this camera…..http://www.scottbirdphotography.com/Other/Vintage-Camera-Collection/i-qMVMfwr/3/L/Studio%20Session-070-L.jpg Some people have very strange ideas! Haha, yes! I also thought of my sister's Instamatic, circa 1968! Dreadful thing, though I recall being very jealous at the time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted November 5, 2015 Share #63 Posted November 5, 2015 Yes exactly! I liked my Mum's Instamatic though. The flash cubes were cool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted November 5, 2015 Share #64 Posted November 5, 2015 Flash cubes were great, so futuristic! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted November 5, 2015 Share #65 Posted November 5, 2015 Predicted what outcome ? Do you know the revenues generated by the M-A ? About the MP, it is just the M240 as it should have been at launch. They just replaced the RAM with a 2GB chip, added the frame-lever, and a better rear-LCD glass. Overall, something like +$30 on the BOM at +$1000 for the final customer. Thanks, but no thanks. You confuse MP with M-P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted November 5, 2015 Share #66 Posted November 5, 2015 You confuse MP with M-P Not that it makes a big difference. Can you answer my questions ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted November 6, 2015 Share #67 Posted November 6, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sorry for my english, i meant not outcome, but the fact that leica brought these film cameras on the market for a giant price in the digital era. Just because of the idea of pure M photography. So it is absolutely not unthinkable that they will release a more pure M without EVF, smaller battery, thinner, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted November 6, 2015 Share #68 Posted November 6, 2015 Today I had a chance to explore the SL and I can say that it is a tremendous effort on the part of Leica to bring to market a truly exciting camera for many audiences - in action, sports, fashion, journalist, videography etc. What is more exciting than this, is the idea that Leica now has the complete unencumbered freedom to go back to the roots of what the M should be (a superlative rangefinder), without the pressure to try to make the M please other audiences. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 6, 2015 Share #69 Posted November 6, 2015 I don't think they have that freedom. Many M users will not have the inclination to pour their money into a second system, nor to drag two systems around.The option of (occasional) use of long lenses and video will be here to stay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted November 6, 2015 Share #70 Posted November 6, 2015 With the SL system as an alternative the M developers are relieved of any pressure to turn the rangefinder system into something else. Still it would be foolish to omit the option of using an electronic viewfinder for those who want or need it. And video is here to stay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted November 6, 2015 Share #71 Posted November 6, 2015 I agree... I hope that SL will be succesful, but as a pure amateur i do not WANT to change my platform (not to speak of NEED...) and till hundreds/thousands of amateurs like me are here around, enjoying their Ms, I think that Leica will find the way to attract them with something new... my M is OK for me.... but would be stupid to say "I'll never desire anything more"... a new better accessory EVF, and something on the sensor's side (ISO, DR...) could be sufficient to make me think seriously at a future switch... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted November 6, 2015 Share #72 Posted November 6, 2015 I think, if they're not careful, removing functionality, or the potential for adding contemporary functionality from the M in the name of purity, a dubious concept to begin with, will drive some users to alternative systems, and by no means all of those will wish to pay for an SL system. In other words unless the M is a bang up-to-date camera, and the ultimate MF camera with all the appropriate technological advances available, Leica may lose customers to competitors, which won't be good for any of us. Many of us know that a brilliant MF system has genuine advantages over AF in certain situations and applications, so it's important that it's not treated as a nostalgic artefact for a diminishing number of antique enthusiasts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 6, 2015 Share #73 Posted November 6, 2015 Well, for "purity", whatever that might be, the digital scene is the wrong place to be anyway imo. The film M cameras seem to me to be far more appropriate for that sentiment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timde Posted November 6, 2015 Share #74 Posted November 6, 2015 Well, for "purity", whatever that might be, the digital scene is the wrong place to be anyway imo. The film M cameras seem to me to be far more appropriate for that sentiment. Purity is perhaps no more than "compact", "manual focus", "aperture priority" and "form factor". Within those restrictions there is room for each existing M camera and really no reason that a future M camera _variant_ could offer other alternatives. The M60 without LCD is just as valid as a future M with built-in EVF, and as valid as any already existing M camera. IMO, Leica does not care at all about purity, they only care about making the next M compelling enough that existing owners will buy the next one, who almost by definition (income/wealth/lenses/etc) are the only people who _would_ buy one. And since that income keeps Leica alive .... it shall be tended to. If they (Leica) were to actually try and compete with anyone but themselves then things might actually change. But so far does anyone see that, the SL as impressive as it is, on paper seems not much different to the A7mk2 other than in body construction and price, and so I would not expect anything other than a new M camera which is compelling enough that existing owners will want to upgrade, and pay a premium to do it. Purity ... so long that it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 6, 2015 Share #75 Posted November 6, 2015 Well, for "purity", whatever that might be, the digital scene is the wrong place to be anyway imo. The film M cameras seem to me to be far more appropriate for that sentiment. This is Leica purity! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted November 6, 2015 Share #76 Posted November 6, 2015 Why do we equate "purity" with "original" or even "old"? Is it therefore impossible for to develop a product to become more pure? Not that I have any idea what we mean by pure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 6, 2015 Share #77 Posted November 6, 2015 Purity is perhaps no more than "compact", "manual focus", "aperture priority" and "form factor". Within those restrictions there is room for each existing M camera and really no reason that a future M camera _variant_ could offer other alternatives. The M60 without LCD is just as valid as a future M with built-in EVF, and as valid as any already existing M camera. IMO, Leica does not care at all about purity, they only care about making the next M compelling enough that existing owners will buy the next one, who almost by definition (income/wealth/lenses/etc) are the only people who _would_ buy one. And since that income keeps Leica alive .... it shall be tended to. If they (Leica) were to actually try and compete with anyone but themselves then things might actually change. But so far does anyone see that, the SL as impressive as it is, on paper seems not much different to the A7mk2 other than in body construction and price, and so I would not expect anything other than a new M camera which is compelling enough that existing owners will want to upgrade, and pay a premium to do it. Purity ... so long that it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck ;-) Leica does not care. Maybe, maybe not. But they certainly have a design philosophy and a view on photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted November 6, 2015 Share #78 Posted November 6, 2015 I think recent threads have demonstrated pretty clearly that purity means something different to everyone with a view. I'm glad Leica has its own view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 6, 2015 Share #79 Posted November 6, 2015 I am curious about the angst the release of the SL has caused many M camera owners. Had the SL been released after the M9, but before the M(240), would this insecurity has arisen quite so strongly? The core of the M system is the optical view finder with manual focus lenses and aperture priority. That is never going to change. When the M(240) was released, it was clear that Leica had considered the benefits the switch to the CMOS sensor brought, and the opportunities live view provided. At that time, I speculated whether Leica would carry over those benefits to uncoupled lenses - longer than 135mm, wider than 18mm, zooms and macros. Certainly, the new sensor would have allowed for that. But they didn't. They were working on the SL. To my mind, the defining strength of the M system is the view finder and the compact manual focus rangefinder coupled lenses. I'd be amazed if that were to change. Sure, you can use live view and take video, but that essence is unlikely to change. Similarly, they are unlikely to offer less, or smaller. The SL is the AF alternative. I must say, I find it a shame that when confronted with a parallel system to the M, priced at the same level, presented with the same Leica approach to quality and user interface, we get two reactions prevailing here - (1) it isn't an M, and (2) buy a Canon or Nikon dSLR. The complaint about the lack of lenses is just silly - I don't know how many M mount lenses were available on the release of the M3, but I doubt it was many. More recently the S and T lenses have trickled in. How many M lenses have been released since 2012? Two - the APO Summicron 50 and the 28 Summilux, and they have been incredibly hard to get. Did anyone seriously think Leica was going to have all three lenses announced available on launch? We all know the SL isn't an M. It's pretty obvious, isn't it? Another M will come shortly, and I have no doubt that Leica won't go backwards, nor will they make it SL-like, but they will improve on the things the M(240) isn't so good at. Both the S and the SL use the Maestro 2 processor, the S has the best optical viewfinder, the SL the best EVF, the M the best rangefinder - why wouldn't they improve the Visoflex. The one on the T is better than the one for the M. As for buying an SLR instead, go for it. If you want one of those, the SL shouldn't affect your decision one way or the other. Certainly, the release of the SL hasn't made me think - "what an interesting camera. I know, I'll go and buy a dSLR!" Why? Because I can't use my M lenses on an SLR, and the Canon, Nikon & Sonys don't have the same approach as Leica. The SL has the same appeal over SLRs as the M over the A7 cameras, with the excellent Zeiss lenses. Those who left behind SLRs for the M system aren't going to go back to SLRs because the SL has been released; nor are they abandoning the M. But the SL offers things the M can't - an extension to the M system, offering a better implementation for R lenses and good AF for the things the M will never do well - zooms, telephotos etc. Sure, SLRs do this too, but that is something else altogether. Sure, it's an expensive option, but no more so than the M and less that the S. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 6, 2015 Share #80 Posted November 6, 2015 Purity, with respect to a Leica camera, to me means: unburdened with irrelevant features. clean, simple design and styling which follows function. ease of learning, ease of use, and ease of remembering how to use. high quality in build, operation, and performance. subtlety and ergonomics in how the features and functions work together. durable and of lasting value. We may not always agree on what are "relevant" features as we all have different opinions and different intents as to what to put our cameras to use on, but in general to me it means not releasing a new model just to celebrate adding a half dozen new features that only a handful of users will actually care about or take advantage of. For example, adding twenty two new scene modes to a camera that already has fourteen is an explosion of irrelevance. They distract rather than focus the user on making top notch photos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.