New Leica M in September 2016? The speculations.

[Exodies]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

<snip>

So....to get in the full ensemble with the least cropping and during the performance, use of the preview lever can be critical to capturing that decisive moment.  (There got it out).

<snip>

I don't think it can be called a moment if it lingers long enough to change lenses.

[Advertisement]

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

[pop]

.... But it really seems to me that any pro photographer should be able to look at a scene and make an accurate assessment of what lens he need -without the use of a preview lever.  ...

The premise is somewhat flawed as not all Leica users - not even most Leica users - are "pro photographers". This has no bearing on how good their pictures are but might have a bearing on how much all manipulations have become automatic to them. Besides, that obviously applies to "pro photographers" as well.

 

Even a photographer who can estimate the required focal length  and distance to subject quite well might profit from a quick and inexpensive check using the frame preview. As any pro photographers knows, the field of view can not only be too wide but too narrow as well. Once you see that the FOV of the lens on the camera is too wide, you might want to check to see whether the next lens you have with you will suffice just barely or whether it will truncate important parts of your subject. 

 

Anyway, the kind of rhetoric that you're not a real pro photographer if you can't do such and such is neither very friendly nor particularly true.

[awesom3]

do away with the LCD and bring back the ISO dial....so a digital MP

[IkarusJohn]

Or to decide they don't need to buy anything....after using their feet.

 

Not everyone here is used to RF shooting.  The preview lever has been around for a long time for a reason....this is just one possible usage.

 

For those that don't want one, there are options.  What's the big deal?

 

Jeff

 

No big deal at all. I have three cameras with it, and one without. Never need it, never use it. 

 

If I had one lens it would be useless - why would I want to know the frame lines for lenses I don't have?  That's worthless information. Of the lenses I have, two don't bring up frame lines of any use 15 & 21), the 28 is the entire viewfinder, the 35 a bit less, the 50 & 75 close and the 90 the middle. I know where they sit, and they're not actually that accurate. 

 

The M3 is really only good for a 50 anyway ...

 

I've never really lost sleep over having them or not. The M60 looks better without them, and I suspect the M-A and Monochrom would too. 

[edwardkaraa]

The way I use the frameline preview is when I'm shooting landscapes mostly. I would normally have the ZM 25 on the camera, but many landscapes would look better with longer FL, even up to 85/90. So I will flip through the frames to see if there is any composition that would look pleasing with a different FL and change the lens accordingly.

 

Even without that, I think Leica M is about tradition, for a bunch of nostalgic people, so even if the lever is useless, it's nice to have just because it has been there since 1954. It's also a nice toy when you're not shooting

[lct]

[...] But I'd really like for you to elaborate on this scenario you're mentioned here...

 

Remember what you said? « I can't understand why someone would feel the "need" a preview lever ». I could answer that I can't understand why someone would feel the "need" to understand my tastes or preferences as well. Just kidding of course but you see what i mean. This is a subjective matter so looking for rationales is not necessarily relevant. Now look i'm in my cottage now, there is a nice light on the trees. I would have the choice between, say, 28mm and 35mm normally but 50mm, 75mm or 90mm could suit as well. Then what will i do? If i had a preview lever i would know already and i would have taken my snap instead of rationalizing. Now it is too late, the nice light is gone...

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While I don't use the preview lever, and don't regret its passing, I'm not worried that other people do. If it comes back, I won't write to the papers.

But I wish, how I wish that framelines were accurate. I might use them more if I could be sure they actually told me what would be in the frame and what would not. As it is I generally leave a bit to spare and crop in post. Someone with more knowledge of optics than me could say if accurate digital framelines could be calculated: if so, I hope they come with the next M.

[biglou]

What i would like is incremental upgrade starting from the M9 concept.

Sensor, reactivity, external EVF of the M240 is useful and could benefit from what was realised for the new FL.

But keep the optical viwfinder and telemeter as is, no need for another system, and no video so M9 sized body, no need for mics, special connectors etc...

A pure photography experience.

[jaapv]

Err.. The M240 has an M9 sized body (well, 0.5mm in thickness, due to the new construction of the bodyshell). The parts you mention have no impact on size.

The only way to slim it down would be to protrude the lens mount more. Or - indeed to remove the LCD, that would gain about 2 mm. However, for a main product that would not be a good idea commercially.

[biglou]

 

Err.. The M240 has an M9 sized body (well, 0.5mm in thickness, due to the new construction of the bodyshell). The parts you mention have no impact on size.

The only way to slim it down would be to protrude the lens mount more. Or - indeed to remove the LCD, that would gain about 2 mm. However, for a main product that would not be a good idea commercially.

 

 

Thank you for your explanations, i agree about the size.

The lcd is useful for menues and there is no way we don't need menues in a digital camera.

The special connectors for video, mics etc... are nonetheless useles for a M photographer, make the camera probably less humidity proof and could be a reason for failure.

What i would like is a version purely for photographers and stripped of all video parts along the more generalist model, why not ?

[jaapv]

As opposed to the previous M cameras, the M240 is weatherproofed - I don't think the extra features are  problem in this respect (although the silly little hot shoe cover is not the most practical thing around).

I have no issue with Leica producing a stripped model for those that want one,that would be a typical Leica thing to do,  as long as they will build a full-featured one for the general market, including me.

[biglou]

I am almost sure without any proof of it that, as with any device, there are design and functionality compromises meant to be as good as it is possible for different tasks.

This could be the case for the M with some options not optimized as they could for photograhers in order to accomodate some video features.

[Morry]

I want a shooting mode to record only B&W even in DNG.

 

I hate to be tempted to chose between color and b&w in front of PC screen.

 

That is why I switched from M240 to 246...

 

(I know this is unlikely to happen)

[Bill Livingston]

I am almost sure without any proof of it that, as with any device, there are design and functionality compromises meant to be as good as it is possible for different tasks. This could be the case for the M with some options not optimized as they could for photograhers in order to accomodate some video features.

 

Unfortunately this is completely untrue and entirely misleading - and with people continuing to 'agree', it shows that others have the same misinformed view which further suggests there IS truth in it.

 

'without and proof' or 'could be' doesn't make the post any less misleading as people take from whatever they read and add their own prejudices to it anyway.

 

The M9 and the M240 are the same size (perhaps Jaap is correct and there is 0.5mm in it, but I thought it was the same, the only increase would be the small section thumb rest by the dial - which is far smaller than a Thumbs Up anyway).

 

Video doesn't add any size and it doesn't take away from performance... and if you spent any time with pro photographers you will know that even on advertising or feature article shoots, video is a very necessary feature as many companies, including my own, want video clips as part of the coverage, particularly for online media.

 

we all want a camera that is as simple as possible to use and doesn't get 'in the way' of working. But just because you don't use it (and neither do I, incidentally), it doesn't mean it shouldn't be there.

 

The M240 IS the best and most complete digital rangefinder camera currently available. Maybe now the SL is here, Leica can perhaps decide to change a few things and maybe return to a more simple, non video product, as a zoom and the EVF of the SL lends itself better to video capture anyway, but remember the 240 predates the SL by two or three years... and as video has no 'cost' as such, was a perfectly sensible thing to add to it at the time.

 

It could simply be that many members are from a time that these things 'could' or 'would' compromise performance as people in my age group still think in the analogue world. Reality today is very different.

[pgk]

As I'm having my M4 rebuilt I'm having the preview lever removed and the 135 frame removed from the viewfinder too. Personal preference. And before anyone asks, no, I'm not suggesting that everyone should follow my lead - and the preview lever will stay on my other bodies. De-bloating the M4 though .

[rosuna]

The M240 was quite an achievement three years ago and even today is a wonderful camera (regarding digital specifications).

 

The only outdated feature is the EVF, and it is due to the processor. It is very good for photographic use though.

 

For me, it doesn't matter because I don't use the EVF. The reason is not the EVF resolution or refresh rate or latency... the reason is the double actuation of the shutter when you are using live view (open-close-open-close-open).

 

Another reason is I love the viewfinder-rangefinder, a pleasure to use with standard focal lengths (28 to 90mm).

 

So I would expect many small improvements in the next model, but this is a classical system, so I don't see revolutions coming to it. 

 

Maybe Leica would develop a separate model with M mount and EVF (no optical viewfinder) for a different public (lower price, lighter, smaller size). Why not?

 

For me, the M system is great because it is so small, compared with the format size, and so good in terms of image quality that there is no similar competition out there. It is quite special. Unique.

[mjh]

I want a shooting mode to record only B&W even in DNG.

 

I hate to be tempted to chose between color and b&w in front of PC screen.

 

That is why I switched from M240 to 246...

 

(I know this is unlikely to happen)

The DNG contains the sensor data so there is no way to change the contents of the DNG files but by changing the sensor. And that’s what you did when you switched to the M Monochrom.

[edwardkaraa]

Unfortunately this is completely untrue and entirely misleading - and with people continuing to 'agree', it shows that others have the same misinformed view which further suggests there IS truth in it.

 

'without and proof' or 'could be' doesn't make the post any less misleading as people take from whatever they read and add their own prejudices to it anyway.

 

The M9 and the M240 are the same size (perhaps Jaap is correct and there is 0.5mm in it, but I thought it was the same, the only increase would be the small section thumb rest by the dial - which is far smaller than a Thumbs Up anyway).

 

Video doesn't add any size and it doesn't take away from performance... and if you spent any time with pro photographers you will know that even on advertising or feature article shoots, video is a very necessary feature as many companies, including my own, want video clips as part of the coverage, particularly for online media.

 

we all want a camera that is as simple as possible to use and doesn't get 'in the way' of working. But just because you don't use it (and neither do I, incidentally), it doesn't mean it shouldn't be there.

 

The M240 IS the best and most complete digital rangefinder camera currently available. Maybe now the SL is here, Leica can perhaps decide to change a few things and maybe return to a more simple, non video product, as a zoom and the EVF of the SL lends itself better to video capture anyway, but remember the 240 predates the SL by two or three years... and as video has no 'cost' as such, was a perfectly sensible thing to add to it at the time.

 

It could simply be that many members are from a time that these things 'could' or 'would' compromise performance as people in my age group still think in the analogue world. Reality today is very different.

I think that features such as video do affect the camera design. Sony has 3 A7 versions, with one optimized for video and one optimized for high resolution stills. The SL itself is what it is because Leica wanted to optimize it for speed rather than high resolution, which requires a different set of compromises.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[biglou]

" The M240 IS the best and most complete digital rangefinder camera currently available "

 

------------

 

 

That's true since it is the only one to exist.

I don't want to dismiss the qualities of the M line, i think they are wonderful.

Nonetheless they can sure get improved and this is my point.

 

 

 

I am not convinced by your " video takes nothing " to the photographic capabilities.

This is a statement that goes against common sense and observed realities.

From the choice of sensor, shutter, electronics, shape, buttons and controls of the camera all is a compromise and meant to accomodate two different activities, making video clips and still photographs.

Maybe a much better sensor for photographers could possibly be set aside because it would not fit the requirements for video, getting too hot for instance or other reasons.

As you say the new SL will probably be more useful for those working professionals wanting the same camera for pictures and video clips and do not need or want a lot of resolution.

[jaapv]

Well, maybe you could list the "photographic capabilities"  that are impaired or taken away. I cannot not think of a single one.
The sensor is not designed for video, video is just a facet of it being a CMOS. Shape, buttons, etc are basically the same as the video-less M9. The electronics are not designed for Video - in reality the video would benefit from a more powerful processor.

The only conceivable reason is a philosophical one: "it does not fit into the concept" - and that is rather debatable. The M is a  reportage and travel camera, and in both  disciplines the abilitiy to take an occasional video clip is a welcome addition which takes away nothing.
 
For those who want to curtail the functionality of the camera there are, in ascending order of extremity: the OFF button , the ME, the M60 and film Ms.
 
I cannot imagine Leica limiting the attraction of their main product to a larger audience for the sake of a small group of -admittidly loyal- old customers.
Knowing Leica, I am sure that they will continue to provide sidelines if there is some demand.




 

I am not convinced by your " video takes nothing " to the photographic capabilities.
This is a statement that goes against common sense and observed realities.
From the choice of sensor, shutter, electronics, shape, buttons and controls of the camera all is a compromise and meant to accomodate two different activities, making video clips and still photographs.
Maybe a much better sensor for photographers could possibly be set aside because it would not fit the requirements for video, getting too hot for instance or other reasons.
As you say the new SL will probably be more useful for those working professionals wanting the same camera for pictures and video clips and do not need or want a lot of resolution.