New Leica M in September 2016? The speculations.

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

............. I'm still torn. Wait for the next M iteration, or stick with my 2 M240s and use the upgrade fund to get an SL...

In a couple of months well know whether there is a new M to consider or not. That will be the time to start making decisions of this sort. Hold steady. Only a few more weeks to go!

[Manoleica]

Damn, more GAS"""

[jankap]

From 1954 (M3) up to 2003 (M7?) there only were marketing changes.

So what can we expect?

Jan

[ski542002]

Chris - interesting to hear your experience (and looking at your website it looks like the SL is helping you to make a living!).  

A question - how do you find focusing in bright light / studio where you're more likely to be stopped down.  Do you need focus peaking, or do you depend on the appearance of the subject in the view finder?  Also, I do a lot of theatre / performance work, and for me the delight of the M's RF is it's capacity to focus accurately in low light (mainly with 28 + 50 lenses - I use a DSLR for telephoto focal lengths).  Grateful if you have any comments on this.  I'm still torn.  Wait for the next M iteration, or stick with my 2 M240s and use the upgrade fund to get an SL...

Hello Chris: I hope my reply is coming in cleanly. This morning on my IPad the formatting of this thread is looking "not-correct"

 

In any event, there are a number of other threads on this forum complaining about (and I'm one of them), the lack of control over the SL's EVF. My workaround to this is to use lots of exposure compensation in manual mode, and relying on exposure preview to confirm correct exposure. Using exp. comp., I've had no trouble focusing in bright, contrasty back-lit subjects. I've found this issue to be not much of an issue at all. At least for me, the lighting scenarios I encounter are "consistent", meaning I only have to adjust viewing compensation only once for a given series of images, if that makes sense. I'm sure at some point (hopefully soon), a Leica FW update will fix this nagging issue.

 

Last night, I photographed a bank kiosk (ATM) at dusk. SL, with 35mm lens @ F8, 1/2 sec using 2 battery powered off camera 6000WS strobes. This was the first time I used the SL in this type of scenario. It involved many of the issues facing this kind of shoot. Dark ambient, various color temps on the kiosk, strobe-fill while dragging the shutter. Was easy to focus, exposure magnification as well as focus peaking verified focus. In-camera levels to achieve near-perfect perspective. No mirror-slap/mirror-lockup to worry about. After the capture, I quickly checked exposure & lighting both in the viewfinder & EVF using the joy stick. All of the issues I faced when shootiing a similar scenario with my DSLR were absent. When I finished the shoot, I stared at the camera and said quietly out loud "this is f - - - - ing" great! I was thrilled. When I get the files processed, I'm going to post one, and explain the scenario with image on the post.

 

When shootiing wide open, I find my "hit-rate" with the SL to be close to 100%. I was accurte with the M, but not that accurate. Shutter of the SL is much quieter than either M, especially the M9. And I find the SL files to be much more malliable than the M, or my Canon raws. For some of my architectural work, I needed to do some exposure blending and almost HDR (which I don't like). Have less of a need to rely on these workarounds with my SL files.

 

The SL is used for 95% of my commercial work. I'm also a glutten for punishment and shoot about 20 weddings/year as a subcontractor for a local studio. (You'll not find weddings on my commercial site.) For the weddings, I'm about 60% SL, 40% Canon. Like you, I still need the speed of a zoom and right now, I don't want to pop for the SL zooms. Once the adapters become more prolific, I'll hopefully be able to get one for my Canon zooms that will work with both AF & image stabilization.

 

Hope this helps.

[jaapv]

From 1954 (M3) up to 2003 (M7?) there only were marketing changes.

[...}

Jan

Frameline number increases? Loading system? Hot shoe? TTL metering? Motor winder?

[dkCambridgeshire]

If the anticipated new M was a car, the spies would be out with long lenses looking for strangely disguised cameras in the hands of known photographers - in the hope of documenting the new wee beastie. 

 

Whatever it is, I wonder if it will produce better image files than the DMR? If it's a CCD camera, maybe it will - but if it's a CMOS??  

 

dunk

[chris_tribble]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm about 60% SL, 40% Canon. Like you, I still need the speed of a zoom and right now, I don't want to pop for the SL zooms. Once the adapters become more prolific, I'll hopefully be able to get one for my Canon zooms that will work with both AF & image stabilization.

 

Dear Chris - thanks for the very informative post.  Like you, I'm also interested to see what happens with adapters for the Canon zooms - though I imagine we won't have access to IS... However, if we get accurate metering and AF works I'll be fine (I usually use a mono-pod with longer lenses). Also like you, I don't consider the cost (£4,640) of the SL 90-280 to be real world for my purposes.  The L series Canon 70-200 IS mk2 costs around £1,600,  gives me constant f2.8, blindingly fast AF on a 5D2 or 5D3 and world class image quality.

 

Maybe the thing to do will be to rent an SL + M adapter and try it... I've noticed that I can do this in London for a reasonable amount... http://www.procentre.co.uk/rental-cameras-leica.php 

[mirekti]

New Leica camera registered 
http://leicarumors.com/2016/07/14/leica-8854-camera-registered-at-indonesian-communication-agency.aspx/

[jaapv]

Weird number.

[ski542002]

Dear Chris - thanks for the very informative post.  Like you, I'm also interested to see what happens with adapters for the Canon zooms - though I imagine we won't have access to IS... However, if we get accurate metering and AF works I'll be fine (I usually use a mono-pod with longer lenses). Also like you, I don't consider the cost (£4,640) of the SL 90-280 to be real world for my purposes.  The L series Canon 70-200 IS mk2 costs around £1,600,  gives me constant f2.8, blindingly fast AF on a 5D2 or 5D3 and world class image quality.

 

Maybe the thing to do will be to rent an SL + M adapter and try it... I've noticed that I can do this in London for a reasonable amount... http://www.procentre.co.uk/rental-cameras-leica.php 

 

Hello:  I really don't understand why IS could not be a feature on the adapter.  It's just an electronic connection.  I have a photodiox EOS to M adapter and the optical quality of the Canon lenses is good on the SL. Zero automation and a fixed aperture that must be preset on a Canon body, but they do work well in a pinch. 

[IkarusJohn]

I sincerely doubt any of this will happen - at least, not on a camera called M.

 

The next M (if we see one this year) will primarily be a rangefinder, based around making the most of M lenses. Improvements will simply be to remove or improve what hasn't been so good on the existing M(240).

 

- better EVF

 

- upgraded sensor, more dynamic range etc - more than 24MP? Why?

 

- better LCD?

 

Anything else? In 35mm format, Leica has developed the Q and the SL for those wanting Leica's idea of the best technology can offer. Apart from flights of fantasy and improbable wish lists, what would you change or improve in the existing M(240)?

 

It's a rangerfinder with huge legacy. That isn't going to change. IS, AF, electronic rangefinders, hybrid rangefinders etc ... ain't gonna happen. That's a new camera altogether.

[jaapv]

Not so sure; yes, there may be incremental improvements, but the M240 is hard to improve on significantly. EVF, sensor, LCD, those will only be of limited interest to a minority of present users, and would only serve to maintain market position, not to attract new customers nor upgraders.

Leica must offer a significant technological leap forward to sell cameras and so far I can only see two ares of interest: the size and the rangefinder. Of the two, the rangefinder appears to be the most likely candidate for a spectacular upgrade.

Unless they should manage to shoehorn AF into the system with  full retention of the  traditional optical finder and lens retrocompatability, which would be close to heroic.

[Paulus]

The M8 was quite "heroic " in it's days, even with it flaws, a highly unlikely concept, at leat, that was what we were told a year before everone started to dump his Leica lenses for drastic prices.

 

(Offering me a Noctilux for € 2000,- and buying a 90mm SA Titan for € 1000,-).

 

In this days it's maybe more difficult to invent something more drastic?

[IkarusJohn]

...

Leica must offer a significant technological leap forward to sell cameras and so far I can only see two ares of interest: the size and the rangefinder. Of the two, the rangefinder appears to be the most likely candidate for a spectacular upgrade.

...

Must they? Is that because they have competition? Or because the M(240) is flawed and not selling well? Or Leica isn't making money?

 

The M(240) has significant flaws, but neither the rangefinder nor the size would rate on my list at all. Providing an EVF at least as good as the SL will surely be a minimum, but improving the rangefinder? How? Electronic focus confirmation or some other gimmick?

 

I think you have said on many occasions, Jaap - M stands for messucher etc etc. Leica themselves have said the camera is their flagship and it will remain so. Isn't it all about manual lenses, and a coupled rangefinder? The rangefinder is new in the M(240) - why does it suddenly need improving, and what would you do to it?

 

As for size, I guess anything is possible, but every digital M is now the same size - that's a level of standardisation that's unlikely to change. If that's the priority, the camera is close to perfect - the size is surely not a driver to attract new customers; that is a nostalgic issue for M film camera users.

 

Time will tell, I guess. An incremental improvement to the existing camera, and/or a gee-whizz departure from what we've had to date (I thought that was the SL) - carbon fibre body in a new smaller form factor, faithful to the coupled rangefinder but with the latest innovations technology has to offer ... can I have some of what you're smoking?

 

Better rangefinder and smaller - yep, I can see the queues forming already ...

[keithlaban.co.uk]

Improved rangefinder and smaller size would not tempt me in the slightest to put my hand in my pocket.

 

Vastly improved EVF, improved sensor and processing would empty my pockets, quick time.

[Giulio Zanni]

I would not upgarde if they would not improve the long exposure time

[EdwardM]

bigger focusing area in OVF PLEASE

[dkCambridgeshire]

bigger focusing area in OVF PLEASE

 

 

 

Whatever is on the way (assuming there is something significant) is likely complete and currently under test by 'you know who'.  Little point in wishing / wanting / pretty pleasing    What it is, is what it is … and there'e nothing that we can say or write which could influence the wee beastie. 

 

dunk

[IkarusJohn]

Whatever is on the way (assuming there is something significant) is likely complete and currently under test by 'you know who'.  Little point in wishing / wanting / pretty pleasing    What it is, is what it is … and there'e nothing that we can say or write which could influence the wee beastie. 

 

dunk

I don't agree with that at all.

 

The SL came as a result of pressure here, I believe. The firmware update reflected requests here. Leica has shown it does listen, and this next M (if there is one) will reflect those requests made a couple of years ago when the M(240) was released; those which Leica agreed with, anyway.

 

Sure, asking for things now for the September release is too late, but I don't think anyone thinks that. Any such camera has been developed, tested and is presumably in production - what will count is the reaction to the next iteration when it is released and tried.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jeff S]

The rangefinder is new in the M(240) - why does it suddenly need improving, and what would you do to it?

 

 

 

Not 'new' according to Stefan Daniel, who said in this awkward floor level interview with Thorsten at 2012 Photokina that everything was new in the M240 except the structure of the RF, which was borrowed from the M9, but with improved accuracy (he didn't specify how)....  http://overgaard.dk/leica-M10-digital-rangefinder-camera-page-Leica-M10-Monochrome-Digital-Rangefinder.html   [At about 10min, 30 sec.]

 

Jeff