New Leica M in September 2016? The speculations.

[luigi bertolotti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

http://leicarumors.com/2016/07/18/leica-rumored-to-announce-a-new-line-of-m-cinema-lenses.aspx/

The equation speculated by Leicarumors (new line of Cine lenses = new M with advanced video capability) is imho far from rational... high grade Cine Lenses are (obviously) for their own specific usage, gear, market

[Advertisement]

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

[jonoslack]

Could you explain the limitations of the SL with M lenses? Some members appear to be very happy with the combo.

HI Jaap

No shortcomings - The SL is fantastic with M lenses (and I do use it quite a lot like that)- but like Chris Tribble I like to work with two cameras with M lenses on - and having the SL for one and the M for the other isn't as good - they need to be the same so that you can apply the same methodology . . .. Added to which I like using a rangefinder unless it really won't work.

 

I did a concert the other night, and the SL with the two zooms together with an M and a couple of lenses was great - but for different things. I'm not keen on shooting the SL and the M both with M lenses.

[edwardkaraa]

For sure the M is not meant for professional video, it is no part of the concept, but for some of its primary use, i.e. journalism, travel, etc, a limited video function is quite useful and adequate. Why would you want to amputate it?

I'm not really sure that my observations are universal or just specific to the samples I've used, but by removing some hardware in the 262, we get much less banding and somewhat better noise performance at high ISO than the 240. Less hardware means less electrical interference.

[edwardkaraa]

Could you explain the limitations of the SL with M lenses? Some members appear to be very happy with the combo.

I'm one of those who initially thought the SL can replace the M as a platform to use M mount lenses. I concluded that it could be used but not ideal, not as enjoyable, and for dynamic shooting, not as precise as an M. My SL has found a new loving home

[marknorton]

It doesn’t really matter how old the M (Typ 240) is or when some anniversary is due. This question is whether Leica will introduce a new M at photokina. The next issue of LFI (after the issue we have finished a week ago) is the photokina issue and does it look like I’m busy? I don’t think so.

 

Maybe there's something lost in translation but if I take Michael's post at face value, he's working on the Photokina issue of LFI and he doesn't think he looks busy from which it's reasonable to infer there's no new M coming along. Or am I missing something?

 

Interesting to note though that compared to the stand space taken by Leica last time, this year the stand is much smaller judging by the promotional stuff I am getting from Photokina. These events cost a fortune to stage and maybe Leica has trimmed the budget to pay for replacement M9 sensors. Say.

[jaapv]

I'm not really sure that my observations are universal or just specific to the samples I've used, but by removing some hardware in the 262, we get much less banding and somewhat better noise performance at high ISO than the 240. Less hardware means less electrical interference.

I understand this was obtained by tuning the sensor/motherboard.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maybe there's something lost in translation but if I take Michael's post at face value, he's working on the Photokina issue of LFI and he doesn't think he looks busy from which it's reasonable to infer there's no new M coming along. Or am I missing something?

 

Interesting to note though that compared to the stand space taken by Leica last time, this year the stand is much smaller judging by the promotional stuff I am getting from Photokina. These events cost a fortune to stage and maybe Leica has trimmed the budget to pay for replacement M9 sensors. Say.

Well, last time's hall was a bit over the top IMO.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Maybe there's something lost in translation but if I take Michael's post at face value, he's working on the Photokina issue of LFI and he doesn't think he looks busy from which it's reasonable to infer there's no new M coming along. Or am I missing something?

 

Interesting to note though that compared to the stand space taken by Leica last time, this year the stand is much smaller judging by the promotional stuff I am getting from Photokina. These events cost a fortune to stage and maybe Leica has trimmed the budget to pay for replacement M9 sensors. Say.

 

 

"Que Sera, Sera".

 

Maybe best to wait and see ... rather than all this speculation and wishful thinking. 

 

dunk

[edwardkaraa]

I understand this was obtained by tuning the sensor/motherboard.

Leica says sensor technology is different, whatever that might mean. As far as I'm concerned, I really like the lower banding/noise in the 262, regardless of the technology behind it

[jaapv]

HI Jaap

No shortcomings - The SL is fantastic with M lenses (and I do use it quite a lot like that)- but like Chris Tribble I like to work with two cameras with M lenses on - and having the SL for one and the M for the other isn't as good - they need to be the same so that you can apply the same methodology . . .. Added to which I like using a rangefinder unless it really won't work.

 

I did a concert the other night, and the SL with the two zooms together with an M and a couple of lenses was great - but for different things. I'm not keen on shooting the SL and the M both with M lenses.

I hear you, Jono. Yes, mixing systems has always been a pain.

[jonoslack]

 

Interesting to note though that compared to the stand space taken by Leica last time, this year the stand is much smaller judging by the promotional stuff I am getting from Photokina. These events cost a fortune to stage and maybe Leica has trimmed the budget to pay for replacement M9 sensors. Say.

 

Hi Mark

I've been thinking about this - it's not just Leica who are no longer announcing stuff at trade shows - most high range cameras are introduced separately now. Before the days of the Internet it was hard to get the news out, and a trade show was perfect - now it's easy on the Internet, but in a trade show it's quite easy to get lost in the rush.

 

 

 

"Que Sera, Sera".

 

Maybe best to wait and see ... rather than all this speculation and wishful thinking. 

 

dunk

Hi Dunk

But it's so much fun speculating (and thinking wishfully)

[marknorton]

I haven't spent much time thinking about what I would like to see in a new M, the original M Typ 240 is still very much fit for purpose. The M262 may be the sweet spot of the range now with a couple of year's development under its belt. What I do know is that on more than one trip this year, I've skipped taking the M, with the usual 21/35/50/90 lens set and just grabbed the little T with its single 18-56 zoom, fine for the intended purpose at the time even if the IQ is not in the same league. The best thing Leica could do for me now with the M would be to introduce a 28 - 90 "zoom" with click stops at 28, 35, 50, 75 and 90, a sort of super Penta-Elmar. It would be large and obscure the optical viewfinder which leads me on to...

 

The other thing of course we need for the M is the SL EVF, the M240 effort was obsolete before it was released and has trapped Leica down a technological backwater. Given the SL finder has reached the development level it has, I think too the time is right to build it into an M camera with dual viewfinder capability.

 

Much as I would like to see otherwise, I think we're only going to see incremental improvements to the M. I would really like to see an enhancement which pushes the M envelope, and I don't mean video, but I fear I will be disappointed.

[GLOBETROTTER]

I have a some more info.

 

Is gonna be a CCD new sensor color & B/W via filter.

 

Good news isn't it ?

[mjh]

Technically this is correct, but since Leica has never really delivered video suitable for professional use, and yes this includes the SL I would personally rather see the M void of all video features and focus on what it does best. For me thats a small, lightweight rangefinder with a high quality EVF (yes blasphemy) and a better buffer that doesnt fill up before the card fills up. There is no reason a camera should stop shooting in 2016.

The point is that there is no antagonism. It is hard to envision a situation where one engineer in Wetzlar says ‘I want to make some change to the design so the M becomes a better still camera’ and another engineer objects ‘No, you cannot as I need to fit in some component to make the M a better video camera’. Much rather both would benefit, a larger buffer or a faster SD controller being a case in point.

 

The M may never become the premier choice for a video camera but I know people who use it that way, if only because it’s the camera they have and it means they can use the lenses they love. And that’s fine. Video is here to stay but from Leica’s perspective, optimising the video capabilities of the SL and S is likely to have a higher priority than turning the M into a top-of-the-line video camera.

[keithlaban.co.uk]

HI Jaap

No shortcomings - The SL is fantastic with M lenses (and I do use it quite a lot like that)- but like Chris Tribble I like to work with two cameras with M lenses on - and having the SL for one and the M for the other isn't as good - they need to be the same so that you can apply the same methodology . . .. Added to which I like using a rangefinder unless it really won't work.

 

I did a concert the other night, and the SL with the two zooms together with an M and a couple of lenses was great - but for different things. I'm not keen on shooting the SL and the M both with M lenses.

Hi Jono,

 

I have similar problems. My ideal setup would be two identical cameras with differing focal length lenses.  At the moment I'm working with various M lenses on an M9 and M240 which is far from ideal. The main issues with the M9 are higher ISO performance, I can't set higher than 1/125 sec on auto ISO and framing using wides is simply not accurate enough.

 

So, what to do? If I sell on the M9 and buy another M240 it solves the ISO related problems but I end up with two cameras with the toy grade EVF, doubling my irritation.

 

I was rather hoping that September would see a solution but it seems that's not very likely.

 

Hey ho.

[Peter H]

Hi Peter and John

I hope you're well. Surely if Leica adopts a clean sheet of paper then it's a new camera (Why call it an M even) - there's no need to throw out the baby with the bath water!

 

As for the concept of the hybrid viewfinder, doesn't it require information from the lens to work properly? Which would be tricky with existing M lenses, so it'd need a new lens mount and new lenses (I'd guess) in which case it wouldn't really be an M!

 

The Leica M8 was announced in September 2006, so I'd say any time from September 2016 until September 2017 would be on the 10th year anniversary. The M240 was announced in September 2012, but it didn't ship until the spring of 2013 - so it's only a bit more than 3 years ago . . . Added to which, recent releases (like the SL MM246) tend to ship rather more quickly these days. . . . . And as someone else suggested, the 3 year gap is just a construct not a rule.

 

Whatever - I've just bought a second M240 body as a backup

 

All the best

 

 

 

Hi Jono!

 

I don't suppose for a minute that they'll make a radical departure with the next M. As you say, they'd be throwing away something too valuable if they did that when they can just as easily bring out a different model as they did with the SL.

 

But I do hope that doesn't mean that the M line by default becomes an exercise in nostalgia.

 

I wish there was more made of the virtues of manual focus. So many people assume that AF is the best answer to all photo situations, but it isn't. It is temptingly convenient but like the Sirens, it can be very misleading and steer you into all sorts of problems.

 

I trust Leica to continue to develop the M so that it remains the best and most up to date camera in the area in which it excels: rapid, spontaneous informal photography in a very convenient and portable format.

[jaapv]

My solution to that is to tell myself that an EVF is not an aesthetic entity, but just a tool. For my purposes it gets the job done - just- and as long as I don't ask more I'm happy. But I''l admit - the SL EVF is something else. The technology has come a long way these last few years. When the 240 was designed the Olympus one was the best removable EVF on the market, hard to imagine nowadays. 

[keithlaban.co.uk]

My solution to that is to tell myself that an EVF is not an aesthetic entity, but just a tool. For my purposes it gets the job done - just- and as long as I don't ask more I'm happy. But I''l admit - the SL EVF is something else. The technology has come a long way these last few years. When the 240 was designed the Olympus one was the best removable EVF on the market, hard to imagine nowadays. 

 

Hi Jaap,

 

I've been telling myself just that for the last 3 years, trouble is it's now wearing a little thin.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ski542002]

Hi Jono,

 

I have similar problems. My ideal setup would be two identical cameras with differing focal length lenses.  At the moment I'm working with various M lenses on an M9 and M240 which is far from ideal. The main issues with the M9 are higher ISO performance, I can't set higher than 1/125 sec on auto ISO and framing using wides is simply not accurate enough.

 

So, what to do? If I sell on the M9 and buy another M240 it solves the ISO related problems but I end up with two cameras with the toy grade EVF, doubling my irritation.

 

I was rather hoping that September would see a solution but it seems that's not very likely.

 

Hey ho.

 

Hello:  My summary thought first...  Whatever they try to improve/add on a new M, will just add features already on the SL.  Another individual on this thread made a Porsche analogy, quite accurate IMO.

 

Had the M9 & M240, usually mounting the 35 1.4 on the M9 & my 75 2.4 on the M240.  Shooting both lenses wide open, I'd rely on the better DR on the M240 and raise my ISO to compensate for the 75's slow max aperture. My shutter speed was always the same on both M's.  For events, I still found it a clunky solution and by anticipating lens usage during the event, eventually I stopped using the M9 alongside the M240. Before zooms became the norm, anticipating a scenario for me was second nature, so it was not hard to get back in the habit.

 

Enter the SL.  I got a great price for my M240 and love the SL with my M lenses, and I find it a more than adequate replacement for my M240...

-DR exceeding my M, especially the M9, and better than my Canon bodies.

-The M lenses are the heart of the Leica brand IMO, and they work very well on the SL.

-My one R lens, the 180 3.4 apo works exceedingly well on the SL

-My Canon optics work well with my Photodiox adapter, although eventually I plan to add an adapter that will access the full capabilities of the lenses.

-I was good at rangefinder focusing; with the SL, my hit rate is close to 100% when focus tracking, and better when I'm shooting static subjects, portraits wide open or architecture stopped way down.

-A quiet shutter that my digital M's could only dream of.

-Integrated EVF that is perfect for 90% of my work.  The other 10% issue(s) will be solved with a FW upgrade (Leica please hurry).

-SL is built like a tank, and I won't have to worry about any eventual rangefinder adjustment.

-Dual card slots

-SL is not much bigger/heavier the the M with the MF grip.  I have integrated PC socket, audio (with the eventual adapter/dongle.  Again hurry!), and the necessary video ports.

-Will begin shooting more video with the full-frame SL, replacing my APS-sized Canon 7D.

-Much much less frequent lockups with the SL (I think I've had 4 since my purchase). Only one instance required battery removal which was super quick, thanks to not having the dumb throwback base plate on a camera that no longer uses film!

 

My backup now, is my DSMKIII with Canon zooms.  For my commercial work, I use the SL about 80% of the time.  It'd be close to 100% once they figure out their tethering issues with LR & C1Pro.  For events, I'm 70%SL, 30% Canon.  At some point when I find the $$ and get the SL 24-90, that percentage of use will increase.

 

What will keep me from going 100% Leica?  

-As of this writing, I feel the Canon speedlights are ahead of Leica, and for some scenarios I need accurate TTL flash for run-and-gun shooting.

-Comparably lousy pro support on the back end.  There's nothing like having the security of Canon's CPS, and when I need to wait 2 months for a lens repair, having a backup Summilux lens is not financially viable while watching the financial meter run on a rental lens. 

[GLOBETROTTER]

Nobody hear me.....

 

I  say again........it comes with a new CCD  with color and B&W in the same sensor.

 

You will see.