Leica M (Typ 262) - Reduction to Rangefinder Photography (at 1000 € less)

[rodluvan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

is the naming (Type Number) at this point completely random?

[edwardkaraa]

I'm confused about the guys complaining about the lack of LV. The 240 and 240P have LV. Buy those ones. The 262 is for the guys who were complaining about LV and video

[Advertisement]

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

[Rick]

So, if this is basically the M240 with a couple less buttons and an EVF socket, together adding up to cost only a few pennies... how come the M240 still costs so much?    

[lm_user]

Quote from Andrea Boccalini posted on the Leica Blog

 

"The sensor is an evolution of the Leica M sensor"

 

Is the sensor different than the M240?

[Bill Livingston]

No. It's the same.

 

Modified perhaps from other (unclear) technical reports suggesting minor mods as its no longer configured for Live View and video... unlikely, but even if true, it's still the same sensor...

[scott kirkpatrick]

is the naming (Type Number) at this point completely random?

 

I suspect not at all.  This is a model with only the "essentials," just as the M-E was to the M9.  So go read about the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262 .

 

And for people who want live view but would not use video, unfortunately they make the same demands on the chip, so both of them are removed at the same time.

 

scott 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Quote from Andrea Boccalini posted on the Leica Blog

 

"The sensor is an evolution of the Leica M sensor"

 

Is the sensor different than the M240?

 

People who were in Wetzlar for the SL announcement say that it is the same chip.  The tech spec sheet calls it by a new name, the Still Image chip.  But it has to connect to Maestro I support hardware over flex or PC board connections.  These are not something you would want to engineer from scratch.  

 

My guess is that behind the marketing language is the fact that when you run a semiconductor line, you get lots of chips and test them to see if they meet various speed and functional requirements.  The ones that go fastest sell for the most, but there is a market for the slower ones as well.  There might be a lot of chips intended for the M[240] product that don't quite meet speed or video functional requirements, but will be just fine for the 262.  And that could be a huge cost savings.

 

scott

[markforce]

No. It's the same.

 

Modified perhaps from other (unclear) technical reports suggesting minor mods as its no longer configured for Live View and video... unlikely, but even if true, it's still the same sensor...

Yeah, likely but it remains somewhat unclear. Even DPReview put it 'it may be the same' but we don't know for sure. The language suggesting it was tweaked for proper rangefinder use (paraphrasing)... what does that even mean? i) the simple fact that Liveview and Video is 'disabled' or ii)...something else?

Full disclosure: I am an M9 user who's (thus far) skipped the 240, while toying with the 246...

[luigi bertolotti]

So, if this is basically the M240 with a couple less buttons and an EVF socket, together adding up to cost only a few pennies... how come the M240 still costs so much?    

Product pricing is an ART by itself... largely indipendent from real industrial costs expecially DURING the lifecycle of a certain "Product Platform" (in the Auto Sector this is very clear) : probably, simply said , thay have evaluated that :

- M240 price (at least, the official pricelist) is better to be kept as is: current customers like me have no reason to get angry and/or regret of their former buying

- At the same time, keeping stable the M240 price establishes a BASIS for the future pricing of the next M.

- M262, to be attractive and sold in numbers, must have a SIGNIFICANT price drop vs. M240.

 

In conclusion, in pure financial terms, I think they could have acted "halfway" cutting (roughly) 500 Euros from M240 price (it sold well, curve of return on investiment has had a satisfactory shape) and price the M262 as is (other 500 Euros on the "new M240 price" but they have probably evaluated that such a tactic wouldn't had helped the sales of 262, would have helped MARGINALLY the sales of 240 and would have given less room to maneuver for the pricing of the future M.

[Lax Jought]

I am curious about the description of the shutter as 'quieter than the M240'.  I wonder if this is in all modes and not just use of LV, and whether it refers to the motor re-cock or the shutter sound itself.  No big deal, just curious.

 

Jeff

 

I'm curious about this too.  Out of all the changes, this is the most important to me because I often photograph in audio-sensitive environments like quiet music concerts or on film sets.

[lm_user]

No. It's the same.

 

Modified perhaps from other (unclear) technical reports suggesting minor mods as its no longer configured for Live View and video... unlikely, but even if true, it's still the same sensor...

 

People who were in Wetzlar for the SL announcement say that it is the same chip.  The tech spec sheet calls it by a new name, the Still Image chip.  But it has to connect to Maestro I support hardware over flex or PC board connections.  These are not something you would want to engineer from scratch.  

 

My guess is that behind the marketing language is the fact that when you run a semiconductor line, you get lots of chips and test them to see if they meet various speed and functional requirements.  The ones that go fastest sell for the most, but there is a market for the slower ones as well.  There might be a lot of chips intended for the M[240] product that don't quite meet speed or video functional requirements, but will be just fine for the 262.  And that could be a huge cost savings.

 

scott

 

 

I went back and read the quote again.  

 

"Another great aspect,” the Italian continues, “is the combination between the sensor and the lens.” The Leica M (Typ 262) lens is very compact so the quality of the images taken with a sensor that is designed for the lens results in very crisp images. The sensor is an evolution of the Leica M sensor; a full frame sensor that uses the micro-lenses to bring all available light to the pixel. This can definitely be noticed in the quality of the color, micro sharpness, and the resolution of 24 MP, the best resolution for a full-frame sensor."

 

One could infer that the same chip was used with a different micro-lens array than the M240.   The M240 was marketed as a solution for R lenses.   Perhaps the best compromise for R and M lenses is a different compromise than for M lenses only?   The removal of live view also removed the functionality requirement for R lenses - thus a new micro-lens array?   It is likely that only reviews by users familiar with the M typ 240 and typ 262 will be in a position discern the difference.   I will look for those reviews with interest.

Edited November 20, 2015 by lm_user

[Lax Jought]

Not quite - I think the M262 is a permanent offering, with only sensor and processor upgrades.  For Leica, no more grumbling about EVF, video or anything else. The viewfinder is perfected, the lenses there. What more does an M photographer need?

 

The only thing I'd need is better ISO performance but that's about it.

 

*edit - and a silent shutter would be great too but if the Typ 262 is quieter than the M240, then that might do the job.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Lax Jought

[mmx_2]

So, if this is basically the M240 with a couple less buttons and an EVF socket, together adding up to cost only a few pennies... how come the M240 still costs so much?    

The really funny thing is that the price os M (262) is basically what I paid for the M (240) in june 2013

[Anlotti]

It looks very promising to me - an up-to-date implementation of the M concept that is not quite bleeding edge but that does a lot of desirable things very well. It hasn't got everything that everybody would want (there can be no such camera), but it does omit some things that a lot of M people can do without. It will of course be superseded, and depreciate, and all those other inevitable things, but I am tempted.

 

Could it be the first ever M body, film or digital, I buy new, I ask myself? [Goes to lie down in a darkened room with a cold towel on his forehead.]

[sumolux]

Not much more R&D. The functionality/firmware side of things has already been done. A revised rear body shell is presumably a bit of CAD work, a not dissimilar task to what they have presumably had to do for the M262 to account for the button removal and introduction of the 'M9' step in the top plate. 

 

I am not so sure....You would still need a small 'mini-screen' to be able to choose WB and some other necessary functions, (perhaps like the little screen on the S)?

Myself: would love it without the back LCD. I still don't understand why you need it except for all the menu pages 

[FredR]

I've just finished reading all eleven pages of comments in this thread.  I shoot film in my M6TTL with four compact lenses; my Leica knowledge ends there.

 

This 262 may be my bridge to Leica digitaldom, enabling me to use my lenses with a lower price to pay for inevitable digital obsolescence.  

 

- What is Live View?  Since this camera does not have it, does that mean I'll only see the image captured and not the image to be captured?

- In Leica digital cameras, are the most important electronic components that became obsolete capable of being easily replaced with next generation versions (e.g., the sensor).

 

I won't buy unless I hold a 262 in my hands, probably at the DC Leica store.

 

Fred

[Lax Jought]

- What is Live View? Since this camera does not have it, does that mean I'll only see the image captured and not the image to be captured?

 

Fred

Yes that is basically what Live View is. If you have a traditional approach to photography, you won't need it. I have used it on my other cameras on occassion in conjunction with a swivel screen to get some great angles and perspectives but it's not really a deal-breaker. Edited November 20, 2015 by Lax Jought

[stephen.w]

Is there any word on what the finish looks like? From the file photos, it looks to be flat black, like the black chrome film bodies.

[Lax Jought]

Is there any word on what the finish looks like? From the file photos, it looks to be flat black, like the black chrome film bodies.

I'm curious also, I'd prefer a chrome/silver version.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Peter H]

I am not so sure....You would still need a small 'mini-screen' to be able to choose WB and some other necessary functions, (perhaps like the little screen on the S)?

Myself: would love it without the back LCD. I still don't understand why you need it except for all the menu pages

Do you really not understand it, or do you mean you don't want it yourself?

 

I assume you never used a Polaroid back or took a test shot, or re-took a photo after you'd developed your first attempt, or revisited a scene because one photo inspired another?

 

I can think of countless reasons why it might be creatively as well as technically helpful to quickly review a photo or a set of photos.

 

I don't know whether I understand the objection to the back lcd or not. When you consider the cases, half-cases, straps, thumbs-up, soft-shutter releases and so on that people stick on their cameras quite happily, it's hard to believe the monitor gets in the way to any real extent, and considering the range of practical uses it has, removing it feels to me like a philosophical attitude rather than anything to do with the practicalities of photography for most people.