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

[Adam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think (hope) this is right. 

 

I think Leica has a huge fight on its hands though. The future of Leica and probably photography in general will not be so much in big DSL cameras, though there'll always be a role for those, but in smaller, M-size mirrorless cameras with sensor technology that produces results that most of the time equal or exceed what a big DSL camera is capable of. I imagine...

 

I'm worried at the moment, but there are reasons to be optimistic too. The M262 could be, and I hope it is,  a sign that Leica intends to be radical and develop the M line to its fullest extent, but recognises the need to offer something that the more traditionalist customer values too. I hope that the advent of the SL doesn't dilute the technological development of the M in any way, but there are some faint signs that it might well do, and that will be very bad news for me.

 

I keep using the word hope, but that's a sign of my uncertainty, and if I feel it others will too, and I don't think that's very healthy when spend involved in building a Leica outfit is so great. The lower price of the M262 and falling prices of Ms reflects all this, of course.

 

 I would like too see the rangefinder philosophy persevere, albeit probably in a new form where a classical focusing OVF can be incorporated with an EVF in a way that gives us two in one (not like the current Fuji EVIL). My ideal future is that Leica seamlessly incorporates modern electronics into a traditional system. It is possible, and there is a market for such products. Swiss watches, tube audio equipment, some vintage cars happily co-exist with their sony, fuji counterparts. They are not cheap, but people buy them.

 

I think what Leica is doing now is in part a result of it being 40% owned by Blackstone who want to protect their investment. Leica is trying to offer as much variety within the Leicaverse as economically viable so that photographers never have to think of going to another brand. The M262 is a brilliant move since it keeps the traditionalists happy with little extra cost, and I assume the profit margin is no different from the regular M. The same goes for the a la carte offering. These moves will generate revenue without much overhead. This is not a bad thing, maximize profit from you offerings.

 

I do hope a significant part of the profit will go into R&D. The SL shows that Leica can be not only a leader in lens design, but also lead as far as EVF technology. Leica needs to catch up on the electronics front, fortunately this is easier than catching up in lens design.

[MT0227]

Where some here were struggling to differentiate the SL from the M. I've always thought they were different concepts. I don't really agree there's  "no real choice". Many M users still use dSLRs, and most photographers use a wider range than the M's native 28-90 range. 

 

The choices are T, M, SL & S - each different, and complementary. 

 

They are entirely two different tools (M/SL).  If you're primarily a street photographer, I don't see a choice (M vs SL), the choice is clear. Conversely, if you're a sports photographer, the SL would be a clear Leica option over the M given the SL's specs.. AF, EVF, 11fps..etc..  So again, I don't see the M and SL competing as a choice against one another as you originally suggested. They are different tools competing for different space; depending on the space the photographer wants/needs to deliver.  IMO the SL is Leica's 35mm mirror-less DSLR like option/equivalent; the M is something very different.  To make a choice between the two is saying they both serve a comparable purpose.  IMO they are just too different to do so; you choosing one over the other because of a different need. 

 

 

For what it's worth, the Leica reps at the Expo said, "the M line more comparable to the Sony a7RII; the SL is something completely different".  

Edited November 19, 2015 by MT0227

[Advertisement]

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

[ayewing]

I am not sure why so much is being read into the release of the new M262. As far as I can see it is smiply an updated ME which will act as a lower cost entry to the Leica M system and may also appeal to the very vocal , but I suspect relatively small, band of Leica minimalists.

 

I expect the new updated version of the M 240 will contine as a rangefinder but if it can include a better EVF preferably in the body of the camera rather than as a clip-on I would be pleased. No doubt there will be further inprovements in the sensor and electronics in line with improvements in these fields. If some reduction in size and weight is possible that would help in differentiating it from the SL. One of the strengths of the Leica M system has always been its small size and portability. Leica has been showing considerable flair and energy in adopting new technology recently. I hope this can be applied to the M system without detracting from its traditional values.

[Peter H]

In my mind, the price similarity between the M240 and the SL is so close that something seems wrong. Either the SL is underpriced or the M240 is overpriced. In the competitive (and declining) market for new camera sales, I wouldn't bet on the first of those options. Maybe the M262 is part of a price realignment for the digital Ms that will place them at a clearly different price point than the SL line, and recognize the stiff competition from mirrorless alternatives that exist today.

 

I think that the M line has more long-term potential to be a premium-priced object than the SL because the M is unique. It is the only serious RF/MF camera of its type, and though its market is small, those people who want that are, as we have seen, prepared to pay for it, provided it keeps pace with technological development while retaining the features that make it so attractive to its users. And provided that Leica treat it as a premium product in terms of QC and support, of course.

 

The SL will succeed for a totally different set of reasons, but will be in more direct competition with Nikon and Canon, and whilst some will be happy to pay a premium price for its design and build quality, I imagine it will eventually be closer in pricing to its competition that the M has to be because the M doesn't have such directly comparable competition.

Edited November 19, 2015 by Peter H

[John Ricard]

 

The reduction in price will suggest to some that there was in fact a cost to Live View or video..

 

Doesn't suggest that to me.  The M9 was 7k and the M240 was 7k.  That's the price for the time of the line M series body for quite some time now.  Has nothing to do with video or live view.

[AAK]

I am not sure why so much is being read into the release of the new M262. As far as I can see it is smiply an updated ME which will act as a lower cost entry to the Leica M system and may also appeal to the very vocal , but I suspect relatively small, band of Leica minimalists.

 

I expect the new updated version of the M 240 will contine as a rangefinder but if it can include a better EVF preferably in the body of the camera rather than as a clip-on I would be pleased. No doubt there will be further inprovements in the sensor and electronics in line with improvements in these fields. If some reduction in size and weight is possible that would help in differentiating it from the SL. One of the strengths of the Leica M system has always been its small size and portability. Leica has been showing considerable flair and energy in adopting new technology recently. I hope this can be applied to the M system without detracting from its traditional values.

 

The ME has an 18 megapixel sensor, the M262 has the same 24 MPix sensor seen in the top-of-the-line M-P 240. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the M262 will give the same image quality as the M-P (240) for $1800 less, if one is wiling to live without video recording or live view. It seems like a heck of a bargain (in Leica terms, of course).

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The ME has an 18 megapixel sensor, the M262 has the same 24 MPix sensor seen in the top-of-the-line M-P 240. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the M262 will give the same image quality as the M-P (240) for $1800 less, if one is wiling to live without video recording or live view. It seems like a heck of a bargain (in Leica terms, of course).

 

Yes, although a used M 240 at a similar outlay will almost certainly retain a higher proportion of its price.

[IkarusJohn]

... I think Leica has a huge fight on its hands though. The future of Leica and probably photography in general will not be so much in big DSL cameras, though there'll always be a role for those, but in smaller, M-size mirrorless cameras with sensor technology that produces results that most of the time equal or exceed what current big DSL cameras are capable of. I imagine...

 

I'm worried at the moment, but there are reasons to be optimistic too. The M262 could be, and I hope it is,  a sign that Leica intends to be radical and develop the M line to its fullest extent, ...

 

Apparently, video will continue and the new M will get the SL EVF, and probably Maestro 2 processor.  I'm doubtful about IBIS and I'd say there's no chance the M will change dimensions.

 

But here's a question for you Peter - what is the "fullest extent"?  Remember, our sage senior members chiding the more excitable juniors that M after all stands for messucher.  I know you disagree with this, but fundamentally, Leica passed the fullest extent with the M(240).  For so long as the M has the optical view finder, it is limited in what it excels at, and without the optical viewfinder, it is no longer an M.

 

I appreciate I am putting words into your mouth, but isn't that why you so dislike the SL idea that its size, weight, price and all the rest are raised as reasons to discount it?  It's priced in the same bracket as the M and the size and weight differences are really too insignificant to worry about.  The zooms are bigger than any M lens, but that is a factor of them being AF and IS.

 

We are seeing that the differences in image quality are also minimal - for me, anyway.  I make no claims to being more than a dilettante, and the image differences do not faze me one iota.  The future is M & SL side by side.  There's no point in looking for quality differences, they just do the same things in different ways.

[pop]

The reduction in price will suggest to some that there was in fact a cost to Live View or video, but I suppose we will just have to grit our teeth and let them think that... the real reason for the reduction is to allow Leica to offer a simpler version of the M in order for them to reduce the price and increase sales prior to a new model next year.

Leica explained the lower price of the M-E vs the M9 by the tools and the development having been written off. A similar explanation would be plausible here, I think.

[Peter H]

Apparently, video will continue and the new M will get the SL EVF, and probably Maestro 2 processor.  I'm doubtful about IBIS and I'd say there's no chance the M will change dimensions.

 

But here's a question for you Peter - what is the "fullest extent"?  Remember, our sage senior members chiding the more excitable juniors that M after all stands for messucher.  I know you disagree with this, but fundamentally, Leica passed the fullest extent with the M(240).  For so long as the M has the optical view finder, it is limited in what it excels at, and without the optical viewfinder, it is no longer an M.

 

I appreciate I am putting words into your mouth, but isn't that why you so dislike the SL idea that its size, weight, price and all the rest are raised as reasons to discount it?  It's priced in the same bracket as the M and the size and weight differences are really too insignificant to worry about.  The zooms are bigger than any M lens, but that is a factor of them being AF and IS.

 

We are seeing that the differences in image quality are also minimal - for me, anyway.  I make no claims to being more than a dilettante, and the image differences do not faze me one iota.  The future is M & SL side by side.  There's no point in looking for quality differences, they just do the same things in different ways.

 

Well, this is the weakness in my armour: I do not know what is going to be possible in the future.

 

I Don't believe, however, that the M is so fully developed and mature a product that its development is virtually restricted to cosmetics as seen in the M262. I accept that it's currently impossible to make a FF AF camera as small as an M unless you accept the compromises that Sony do, and even then the lenses can't be much smaller.

 

But, not everyone wants AF as is obvious.

 

And anyway, I fully expect that there will be very significant advances in sensor and viewfinder technology that would enable Leica, with their unique market position, to produce a small camera with unrivalled quality output, using the world's best small lenses.

 

So far, so much guesswork, but I feel that the SL will re-acclimatise us and Leica to the idea that the best modern cameras need to be large and whilst there's much truth in that, if it prevents the sort of development that might make it untrue at some point in the nearish future, that would be a great shame and a great opportunity missed. But so many people have already reacted to the M262 in such a way as to suggest that they accept that the M is rapidly becoming a historical artefact that Leica's current approach may turn out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy of doom for it.

[Adam]

 

We are seeing that the differences in image quality are also minimal - for me, anyway.  I make no claims to being more than a dilettante, and the image differences do not faze me one iota.  The future is M & SL side by side.  There's no point in looking for quality differences, they just do the same things in different ways.

 

I would agree. In hindsight Leica could not afford not to have an SL type camera. fast EVF, AF, IS and long zooms are more optimal for certain types of photography, and on this forum many have called for a camera with these features.  The ideal Leica customer has more than one type of Leica camera.  It is good if they take same quality pics but are optimized for different shooting environments. Now we have a choice: SL plus minimized M or full M, but all take same quality pics. What stands out is the Q. I think it will come out with more lens combinations and will be for those who prefer a compact  EVF, IS, AF combo.

[BBHewee]

With the current reductions in the UK, a 240 is 4300 vs 3950 for the 262 according to Red Dot Cameras. In my mind, Live View alone would justify the extra expense when the RF is out of whack. I've never used video on mine honestly but have also never found it a problem to have it on the camera available. I'm 115 kg, 100g doesn't really do much one way or another. 

[jaapv]

Don't be so sure. That brass plate is HEAVY. When I get home I’ll weigh it.

The top plate from the M9: 115 grams. 100 grams cannot come from the top plate alone.

[drdannn]

I would have bought this instead of the 240. 100gr. lighter is very good. Also I rarely even remember that I have live view, and I bought the EVF and used it a couple of times. Would have been much better for me with the 262.

[Bill Livingston]

Leica explained the lower price of the M-E vs the M9 by the tools and the development having been written off. A similar explanation would be plausible here, I think.

 

 

 

 

Of course it would... and there would be a lot of truth in it. But mid life revisions are always marketing decisions aimed at extending life and interest in a current product in anticipation of a new model later. 

 

R&D departments on the other hand are more interested in product development and breaking new ground.

 

I spent the majority of my working life in exactly this environment.

 

And very often, those interim models are actually the very best products in that particular products lifespan. Refinement, to suit the late adopter market and the solidify the loyalty of current customers... whereas the new model would hopefully add new customers to the fold, as well as perhaps tempting old customers to upgrade.

 

This isn't a bad thing at all. It's how specialist manufacturers maximise each product. 

 

I bought the 240 M-P the moment it came out as it was clearly the apex of the 240 model. If the 262 was available at the time, I may have been tempted, if I was being totally objective and I knew what I know now (I don't use video or Live View at all, unless I have the EVF mounted of course...), as the 262 meets my actual needs... but as a first time Leica user, I wouldn't have know that at the time and I would always have unsure...

 

However, if I was buying a camera today, I would probably still buy the M-P, or the a la carte. I like the flexibility - just in case...

 

I suppose what I would really like would be the M240P that I already have, and a digital M4 lookalike, size and appearance wise, without the rear screen and probably a Monochrom version at that.

 

Those two would be perfect (as long as the batteries were compatible) for the foreseeable future. 

 

No messing with lenses in the field (much) and two bodies allowing me to have black and white and colour just as I always did...

 

Never going to happen of course... But then Bocaburger said something similar only a few days ago about a simplified M240...!

Edited November 19, 2015 by Bill Livingston

[Rick]

The top plate from the M9: 115 grams. 100 grams cannot come from the top plate alone.

 

Does the M262 share the same smaller battery from the M9?

 

Rick

[pippy]

I don't want live view nor video so, for my personal needs, this is a very good model indeed.

I look forward to checking it out.

 

Pip.

Edited November 19, 2015 by pippy

[jaapv]

Sorry, mismeasured. 135 grams... Still, it makes the weight reduction by Aluminium not quite believable. There must be more. Maybe the lens mount reinforcement for heavy lenses was left off too.

[stunsworth]

From the Leica website regarding the 262:

 

"The top plate is engineered from durable aluminium [sic], which makes it around 100 grams lighter."

 

Nice to see that they've spelt 'aluminium' correctly <grin>

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[imants]

Video not a problem others do a great job  even the smatphones are being  geared that way  ............... Canon  Panasonic, Sony Olympus