Jump to content

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


LUF Admin

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

 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.

 

 

Yesterday we didn't know about the M262 strategy.  So who knows what the future holds?

 

But maybe this provides a possible clue...  http://leicarumors.com/2015/10/14/leicas-patents-for-optoelectronic-rangefinder.aspx/

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

That explanation sounds infinitely more plausible than the assumption that the cost of a tiny mono mic and a socket did amount to 720 Euro.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

... 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. ...

 

Please excuse the selective quote, but this I disagree with - you're being too pessimistic.  

 

Yes, the M is mature, but why on earth would Leica diminish its fantastic legacy and current offering of excellent M lenses?  The M lenses will continue to be offered in the 18 to 135 focal length, all rangefinder coupled, and with a new EVF rather than external optical viewfinder (though I'm sure those will continue to be available too). It's a compact winning formula.

 

As for large, you really need to pick the SL up, I think.  If you want AF and stabilisation, then I agree.  This will never be offered on the M.  But I do think the M will have the same quality sensor, same quality EVF and same processor as the SL for the future - they will enjoy the same place of importance for Leica.  So, what are the development opportunities the M will miss?

 

You can look at your M(240) with remorse if you like.  I am fully intending to look at my M60 and Monochrom with unbridled pleasure, and I will do so for many years regardless of what happens to the M in the future - it's in safe hands, I think.

Edited by IkarusJohn
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

Rick

It looks IMHO like the same battery as the M240.M-P would be logical, why would Leica prefer the less battary capacity of the M9?  The body ( without the holes) would be the same as the M 240/M-P 240 only the top plate would be different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what is the correct term for black paint wearing off of aluminium? Aluminiuming?

chipping of the paint....or "deanodisierung"

 

 

What about chrome: would it stick on aluminium? Normally the had to use  brass as a base?

Edited by Paulus
Link to post
Share on other sites

........................... So, what are the development opportunities the M will miss?

 

You can look at your M(240) with remorse if you like.  I am fully intending to look at my M60 and Monochrom with unbridled pleasure, and I will do so for many years regardless of what happens to the M in the future - it's in safe hands, I think.

 

Equally, please forgive the selected quote, but to avoid another essay from me I'l keep it to this:

 

To repeat, I have nothing against the SL but to concentrate on the body size alone is a mistake in my opinion because it's primary advantage is when paired with SL lenses, which are big.

 

But that's fine too for those who want it and why not offer a range of types of camera to please a larger audience? I may even end up with an SL myself because it sounds like a truly impressive camera, but that is far from my point.

 

i think Leica may find itself fighting on too many fronts to be able to devote all the energies to small-sized cameras that it would have had it not decided to follow the competition. I know the EVF might make it feel like it's leading the way but in this format I really don't believe it is, and the competition will not stand still. So it will be working very hard to make the SL competitive, and won't need its own products competing with it as well.

 

This all sounds more desperate and negative than I really feel, and I'm expressing everything in a more dramatic fashion than it warrants because most opinions are flowing in the opposite direction.

 

 

But making a great small camera is undeniably harder than making a great big one,  and my romantic soul wants Leica to win the toughest and most prized of all battles, and not pick the easier fights.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

Why?

 

It is a computer camera and they all lose value over time like any other computer product does.

 

Just because it has a frame line preview lever, a bit bigger buffer and above all else, Leica styling and branding is no assurance that it *has* to retain value. If it does, great, but if it does not, great too for folks like me who will always buy mint used Leica digital bodies for paid work.

 

You also said you were "worried" in your last post....? What on earth is there to be worried about, the cameras we have now are great, easily out-tool the talent levels of most who use them. Just sell it when you see what you want next or keep them maintained, buy a couple of them used with low actuations if it seems like the end of the line for what you want and get on for years in making great photos.

 

 Until I see the next great M-something or other at a used price that appeals to my value system, I will be using my M240 or another one that replaces it for years to come. I also highly doubt Leica is going to completely bungle up what makes the M camera system great, putting out a model that has less tech, more simplicity and a quieter shutter to boot says this too me.

Edited by Ai_Print
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing the back-to-the-basics concept offered with M262 (which I welcome as an once a M240 and current M246 user), I am more than encouraged to move a step forward (or backwards?) to use anything without LCD screen.

 

I wish if they could include no screen option in the M240 a la carte, just assuming the price then might be less than edition 60.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's funny, is if the body was smaller, not just lighter, the 262 would be a sensation. I like it, don't get me wrong.

 

The real question is when will Leica muster the courage and vision to make a move like they did going from Barnack to M?

 

It's time to throw out the M design as a M6 look-alike and make a modern camera with the same priorites as the lenses, which are really the only reason Leica is still going. The lenses are as small as possible and even sacrifice performance to some degree, to this end.

 

Many of us want the smallest, lightest body possible: as did Barnack. The Sony A7 is thinner than the M6 at the LCD. Forget the squareness. Make some humps where you need to, but try to make them ergonomic, so the camera is small and light.

 

Next get this: RF is not about tradition, for many of us. We like RF because of performance: it's clear, it's fast, and you see alot. So give us that with a EVF alongside, built in. Inboard.

 

So, Leica, make three basic cameras:

 

1)M6 knockoff, with 240 features but smaller and lighter. The "traditional". :)

2) the MN. N is for new, and this is the camera I describe above, EVF/RF small and light as possible, new shape: curves :)

3) same as above but without RF, EVF only, but a really good one. This is the interchangeable Q. :)

 

Oh Charlie, you say, too many models, you are dreaming!

 

Count the models today. Three options for M is fine and you add monochrome versions at least for one.

 

Oh and one more thing: when you make the MN add the potential to control an AF lens. Then make some. Not for me. But others like them. This would open the door to re-enter the mass market.

Edited by uhoh7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly he price reduction is probably not enough to entice many those that dream of a leica  and money is an issue.

 

Video and live view are not a must on all cameras  probably a good move by Leica, size is ok     ............. size is important when focusing manually if the camera is too small it all becomes too cramp.

Edited by Imants
Link to post
Share on other sites

What's funny, is if the body was smaller, not just lighter, the 262 would be a sensation. I like it, don't get me wrong.

 

 

If smaller means; a smaller rangefinder base, that would give different problems.

 

I don't see the necessity of making the camera smaller.

 

It was allright for 50 years.For different reasons the size is important. For instance ergonomical. The size of the m6 was IMHO one of the best to hold the camera.

 

A smaller camera, like the III series,  is not more comfortable to hold, so I don't see why it has to be smaller?

 

Sometimes smaller, just because it is possible ( and I really doubt that when you want to hold on to the rangefinder principle ) just isn't the solution. The size of the baseplate of the M hasn't changed since the 50-ies. Why change this now. It's like changing a winning team to me.

 

Comparing a well designed camera to a Sony design is IMHO not the solution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly he price reduction is probably not enough to entice many those that dream of a leica  and money is an issue.

 

Video and live view are not a must on all cameras  probably a good move by Leica, size is ok     ............. size is important when focusing manually if the camera is too small it all becomes too cramp.

If I were shopping for an Digital Rangefinder camera and would have no interest in a video or EVF this one would be a no-brainer.Size is personal. To me film Ms feel skinny.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

i think Leica may find itself fighting on too many fronts to be able to devote all the energies to small-sized cameras that it would have had it not decided to follow the competition. I know the EVF might make it feel like it's leading the way but in this format I really don't believe it is, and the competition will not stand still. So it will be working very hard to make the SL competitive, and won't need its own products competing with it as well.

 

...

 

I don't really buy this either.

 

At the moment, Leica has the rebadged Panasonic compacts (which it would be great if it ditched, frankly), the X cameras (I'm a bit lost on what is current) and the Q.  I wonder if they might rationalise this to the X-Vario and Q, but that's another issue.

 

In terms of systems, they have the APS-C system with mount shared with the SL, the two full frame systems - M & SL - and the S.  Too many fronts?  Three formats, and 4 systems, and I'm not really sure that there is that much competition in each of these.  The thing about the competition (Canon, Nikon & Sony) is that they have a far more confusing line up of cameras on offer, none even remotely similar to the Leica cameras and they seem to release almost annual updates.  To my mind, the Leica line up is coherent and not confusing at all; and the differentiation from the other camera makers is there.  The more people are drawn to the brand as a whole, the more M cameras and the like will be sold across the board.  Apparently Leica is profitable ...

 

Some have referred to the lack of SL lenses, and I'm sure for a pro that's a problem.  I have posted elsewhere my thoughts on adapters for Canon & Nikon AF lenses.  The thing is that if Leica is committed to the SL, it will do exactly what it has done with the T and the S (and what it almost certainly did with the M when it was released) - it will offer cross-platform compatibility, and it will continue to release new lenses when they're good and ready.  Meanwhile, somewhere at the Mother Ship, some R&D technicians are working on the SL2, and it will be ready in a few years.  When that is released, my SL will still be working fine, and Leica will repair it if I drop it ...

 

If Leica really does want to get to 1%, this is the way to do it.

 

Cheers

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...