Rick Posted December 18, 2015 Share #41 Posted December 18, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) John, I love this stuff you troll with! Will Leica discontinue the M to help the service department with fewer repairs? Priceless John. This logic leads to the idea that if Leica sold fewer cameras in general it would allow the service department to turn around repairs even faster. And, I love the implication that the service department is deluged with an unreliable, poor quality controlled M camera and therefore can't get out repairs in a timely manor. Classic stuff! Next, you reference a blogger posting on a blog where he demonstrates the prowess of the SL by posting pedestrian photos that only seem to prove the point that the SL is designed to produce perfectly boring images. Look here: http://thephotofundamentalist.com/?p=2262 for amazingly creative photographs that the M can produce... as far as inspirational photographs are concerned... if art matters to you... I don't really know why it would... Next you think if Leica dumps the M they could focus their resources and leverage off of the technology in each and optimize profits. I love this one. Dump the one camera that defines the company to focus resources? I'm hiring you to run my business. And, lastly... you say the blogger states that the the SL is really just a better M without a rangefinder? I contend the M is really just a better SL without the EVF??? I mean, come on, seriously... I love this crazy stuff you post. You should submit a daily inspiration over at the other site. Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 18, 2015 Posted December 18, 2015 Hi Rick, Take a look here Should Leica Replace the M with the SL?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gpwhite Posted December 18, 2015 Share #42 Posted December 18, 2015 But the salient point here is not that the M is beautiful (which it is without question, like the 911 design)... relative to this thread, IMHO, the point is that the M OVF/RF offers the photographer flexibility and control in composition like no other solution (just as the 911 is a unique thrill to drive). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted December 18, 2015 Share #43 Posted December 18, 2015 The limitation of EVFs is not a red herring when I have difficulty using an EVF in bright sunlight, or when it affects my night vision in a very dark setting. (I've tried Sony, Olympus & Fuji, not the SL, but I assume it's similar.) Professional cinematographers have a bunch of tools that aren't practical for some still photography. The limitation I was referring to is the one Sean was complaining about, dynamic range, NOT usability in sunlight or dark surroundings. Regards usability: The Olympus E-M1 EVF was best of breed until the SL came out. The SL's automatic brightness adaptation is excellent: it prevents the blasting of your night vision while maximizing visibility in daylight even better than the E-M1 does. Also, in sunny daylight, I tend to wear a sun hat with deep brim when I'm shooting, whether using the M-P or the SL, or any of my R or Nikon SLRs, because I wear glasses and sunlight is bound to sneak around my glasses and make it impossible to see what's in the viewfinder with all of them. I don't need any special tools to enjoy using my cameras in any conditions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satijntje Posted December 18, 2015 Share #44 Posted December 18, 2015 Stefan Daniel was very clear at the recent Erlebnistage event in Wetzlar. "The M is rangefinder, and that will stay!" John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted December 18, 2015 Share #45 Posted December 18, 2015 Maybe that's your question, not his; the initial post (and the thread title) specifically asks about eliminating the M from the Leica product array. Silly, at best. Jeff Yes, you are correct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted December 18, 2015 Author Share #46 Posted December 18, 2015 John, I love this stuff you troll with! Will Leica discontinue the M to help the service department with fewer repairs? Priceless John. This logic leads to the idea that if Leica sold fewer cameras in general it would allow the service department to turn around repairs even faster. And, I love the implication that the service department is deluged with an unreliable, poor quality controlled M camera and therefore can't get out repairs in a timely manor. Classic stuff! Next, you reference a blogger posting on a blog where he demonstrates the prowess of the SL by posting pedestrian photos that only seem to prove the point that the SL is designed to produce perfectly boring images. Look here: http://thephotofundamentalist.com/?p=2262 for amazingly creative photographs that the M can produce... as far as inspirational photographs are concerned... if art matters to you... I don't really know why it would... Next you think if Leica dumps the M they could focus their resources and leverage off of the technology in each and optimize profits. I love this one. Dump the one camera that defines the company to focus resources? I'm hiring you to run my business. And, lastly... you say the blogger states that the the SL is really just a better M without a rangefinder? I contend the M is really just a better SL without the EVF??? I mean, come on, seriously... I love this crazy stuff you post. You should submit a daily inspiration over at the other site. Rick Rick, Clearly you are a genius and an art critic bar none! However, let me answer your post with a few questions which should allow your great insights to shine upon us all. What is the next M likely to have or be that the current M is lacking? Is that feature(s)/capability enough to increase sales? Currently Ms are readily available at virtually any dealer with few exceptions (like Safari edition or some monochrome). For example, would having the SL innards put into a current M be enough where AF is not available? If you were Leica management and you can't build SLs or Qs fast enough to meet demand where would you put your money? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 18, 2015 Share #47 Posted December 18, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) You referred to an electronic rangefinder above if i remember well but be it optical or electronic, a rangefinder can only "see" outside the lens and is thus the opposite of an EVIL among other TTL cameras. Different beasts for different things, apples vs oranges, etc. Replacing the M by the SL would make no sense at all and the demise of the rangefinder would simply be a suicide for Leica. It is not your secret desire is it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 18, 2015 Share #48 Posted December 18, 2015 You can't see "outside the lens" with an electronic rangefinder. I also don't think you can have an electronic rangefinder with a non electronic lens like all the M mount lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 18, 2015 Share #49 Posted December 18, 2015 Not my understanding Jim. The electronic rangefinder referred to above is not behind the lens as clear as i can see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 18, 2015 Share #50 Posted December 18, 2015 Jim. With an M camera and virtually all of the M mount lenses .... Incorporating an electronic rangefinder of any kind would be counterproductive. You still have to use the cam. Wedging a set of electronic switches in amongst the mechanical rangefinder parts would be a waste of time. What they have now works. It would take several generations of hobbled cameras to get it half right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted December 18, 2015 Share #51 Posted December 18, 2015 Funny ridiculous thread title. But it is nice to see that despite the initial outrage the SL is gaining ground under potential consumers. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
@McLeica Posted December 18, 2015 Share #52 Posted December 18, 2015 The real question is will Leica merge with Nikon to become Neica or perhaps, Likon? The first product from this partnership - The M4S. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 18, 2015 Share #53 Posted December 18, 2015 Jim. With an M camera and virtually all of the M mount lenses .... Incorporating an electronic rangefinder of any kind would be counterproductive. You still have to use the cam. Wedging a set of electronic switches in amongst the mechanical rangefinder parts would be a waste of time. What they have now works. It would take several generations of hobbled cameras to get it half right. I did not say the contrary Jim (sorry for the typo). But i'm not 100% sure that Leica are thinking alike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 18, 2015 Share #54 Posted December 18, 2015 Rick, Clearly you are a genius and an art critic bar none! However, let me answer your post with a few questions which should allow your great insights to shine upon us all. What is the next M likely to have or be that the current M is lacking? Is that feature(s)/capability enough to increase sales? Currently Ms are readily available at virtually any dealer with few exceptions (like Safari edition or some monochrome). For example, would having the SL innards put into a current M be enough where AF is not available? If you were Leica management and you can't build SLs or Qs fast enough to meet demand where would you put your money? Thank you John, for the kind words... if I wasn't also so modest I might agree with you about being a genius and art critic bar none. But, I'm really not much of an art critic. Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted December 18, 2015 Share #55 Posted December 18, 2015 A blogger just posted an article on Mr. Huff's blog stating that he sold his M and replaced it with the SL and that the SL is really just a better M without a rangefinder. Well there are people in this world who get things wrong and you've just shown a very good example. How many times does it have to be stated that an M (i.e. Rangefinder camera) without a Rangefinder is NOT an M (i.e. Rangefinder camera). Just because another camera can use M lenses means very little. The SL IS the SL, the M IS the M. Please, please can we have a moratorium on asking whether a camera is a new version of a totally different camera? Its getting very boring . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 18, 2015 Share #56 Posted December 18, 2015 I love the way that threads here drift off topic - it means there can be little gems of information or entertainment in even the silliest of threads. Thanks for the smile, Rick & Jono. I love over the idea that the M is not selling because dealers have stock. It reminds me of that East German joke about the butcher having a sausage in his shop window so people wouldn't think he was a tiler ... This just gets more surreal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted December 18, 2015 Share #57 Posted December 18, 2015 The limitation I was referring to is the one Sean was complaining about, dynamic range, NOT usability in sunlight or dark surroundings. Regards usability: The Olympus E-M1 EVF was best of breed until the SL came out. The SL's automatic brightness adaptation is excellent: it prevents the blasting of your night vision while maximizing visibility in daylight even better than the E-M1 does. Also, in sunny daylight, I tend to wear a sun hat with deep brim when I'm shooting, whether using the M-P or the SL, or any of my R or Nikon SLRs, because I wear glasses and sunlight is bound to sneak around my glasses and make it impossible to see what's in the viewfinder with all of them. I don't need any special tools to enjoy using my cameras in any conditions. Usability in sunlight or dark surroundings is exactly the limitation that Sean was complaining about. Quote: "Faced with a bright and sunny subject (or a lit stage near an audience in dim light, etc.) an EVF’s shadow areas go to black or the highlights go to white or both. It’s for this reason that I, personally, don’t normally use EVF cameras." Dynamic range is the problem in both cases. Shadow areas that go black on an EVF and wouldn't go black in an optical viewfinder. Or highlights that go white in an EVF and wouldn't go white in an optical viewfinder. The problem isn't that you can't predict exposure but that you can't even see parts of your subject in the EVF, possibly important parts. Sometimes it doesn't matter, but sometimes it does. Cinematographers use EVFs but they can often direct the lighting, the subjects, the backgrounds, do retakes, have multiple camera angles, etc., and they have extra tools like large add-on screens, large hoods, etc. It's a different type of work than what I do. I recently did some portraits on a sunny beach and was glad to not have to use an EVF camera. I'm not suggesting people can't "enjoy" an EVF camera. They certainly provide a lot of joy and utility. Rather, there are some limitations that impact on some types of photography, in some conditions. I was initially surprised to read Sean's comment, considering he's reviewed a bunch of EVF cameras, but on further thought not surprised. He's always made "seeing the subject" an important part of his reviews. Anyway, different cameras meet different preferences. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted December 18, 2015 Share #58 Posted December 18, 2015 Rick, Clearly you are a genius and an art critic bar none! However, let me answer your post with a few questions which should allow your great insights to shine upon us all. What is the next M likely to have or be that the current M is lacking? Is that feature(s)/capability enough to increase sales? Currently Ms are readily available at virtually any dealer with few exceptions (like Safari edition or some monochrome). For example, would having the SL innards put into a current M be enough where AF is not available? If you were Leica management and you can't build SLs or Qs fast enough to meet demand where would you put your money? I would put my money where I am making a profit or otherwise deriving corporate benefit from a product. Leica has said explicitly that the M will continue and they have shown they know how to maintain a corporate image as well as create profits and, along the way, they have shown that product diversification has benefits. But just as Rick is a genius and art critic bar none, you are a genius, a renowned business expert, and a Leica critic par excellence even without access to data on how they make their profits and invest for the future. This is quite a feat on your part, and you should be proud. It may annoy you that Leica ignores your business acumen, but so far they have done quite well not paying any attention. By the way, do you by any chance have either an M or a SL? My recollection is that you have in the past trashed just about everything Leica except your Q but I could be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 18, 2015 Share #59 Posted December 18, 2015 I did not say the contrary Jim (sorry for the typo). But i'm not 100% sure that Leica are thinking alike. I believe they are. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 18, 2015 Share #60 Posted December 18, 2015 I would put my money where I am making a profit or otherwise deriving corporate benefit from a product. Leica has said explicitly that the M will continue and they have shown they know how to maintain a corporate image as well as create profits and, along the way, they have shown that product diversification has benefits. But just as Rick is a genius and art critic bar none, you are a genius, a renowned business expert, and a Leica critic par excellence even without access to data on how they make their profits and invest for the future. This is quite a feat on your part, and you should be proud. It may annoy you that Leica ignores your business acumen, but so far they have done quite well not paying any attention. By the way, do you by any chance have either an M or a SL? My recollection is that you have in the past trashed just about everything Leica except your Q but I could be wrong. Alan, please stop... you are embarrassing me. I'm really not an art critic. Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.