otto.f Posted January 7, 2016 Share #1 Posted January 7, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) is a question that came to my mind after the release of the M262 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 7, 2016 Posted January 7, 2016 Hi otto.f, Take a look here Why not the whole M body in aluminium?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
MarkP Posted January 7, 2016 Share #2 Posted January 7, 2016 ....then we could watch a video of it being polished for hours on end ;-) ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 7, 2016 Share #3 Posted January 7, 2016 Nothing wrong with light alloy castings, probably less expensive too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 7, 2016 Share #4 Posted January 7, 2016 The baseplate might need to be a bit thicker and the point at which it clips into the bodyshell may need strengthening too. There are some very good finishes available for aluminium though some of which are pretty tough. Tricky to paint I'd imagine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 7, 2016 Share #5 Posted January 7, 2016 At least one user (from a humid climate) has reported on his improved experience with the M262 when transitioning from hot to cold indoor temps (and presumably vice versa), i.e., no sweating or fogging. A nice benefit in addition to weight. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ricoh Posted January 7, 2016 Share #6 Posted January 7, 2016 God forbid! Brass is lovely, I can't wait for some brassing on mine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colint544 Posted January 7, 2016 Share #7 Posted January 7, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Nice idea for a thread with some longevity! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 7, 2016 Share #8 Posted January 7, 2016 Since the M240 Leica has learned how to use aluminium machining technology: the T, the SL, the M262 top plate. I expect the next M will be aluminium based rather than brass or steel - though it may be a balance between the strength of steel vs the low weight but perhaps greater bulk of alluminium. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bencoyote Posted January 7, 2016 Share #9 Posted January 7, 2016 The baseplate might need to be a bit thicker and the point at which it clips into the bodyshell may need strengthening too. There are some very good finishes available for aluminium though some of which are pretty tough. Tricky to paint I'd imagine. I would argue that the baseplate should be dispensed with in favor of S T and SL style batteries. It is a kind of anachronism on a digital camera and gets in the way of tripod quick release plates and maybe a better tripod mount with an orientation pin. CNC milled aluminum is a modern production technique that yields high quality parts. The M was originally designed in a different era when man hours were comparatively cheaper. So redesigning the M for modern manufacturing may be an effective way to bring down the price without sacrificing quality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted January 7, 2016 Share #10 Posted January 7, 2016 Make it unpainted carbon fiber body. The body can then be balanced by varying different weight bottom plate. Use the lightest base plate with 28 elmarit and heaviest one with 280 f/4. Everybody wins (and drools). (edit: I like the base plate. Make the rectangular battery cylindrical and spool shaped, the way batteries are supposed to be shaped. See AA, AAA, C, D ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrödinger's cat Posted January 7, 2016 Share #11 Posted January 7, 2016 The Leica M series cameras, to all intents and purposes, are somewhat of an anachronism from the git go. In my personal view that is a large measure of their charm. I suspect there are a fair number of Luddites other than myself who would be aghast at the idea of an M camera made from something other than brass. And the baseplate, cumbersome as it may be, was intentionally retained for outmoded attitudes just such as my own. As an aside, I belong to a generation which grew up with the idea that a heavy, solid feeling product was an indication of quality. Something lightweight equated to flimsy and cheap and was to be disregarded. Not true of course, but that's the way the thinking went. With very few exceptions I've never had occasion to reconsider my thinking in the matter. Imagine my surprise on reading not to long ago in the Nikon forum how someone, much younger than myself, made the case that for young people the exact opposite was the case. They appreciated the lightweight feeling imparted by modern materials and less weighty products, considering heavyweight devices to be the product of inferior technologies and hopelessly outdated. I have no interest in changing my mind on such matters at this late date in my life, but it was entertaining to learn that there is at least a contrarian opinion on the matter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kilmister Posted January 7, 2016 Share #12 Posted January 7, 2016 Carbon fibre seems a good alternative to brass. It is more eco-friendly than smelting Bauxite and then moulding into shape. (No doubt someone will tell me I have no idea what I am talking about but at least I do it with good intentions and don't troll.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted January 8, 2016 Share #13 Posted January 8, 2016 There is carbon fiber underwater housing for Leica S already. http://www.wetpixel.com/media/DEMA_13_4/DEMA_13_4-22.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bencoyote Posted January 8, 2016 Share #14 Posted January 8, 2016 Imagine my surprise on reading not to long ago in the Nikon forum how someone, much younger than myself, made the case that for young people the exact opposite was the case. They appreciated the lightweight feeling imparted by modern materials and less weighty products, considering heavyweight devices to be the product of inferior technologies and hopelessly outdated. I have no interest in changing my mind on such matters at this late date in my life, but it was entertaining to learn that there is at least a contrarian opinion on the matter Heh I never really crystallized it that clearly that way before but that is actually the way that I think. I'm 44 and grew up in an aviation family though. To me heavy implies crudely made and poorly optimized old tech. Sort of like trains. On the other hand light means well designed and optimized with space age materials. More like: Airplenes, aerospace and fancy high tech bicycles. New technologies. I once picked up this berryium fitting from space telescope and told the load it was designed to support and was wow!!! Then I heard about all the horrible things that happen to people who fail to wear proper protective gear while in areas contaminated by the dust and I was like. YIPES!!! Anyway interesting cultural association you picked up on there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 8, 2016 Share #15 Posted January 8, 2016 bencoyote - What you just said, is like, heavy man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted January 8, 2016 Author Share #16 Posted January 8, 2016 The Leica M series cameras, to all intents and purposes, are somewhat of an anachronism from the git go. In my personal view that is a large measure of their charm. I suspect there are a fair number of Luddites other than myself who would be aghast at the idea of an M camera made from something other than brass. And the baseplate, cumbersome as it may be, was intentionally retained for outmoded attitudes just such as my own. As an aside, I belong to a generation which grew up with the idea that a heavy, solid feeling product was an indication of quality. Something lightweight equated to flimsy and cheap and was to be disregarded. Not true of course, but that's the way the thinking went. With very few exceptions I've never had occasion to reconsider my thinking in the matter. Imagine my surprise on reading not to long ago in the Nikon forum how someone, much younger than myself, made the case that for young people the exact opposite was the case. They appreciated the lightweight feeling imparted by modern materials and less weighty products, considering It heavyweight devices to be the product of inferior technologies and hopelessly outdated. I have no interest in changing my mind on such matters at this late date in my life, but it was entertaining to learn that there is at least a contrarian opinion on the matter It will still be heavy enough with aluminium for the whole body. You have to have a counterweight for your Noctilux and all the luxes indeed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted January 8, 2016 Author Share #17 Posted January 8, 2016 Carbon fibre seems a good alternative to brass. It is more eco-friendly than smelting Bauxite and then moulding into shape. (No doubt someone will tell me I have no idea what I am talking about but at least I do it with good intentions and don't troll.) Seems more vulnerable to me in certain circumstances what I hear from cyclists Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 8, 2016 Share #18 Posted January 8, 2016 I am a bit puzzled by this thread; Leica is using aluminium for the top plate of the 262, and a lightweight alloy casting for the body. Using aluminium for the camera body would make it heavier, not lighter. I may be misreading some posts, but I get the impression that there are some people who think that the whole M camera bodies are made of brass. There have been other experiments. Leica made top plates from zinc for a while in the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 8, 2016 Share #19 Posted January 8, 2016 'Plastic' Leica anyone? There are plenty of possibilities. Personally I prefer something solid, if that is, its not too heavy. I can understand the association of weight with older design but many modern products can all too easily feel flimsy to me these days. I suppose the trade offs are weight, physical stability and longevity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 8, 2016 Share #20 Posted January 8, 2016 .... and a lightweight alloy casting for the body. Using aluminium for the camera body would make it heavier, not lighter. I've never really thought about what the body shell is made from - if its an 'alloy' casting I assume that means an aluminium alloy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.