The Leica M-D thread - merged.

[padam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The regular 28 Lux was leaked from the same HK source.

 

So I think the images are legit.

Edited April 26, 2016 by padam

[jaapv]

But the 262 doesn't support EVF, and besides, how do you change the function if there is no GUI?

 

I also think they should have just left it off.  If you want to compensate exposure, just change the shutter speed.

That is as may be, but the poster I responded to was referring to the M240 series in general.

[don daniel]

I think the image does not show a connection for a EVF. So it must be a camera without liveview. The wheel on the backside is redundant. But there is still hope that Leica did not screw up the purist concept and that what we see is just a fake.

[menos I M6]

EV compensation is  not the only function of the thumbwheel, EV compensation can be modified not to use the thumbwheel too. The wheel is essential when using focus aid in the EVF. to switch between 5x and 10x with the camera at your eye, for instance.

(Btw, calling the camera M10 appears to me to be a bit mouldy-Luddite as well, so forgive Leica this foible   )

 

 

My criticism is not just about the thumb wheel (it is just an ergonomic issue which was better solved before with the Canon like control before) but mainly that since the Leica M10 once you half press the shutter release, the exposure compensation value is displayed in the viewfinder.

 

This is an entirely nonsensical behavior.

It is logical to expect the exposure value of the auto program to be displayed when waking up the meter - half pressing the shutter release button is accepted of doing just that (in the case of the Leica M of course only shutter speed).

 

And yes, I call the M240 the M10.

Leica's naming scheme really screwed things up for me.

In the past we simply called a Leica M3 or M5 or a IIIf or M8.2.

Now we have these absolutely terrible, confusing names and formulas to be spelled to prevent confusion ?

Does my disliking of this horrible marketing scheme make me a luddite? I'd rather prefer you not to call it what you did.

 

That is as may be, but the poster I responded to was referring to the M240 series in general.

The poster didn't, but referred to the M10 generation cameras, obviously including all M10 based derivatives, as they share the same unfortunate thumb wheel and viewfinder behavior regarding exposure compensation.

 

This may sound all very negative, but indeed my experience since moving from the M9 based platform after very long reluctance to the M10 based platform of Leica digital M cameras has been all but a positive experience.

It has in fact been such a rocky experience that I entirely stopped using digital Leica Ms since then and just used diverse film based cameras and my Nikon digitals instead.

 

This to me is a major deal - I was practically married to a few of the older Leica digitals. My M8.2 was for a few years a daily used camera. The original MM I ordered the day it was introduced has played a similar role and I regard it still as the worlds best digital camera by today.

I absolutely prefer the Leica M as a platform and loved it's simplicity and speed.

 

The M10 completely broke that.

 

I hope for Leica to fix these issues in future cameras.

Although I personally would never use one - I am absolutely happy, Leica introduced the SL.

Now Leica's engineers and marketers have all the playground in the world to introduce advanced features into a parallel camera system and bring back the speed, simplicity, lightweight, compactness and usefulness into the Leica M, where it really belongs.

 

They have proven that Leica still has it with the introduction of the M-A.

We NEED a digital Leica M-A!

 

It is not just for the luddites, geeks, show-offs and the trendy with more money than brains. There are indeed people out there who find a simple, traditional Leica M to be more efficient, faster, logical, better.

Some of these even think, that calling a Leica M a Leica M-XL (Typ123) is a very ridiculous thing if you could call it just a Leica M.

[jaapv]

There is nothing wrong with the naming. It is perfectly clear and surely a manufacturer has a right to name his products anything he likes.

You might as well complain that the camera is not named the xii f.... I find it all a bit ridiculous.

 

It is unfortunate that you do not like the enhanced possibilities of the newest Leica DRFs, but most buyers seem to do so, and that is Leica's bread and butter. They are in this business to sell cameras.

Anyway there is nothing stopping you buying a mint used M9, or ME, or Monochrom1.  

 

(Btw, I wasn't referring to you as a person, I was giving my opinion on the use of "M10" which is confusing to many)

[sblitz]

Late to the party here, but my understanding is that in taking all this away the camera is more expensive? Hmmmmmmmmmm . . . . .  ok. I don't need to pay premium to not have an LCD and a few other bells and whistles...IF it were a few thousand $ cheaper, it would have my interest.

[Joshua Lowe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Pricing this camera higher than the 262 makes no sense, especially if it's another repackaging of the 240/246/262 sensor.

 

If they really didn't use the Q/SL sensor then this is just a cash grab.

[jaapv]

The price depends on the number they expect to sell. The lower the number, the higher the price. I think Leica has no high targets for this camera.

[jaapv]

Late to the party here, but my understanding is that in taking all this away the camera is more expensive? Hmmmmmmmmmm . . . . .  ok. I don't need to pay premium to not have an LCD and a few other bells and whistles...IF it were a few thousand $ cheaper, it would have my interest.

No LCD means designing and making a small run of different bodyshells. How can that be cheaper?

[IkarusJohn]

There is nothing wrong with the naming. It is perfectly clear and surely a manufacturer has a right to name his products ...

 

 

Dirk is surely entitled to express his disagreement with the naming convention without having his views labeled being luddite-like. That is disrespectful. I should point out that he was alluding to a considerably wider dissatisfaction with the M(240), which many share, without being stigmatised in such a way. 

 

If the naming convention is so clear, can you explain its logic?  M(240), M246), M(262). You might add SL(601) and the others - presumably this trend will continue - what will version 2 of the T, Q and SL be called?  Will there be new versions of the Monochrom, M-A & M-D. 

 

As I recall, Leica said there was no particular logic or system to the type naming comvention. The criticism seems fair to me. I have no problem with Leica's internal prototype numbering being random - just that it has has to carry over into the market for model distinction - otherwise we have 4 current M cameras, all sharing the same technology - the colour/liveview/video model, non-video model, non-LCD model (oddly, called M-D, despite the convention) and the Monochrom version.

 

If the M-D is a small volume product run, I sort of get the premium. But leaving the rear wheel on (when there's no live view) makes that justification seem a little thin, and does make it look like Leica raiding the parts bin. 

Edited April 26, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[jlindstrom]

If the rumors are correct, it's a little weird going back to brass. The even with removed parts it ends up weighting the same as M262. It could have been little lighter.

 

For tooling I think not much difference from M60 tooling?

 

All in all, this doesn't really get me interested. The M262 is already there for me. The only relevance might have been if they shaved mm off the thickness and made it film M size now that screen is removed.

 

Still hope it sells extremely well and keeps up the Leica momentum.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jmahto]

From the picture it seems there will be no EVF support. In that case it is exactly like M262 minus LCD and costs more!

 

Something doesn't add up.

[sblitz]

Look like MA back to me, and I suspect the LCD screen and the buttons and internal electronics involved cost a lot more in any event. In the end, they are going to charge more because they can -- it is a vanity item to show how cool one is to have a digital camera operating like an MP (film). They will even have a little video with some renowned older photographer singing its praises. I get it, its marketing, great for them if it earns them a bucket lot of euros. Doesn't mean my eyes should be closed so I don't recognize what's in front of me.

[IkarusJohn]

Look like MA back to me, and I suspect the LCD screen and the buttons and internal electronics involved cost a lot more in any event. In the end, they are going to charge more because they can -- it is a vanity item to show how cool one is to have a digital camera operating like an MP (film). They will even have a little video with some renowned older photographer singing its praises. I get it, its marketing, great for them if it earns them a bucket lot of euros. Doesn't mean my eyes should be closed so I don't recognize what's in front of me.

 

It's a shame if this is true - it dilutes the Essentials moniker. 

[sblitz]

What is essential is building something that sells. All else is essentially noise

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[indergaard]

I also think they should have just left it off.  If you want to compensate exposure, just change the shutter speed.

 

But then Leica would have had to actually make a new camera. Which this isn't. It's again just a re-hash of the M240, with less features, and probably a higher price tag.

[jaapv]

Look like MA back to me, and I suspect the LCD screen and the buttons and internal electronics involved cost a lot more in any event. In the end, they are going to charge more because they can -- it is a vanity item to show how cool one is to have a digital camera operating like an MP (film). They will even have a little video with some renowned older photographer singing its praises. I get it, its marketing, great for them if it earns them a bucket lot of euros. Doesn't mean my eyes should be closed so I don't recognize what's in front of me.

What camera will the video be taken with?

[rosuna]

Lovely camera.

 

I would give my M240 and pay a plus for this M-D 262 (black & white I assume).

 

R.

[DezFoto]

There is nothing wrong with the naming. It is perfectly clear and surely a manufacturer has a right to name his products anything he likes.

You might as well complain that the camera is not named the xii f.... I find it all a bit ridiculous.

 

I think many find the naming conventions confusing and/or pretentious (much like Apple's products, who they are mimicking). Despite Leica's claim that they wanted to make the name more simple (simpler than M9?), have in fact made them more convoluted. Which "M" do you own? The 262 or 240? Do you own the MP or the M-P? And it's only going to get more convoluted as new generations of cameras labelled simply "M" are released. It's a perfectly legitimate complaint from a customer. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[zlatkob]

Could someone explain to me why "chimping" is considered a bad thing?

 

Chimping is a great thing. Checking the LCD is good, smart practice. I've said it before: the LCD is one of the very best additions to photography since the invention of photography. Of course, if for some reason I need to look through the viewfinder constantly and make dozens or hundreds of exposures without chimping, then I will. But the ability to have an instant preview whenever I want one is priceless and has saved or improved a good number of photos for me. A digital camera without an LCD is a non-starter for me. I've heard of (or experienced) enough of the problems of film to not want to imitate its faults for the sake of having an "analog" experience.  Undiscovered shutter faults.  Undiscovered flash sync problems.  Film that wasn't loaded properly.  The broken light meter.  The misjudgment about exposure.  The misaligned lens hood that vignettes.  Unexpected flares or reflections.  Subjects blinking and looking asleep.  Etc.