Peter H Posted April 28, 2016 Share #261 Posted April 28, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Mmmm... The camera that reduces to a minimum the interface, true purity in digital, should have been monochrome... Not for those who think colour is purer than B&W. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 28, 2016 Posted April 28, 2016 Hi Peter H, Take a look here The Leica M-D thread - merged.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted April 28, 2016 Share #262 Posted April 28, 2016 With respect, I think this is a very unrealistic sense of the operability and repairability of Leica's current digital technology. Why? Leica strives to have a full supply of repair parts for at least 10 years after production end. So with a manufacturing run of say 3 years that will mean fully repairable for over 13 years, with a bit of luck more than that. After that still at least partly repairable, and why shouldn't a camera that has been running for a decade and a half not carry on for a considerable number of years afterwards? Old electronics have proved to soldier on for surprising periods of time. The weakest link will be the batteries, but I just had the NiCads (and condensor) of a 25 year old electronic flash replaced -just for fun, not serious use-, making it fully operational again. Yes, technology may -will- have progressed immeasurably by then, but I can quite imagine myself being happy with the images I get out of my current gear indefinitely. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted April 28, 2016 Share #263 Posted April 28, 2016 (edited) In other words, you agree that ergonomics may in some cases win over a large screen on the back of the camera. I think this is a message that often gets lost. Ergonomics, of course, is a very personal thing. I cant think of one case where ergonomics.....or ascetics "wins" over a an LCD......and I don't love like the ergonomics of the 240MP that I use....too thick too heavy But this cameras not made for me.....and to each his own Edited April 28, 2016 by ECohen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted April 28, 2016 Share #264 Posted April 28, 2016 Why? Leica strives to have a full supply of repair parts for at least 10 years after production end. So with a manufacturing run of say 3 years that will mean fully repairable for over 13 years, with a bit of luck more than that. After that still at least partly repairable, and why shouldn't a camera that has been running for a decade and a half not carry on for a considerable number of years afterwards? Old electronics have proved to soldier on for surprising periods of time. The weakest link will be the batteries, but I just had the NiCads (and condensor) of a 25 year old electronic flash replaced -just for fun, not serious use-, making it fully operational again. Yes, technology may -will- have progressed immeasurably by then, but I can quite imagine myself being happy with the images I get out of my current gear indefinitely. The timespan envisaged was "two decades at least" - so, yes, 13 years gets us... some way there, but not quite. And a flash may not be the best thing to compare to a digital camera. Perhaps better to think of a first-generation iPhone. Anyone still use one of those? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RF’sDelight Posted April 28, 2016 Share #265 Posted April 28, 2016 There you go: http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Leica-M-D PS: Brass is back! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted April 28, 2016 Share #266 Posted April 28, 2016 The M-D would be fantastic for the situations when someone approaches you and asks you if you just took his picture 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted April 28, 2016 Share #267 Posted April 28, 2016 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Leica M-D "a step back to the future". "a step back" seems a negative choice of words when many will already have this in their mind that the product will be a step back from usefulness. Edited April 28, 2016 by Paul J 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steamboat Posted April 28, 2016 Share #268 Posted April 28, 2016 The first Porsche "911" was internally referred to as the "901". Peugeot had rights to that number as a model number so Porsche could not have a nameplate on the automobile with "901" and hence the 911. Me? It's taken a while to get use to the Leica "Type" designation. I still think it's awkward but certainly works. Rainy day on east coast of Lake Michigan. I need to get out and make some photographs! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonathanP Posted April 28, 2016 Share #269 Posted April 28, 2016 (edited) I assume that uncoded wide lenses won't be very usable on this since you can't manually set the lens code? Presumably the only option will be faffing with LCC or flat field plugins in post processing? Mind you, if you can spend that much on a crippled camera I guess affording the latest lenses isn't a problem Edited April 28, 2016 by JonathanP 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted April 28, 2016 Share #270 Posted April 28, 2016 Just saw the M-D announcement. Yes! This is what I dreamed for when the M Edition 60 was released. Sadly, my camera budget is already gone for this year. But there's next year... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted April 28, 2016 Share #271 Posted April 28, 2016 I assume that uncoded wide lenses won't be very usable on this since you can't manually set the lens code? Presumably the only option will be faffing with LCC or flat field plugins in post processing? Mind you, if you can spend that much on a crippled camera I guess affording the latest lenses isn't a problem My primary M lens kit is all coded now (WATE, Summarit-M 75/2.4, Summilux 35 v2 coded by DAG). The only question is whether I want one enough to spend the money for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunhoy Posted April 28, 2016 Share #272 Posted April 28, 2016 (edited) Can't take this camera seriously. They left the meter in it. and let's not forget about the price tag! Edited April 28, 2016 by dunhoy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdk Posted April 28, 2016 Share #273 Posted April 28, 2016 One thing I noticed on Leica's Details web page is they claim the M-D's shutter is significantly quieter in re-cocking than the M Typ 240 series cameras. That quietude could be a boon for people shooting in quiet locations, or wanting maximum discretion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 28, 2016 Share #274 Posted April 28, 2016 The timespan envisaged was "two decades at least" - so, yes, 13 years gets us... some way there, but not quite. And a flash may not be the best thing to compare to a digital camera. Perhaps better to think of a first-generation iPhone. Anyone still use one of those?Well, the flash bit was just about the batteries... My brother has restored my father's Kuba taperecorder -from 1954 IIRC.- The only problem he encountered was that the tapes run the wrong way. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 4 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/259865-the-leica-m-d-thread-merged/?do=findComment&comment=3035148'>More sharing options...
dunhoy Posted April 28, 2016 Share #275 Posted April 28, 2016 It's the first chimp deterrent since the demise of film! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kivis Posted April 28, 2016 Share #276 Posted April 28, 2016 I want it. I can't afford it. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denys Posted April 28, 2016 Share #277 Posted April 28, 2016 The first Porsche "911" was internally referred to as the "901". Peugeot had rights to that number as a model number so Porsche could not have a nameplate on the automobile with "901" and hence the 911. Me? It's taken a while to get use to the Leica "Type" designation. I still think it's awkward but certainly works. Rainy day on east coast of Lake Michigan. I need to get out and make some photographs! Actually 901 wasn't just an internal reference at Porsche: the company had every intention of selling 901s. Only when Peugeot complained was the idea dropped. It's possible to purchase sales brochures with 901 on the cover. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted April 28, 2016 Share #278 Posted April 28, 2016 When I saw the anouncement of the new Leica M-D https://www.meister-camera.com/de/produkt/6447/leica-m-d-typ-262-schwarz?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MC+160428 I thought, nice second body. Allthough I had thought the price would be less, without the display. less parts. Easier to produce, less money. Certainly an attractive and solid camera IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 28, 2016 Share #279 Posted April 28, 2016 I would say the display is about -30$, the EVF interface -5 $. The extra R&D and tooling will be far more with the anticipated limited number of cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted April 28, 2016 Share #280 Posted April 28, 2016 About the solidness. Could one compare it with the surdiness of a Leica MP, now that the body seems to be in one piece? No more displays getting smashed when it hits the ground in an unexpected way. ( No offense Jaap..) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now