The Leica M-D thread - merged.

[edwardkaraa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While I take your point, this seems a little bit revisionist. I seem to recall Hasselblad etal, sold quite a few Polaroid backs to professionals. If a shot is important, a little added certainty is nothing to be apologetic about.

Not really. If you compare the LCD to a Polaroid, then definitely exacting studio work with non moving subjects would benefit from the ability to review, magnify and refine lighting and composition. No question there.

But, otherwise, photography is about the decisive moment. No matter if it's street, documentary, reportage, sports, wildlife, weddings, capturing "the moment " is much more important than any other considerations. It would be a pity if the moment happens while the photographer is looking at his screen to check if he caught the moment

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Bill Livingston]

 It would be a pity if the moment happens while the photographer is looking at his screen to check if he caught the moment

 

 

How many people ACTUALLY do this, though? I think we are in danger of making assumptions and then damning everyone with those assumptions...

 

I have my M-P screen set to 'off'... so the LCD screen does not show a picture after the shutter has fired.

 

It is easy enough... You just go to AUTO REVIEW which is on the third page on the main menu... at the very bottom (below all the other settings for 'display'...).

 

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!

 

Once selected, you then push the info button and it takes you onto the next page which gives you a number of choices.

 

 

On my main profile I have it set to 'OFF', which means my camera behaves pretty much exactly like a M60 or a M-D... there is absolutely no display and no image or anything else such as a histogram shows when I fire the shutter. 

 

When you go home, you can even see your pictures for the first time on screen... because there was absolutely no need to go back to the menu and look, was there...?

 

Or was there...? 

 

If I am in awkward lighting or if I want to check focus or anything else a little more time consuming, I will use the PLAY button rather than mess around with the menu.

 

This is the profile I use most of the time... classic metering, no EVF/Display, everything pretty much switched off. I know where I am, because I have the framelines set to 'WHITE' just like an illuminated version of the classic M3/4/6 framelines... basically, my M-P is exactly what many of you on here want as a simple camera.

 

The benefit is that I can, with one menu setting, change the whole camera to a completely different set up...  I can even go back to a camera that allows me to chimp or check a histogram...! On this profile, I set the framelines to RED... that way, I immediately know when I look through the viewfinder that I am on a different set of settings to my standard... Its really that easy and that simple...!

 

So, I REALLY don't see the excitement about all of this.

 

Most of it, from what I can see anyway, is just noise and prejudice... The original M240 and M240P series of cameras can be as simple and discreet as you want them to be... indistinguishable from these later two variants in practical use...

 

It operates just like a film M from a few years ago... but with SO many advantages...!

 

But, if you want to pay more for pretty the same thing but with less flexibility.... then fine. As I said before, my M-P 240 is looking like exceptional value...

Edited May 1, 2016 by Bill Livingston

[Mike Rawcs]

 It would be a pity if the moment happens while the photographer is looking at his screen to check if he caught the moment

 

This happened to me when using an M9. I wanted to take a photograph of a seaside cafe that had a lovely sky in the background and I was using the LCD to check just how much of the actual picture was outside of the framelines, as on the M9 they were hopelessly inaccurate. As I chimped to see the actual composition, a young girl came running out of the open door of the cafe, straight toward me. If I hadn't chimped I would have got the photograph. One that got away; I hate missing a good photograph.

 

Ironically, when using a film MP, I never worried about the same loose framelines as a period of time had past between taking the photograph and being able to see the result. For some reason I always feel much more relaxed about composition when using a film camera, especially when using b&w film. Why this is so I have no idea.

 

I remember reading a White House photographer recall how he saw a fellow photographer chimping while still within 10 meters of the President of the United States. 

 

Mike.

[sumolux]

Althought the M-D instruction manual only mentions DNG, the 'Datenblatt' says this:

 

"Data format DNG™ (raw data), compressed loss-free, JPEG"

 

So what's that about then? An ENG-GER translation issue perhaps?

[Mixalis]

Just published my review of the new M-D. This is the first camera sold by Leica Mayfair in London. I've been using it all weekend and I'm loving it. 

[IkarusJohn]

... So, I REALLY don't see the excitement about all of this.

 

Most of it, from what I can see anyway, is just noise and prejudice... The original M240 and M240P series of cameras can be as simple and discreet as you want them to be... indistinguishable from these later two variants in practical use...

 

It operates just like a film M from a few years ago... but with SO many advantages...!

 

But, if you want to pay more for pretty the same thing but with less flexibility.... then fine. As I said before, my M-P 240 is looking like exceptional value...

 

 

The MD costs $6,000, the M(240) $6,400 and the M-P  $7,000. The MD is $800 more than the M(262), at $5,200.

 

I think you might be thinking of the M60 which can be had for $11,500 (assuming you sell the lens for at least the price of a silver chrome 35 Summilux). 

 

So, minor point, you're not paying more for the MD than the M(240); just the M(262). I assume the M(262) has the same functionality you're talking about - I have no idea. 

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...............No matter if it's street, documentary, reportage, sports, wildlife, weddings, capturing "the moment " is much more important than any other considerations. It would be a pity if the moment happens while the photographer is looking at his screen to check if he caught the moment

 

 

I note the winking smiley at the end of this, and assume you put it there to make it clear that you're not being entirely serious.

 

By the same token, I assume the M-D comes supplied with a tube of Super Glue so that you can ensure that it never leaves your eye. 

[Cyril Jayant]

M D = mojo defunct "...............long live the rangefinder.   .........well maybe not

 

Monking -Deleted 

[Tailwagger]

Not really. If you compare the LCD to a Polaroid, then definitely exacting studio work with non moving subjects would benefit from the ability to review, magnify and refine lighting and composition. No question there.

But, otherwise, photography is about the decisive moment. No matter if it's street, documentary, reportage, sports, wildlife, weddings, capturing "the moment " is much more important than any other considerations. It would be a pity if the moment happens while the photographer is looking at his screen to check if he caught the moment

 

 

Sorry, nerve hit.  No offense, but I really hate this photography is all about the decisive moment mantra.  As great as he was, photography doesn't begin and and end with Cartier-Bresson. And personally, when it comes to last century hyphenated Leica photographers, I'm a far bigger fan of Renger-Patzsch, anyway. I seriously doubt that the latter was the least bit concerned with when he pressed the shutter release other than that when he did, everything was precisely the way he wanted it.  Your list leaves out landscape, industrial, astro, still life, macro, dozens of forms of outdoor, natural light photography all of which occur outside the confines of the studio where success has little to do with when one decides to release the shutter.  Any number of pursuits where it was and remains valuable to ensure that the exposure and composition are precisely what was desired before moving on.  And in many, if not all of the areas you do mention, the decisive moment has generically devolved to C-AF and 9 frames a second.  I'd say, spray and hope has done far, far, far more damage to the craft than chimping ever can or will.

 

The decisive moment is at best a completely orthogonal notion in this context. It is the very last link in the chain and no more important than any of the others preceding it. Great photography is a function of awareness, planning, set up, and patience regardless of whether it is aimed at capturing something fleeting or something that will be there for a billion years. When time is of the essence, photographs are missed for a thousand different reasons. Wrong focal length, wrong aperture, wrong ISO, wrong POV, wrong light angle, gust of wind, passing headlight, etc. Distraction via chimp is way, way down my list.  Even when circumstances are accounted for, most misses come down inattention or a failure to understand the potential of ones surroundings. These failures occur as a prologue to the shot, not a postscript to it.  Used properly, reviewing in the field is not a personal, ego-driven retrospective for patting ones self on the back; its the start of planning and setup for the next sequence of captures.

 

There may be a thousand legitimate reasons for wanting to dump the LCD.  Some want the spiritual high.  Some for the Jedi sense of achievement.  A few may embrace the uncertainty, enjoying the anticipation of tearing open their presents as soon as they get home. Still others will embrace it as a whipping post for forcing them to improve their imagination and skill. But lose the LCD because its too distracting, a crutch, crack, what have you and you'll be more in the game?  Doesn't resonate at all with me. 

Edited May 1, 2016 by Tailwagger

[AAK]

Just published my review of the new M-D. This is the first camera sold by Leica Mayfair in London. I've been using it all weekend and I'm loving it. 

I read your review and enjoyed it very much, and your experience with this camera is one of the first.

 

My sense is that the M-D will give an experience that is as close to film as a digital camera can offer, and that is how the Leica sales literature is positioning it. Certainly the camera doesn't offer any technical advantages over the M240/M262, indeed, it's arguably just the opposite with the lack of a rear LCD viewer.

 

If it's primarily about a more fundamental and traditional experience of shooting, why not just go all the way and shoot film? Is the trouble of actually loading and developing film (or having it developed commercially) perceived to be too much of a nuisance? I ask this as someone who primarily shoots film myself in large part for the pleasure that comes from that experience. Or is it about the ease of shooting 1000 shots in a day? Or something else? Even though you suggest that this will be long-lived camera in your review, I fear that the digital upgrade cycle fever will eventually manifest itself, and you allude to this with the idea of an M-DII.

 

Anthony Killeen

[IkarusJohn]

I also shoot film from time to time.

 

But the comparison of taking out the SD card and putting it in your computer to then process in LightRoom to taking out the film, loading the cannister, developing it using reasonably unpleasant chemicals at the correct concentrations, in the right order, at the right temperatures and for the right times; and then scanning simply doesn't compare. And that's just black & white film. 

 

Even if you're an old hand at developing, removing an SD card is way easier. I love using film, and I can bare developing, but saying use film if you don't want an LCD is a bit of a stretch, don't you think?

[ECohen]

Not really. If you compare the LCD to a Polaroid, then definitely exacting studio work with non moving subjects would benefit from the ability to review, magnify and refine lighting and composition. No question there.

But, otherwise, photography is about the decisive moment. No matter if it's street, documentary, reportage, sports, wildlife, weddings, capturing "the moment " is much more important than any other considerations. It would be a pity if the moment happens while the photographer is looking at his screen to check if he caught the moment

 

 

 

True enough. 

 

But I guess that's why I think many or you feel chimping is considered a bad practise....its not 

I think we need another word for simply being sure your getting the shot you are hired to do or plan to do.

 

As a professional, Polaroid was essential  FOR EVERYTHING!! As is the  preview ,no matter what form. That by no means, means looking at every shot or missing shots because you were looking at the LCD, changing film,changing lenses or whatever. When shooting in situations where things change.... shoot a Polaroid. When your done always shoot an "exit Polaroid".......or glance at the LCD

 

The preview/LCD is about insurance no matter what you are shooting.If what your shooting is not important enough to check ...then don't check. If your situation is such that you may miss something then your job is to be ready.

But don't tell me that not having a screen is better just because you don't have the discipline to know your purpose is to get the shot and you might be distracted. Now getting the shot may not be your purpose, it just may be the joy of snapping photos...if I get it I get it.

 

On a lighter note..10 business men are getting on a airplane to go back to their respective cites. Your asked to catch some live action "deceive moments".... they will give you a few minutes after the meeting. Every ones saying there goodbyes...and your packing up.

Its a rangefinder ...anybody ever leave the lens cap on (it's just an example it's never happened to me..I use the LCD)? Or perhaps a flair from a window ...or a busted something ...the possibility's for error are endless. Wouldn't you like to know that  before they all walk out the door?  "Hey guys...Can I have another 30 seconds please" 

 

Yep some folks don't need a preview and that's fine....If what your doing isn't important enough to check at some point during a session....then the M60 or the MD is for you.....and that fine.

 

Having an LCD and not using it, is better the not having it at all. 

 

Sorry for the rant but the Polaroid comment burns me.  Being a professional and having "preview" Insurance is an important part of getting the shot ...any shot.

So is "chimping" considered bad? When is it acceptable to look at you LCD and what should we call that?  Because chimping implies to many of you that your missing shots because you are unaware......absolute bunk!

 

 

I'm with Tailwadder on this

 

I hate to bring this down to money... but the M60 and the MD to me look like a rich mans toy......Why would you not want the ability to check or not?

I can only think its Zen and the Art of Photography

 

 

Edited May 2, 2016 by ECohen

[Morry]

I also think to check LCD is a reasonable routine.

 

When we face difficult light or any important situation, we take a test shot, check LCD and then adjust exposure if necessary.

This is supposed to be the major advantage we had been given by digital technology I guess.

 

Once I got used to it, I just do it without even thinking.

"To check in order to make sure in necessary situations" is now almost "just to make sure whenever".

 

Then it was about time when I started thinking to myself so M-D looks very interesting to me.

It would not be a professional tool, but can be ideal for private works.

 

I still own M7. If this one can be used as digital M7 that sounds quite promising but I am still wondering.

[ramarren]

I think my concern is that 1: it may be "virtually" lossless as opposed to "absolutely" lossless. 2: will future DNG converters be able to uncompress the files when storage size is no longer an issue. 3: The real truth of the matter may be that I'm an unconvinced Luddite  !

 

 

Lossless DNG compression has been part of the Digital NeGative specification since it was version 1.0 (it is v1.4 now). It is 100%, bit-for-bit, lossless. 

 

Many cameras until recently didn't implement the compression internally and outputted uncompressed DNG because it required more CPU than was available in a low powered camera device. That is no longer the case. All computer based DNG conversion included the lossless compression decode and encode from the first release of DNG Converter and DNG compatibility in Adobe Camera Raw.

 

You can be as much of a Luddite as you want, but when it comes to lossless DNG compression, it goes back to DNG Stone Age. 

[edwardkaraa]

If one is disciplined enough to take just one Polaroid to evaluate lighting and composition, then good for you. When I watch fellow photographers, hobbyists or pros, working, they chimp after each and every shot. I tend to do the same as well. The habit of glancing at the LCD is like a modern photography ritual. When I restarted shooting film a few years ago, I was still looking at the back of the camera all the time, a habit I could never let go of.

[edwardkaraa]

Another important point is horses for courses. Removing the LCD from the S would be suicide. Removing it from the SL is technically impossible since it's a LV based camera. But somehow removing it from the M feels less objectionable. I'm not sure how many use the M for studio work, but that is absolutely not the right tool for the job. For the applications that the M is right for, having or not having an LCD won't make a huge difference. This said, I never said I don't need the LCD, to warrant the nasty replies. I personally think I do need it for my style of shooting, but I find the idea of the M-D interesting and I fully understand the reasoning behind it and why some photographers would rather not have it. And out of 6 variations of the current M, there is one without LCD, so I don't understand the panic it's generating. If you have no interest in an LCD-less camera, just move on, you still got 5 M models to choose from. Don't get too emotional about it.

[Adam]

Why is the M, according to you, absolutely not the right tool for studio work?

[edwardkaraa]

Why is the M, according to you, absolutely not the right tool for studio work?

Which M lens is suitable for studio work? What about the inaccurate framelines? Where do you insert the flash cord? It's not impossible to shoot studio with it but it's not the right tool. That's why you have DSLR, and the Leica S and SL.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Adam]

Never did any real studio work, hence the question. I though the 50mm was used a lot in studio work, plus wifi flash and tethering. But I can see that there are easier ways to do it. Thanks.

[DezFoto]

I wonder how one would clean the sensor on the M-D, I guess it would be via bulb mode? The unfortunate part of that, is that during a bulb exposure the sensor is "active" and thus, has a slight electrostatic charge that attracts more dust, which is why the M240 and previous cameras have a sensor cleaning mode.