The Leica M-D thread - merged.

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The "A" setting on the shutter speed dial has a far deeper detent than the other settings and I can set set it by feel without seeing it at all or even removing it from my eye. Have you tried that?

Peter, I have noticed this deeper detent on my M(Type 262) after having put the colored tape  (as I usually do with digital M since M8).

 

 

 

Off subject of camera sizing but I couldn't help noticing that you do the same with your various M's as I do regarding putting a piece of coloured tape on the shutter speed dial to clearly mark the AUTO setting. I've never figured out why Leica engraves / colours that setting in a dull RED. It's all but invisible in dim lighting, and really hard to read with +50 year old eyesight. I use a yellow camera tape "arrow" to highlight AUTO on my M's. Mentioned this to Solms a number of times, but no reaction or answer.

 

Peter, since M8, when I take it out of a bag, the M8 was on "B" or "8000" in place of "A" as expected.

After the tape on "A", I could see if it's off when taking out of the bag.

 

The colored tape is tactile and visual, so when having the camera at eye level, I can put it back to "A" much easier, by touch.

 

Regards,

 

Arnaud

[Bill Livingston]

I had a virus recently, and whilst convalescing took the opportunity to watch some videos of my childhood hero Chris Yates in that wonderful series "A Passion For Angling" and other youtube uploads from that era. They don't make them like that anymore.

Pete

 

 

Hi Pete,

 

Thanks... one of mine too. 

 

The Redmire Pool film was really good... if little far fetched at times..!

 

I have waded across the pool at the same spot Bob and Chris jumped in out of the tree ... and I had to be pulled out with a rope...! You would far more likely disappear into the silt up to your waist in four or five feet of water... and drowning would be a more likely outcome than simply losing a welly!

 

It wouldn't have been such gentle and good natured TV though...

 

If you are not too far away from Ross on Wye, or can get there and you fancy a walk around the Pool and to meet Les Bamford, PM me and I will arrange something for this close season...

 

Anyone who knows who Chris Yates is should see Redmire at least once in their lives... and it can be quite photogenic too...

Edited April 29, 2016 by Bill Livingston

[Tailwagger]

Nothing wrong with either position of course...

 

Very true, but some of these factions do have a pronounced psychological effect outside these borders and certainly influence a number of comments within them. Not that it matters in the least, but it would be astonishing if this version is received by CaNikons, Fujistas or Sonyphiles with anything other ire or quizzical looks.  I count my own initial level of confusion about this offering as evidence I've not yet fully matriculated. 

 

For many years, while I admired the output of a Leica camera, I reviled its reputation. So much so that I refused, despite a tremendous amount of visual evidence goading me to the contrary, to buy in.  From the outside, their offerings appeared to be aimed squarely at either well healed dilettantes or crusty refuseniks who simply couldn't stand to see the old ways pass.  I can still hear myself thinking, '$50K boxed editions; manual focus... I mean really... who the bleep buys this stuff?'.  Certainly Leica does little to dispel any aura of exclusivity.

 

But in the months following buying the M, I've acquired half a dozen more lenses than I had intended to, spent most of my idle time musing about just how long I can resist buying a second body and barely touched any of my other equipment. Not because the M is old school, cooler, appreciably better build, lighter, sexier and most definitely not because its the better value.  Nope, none of that. Not because its made shooting any more enjoyable or easier, lightened my bag or substantially altered my process.  It hasn't.  No, the reason I cant seem to grab anything else on the way out the door is that this system injects more flesh and blood into the end result than any other I've yet to experience.  No other camera has felt as human, more a partner in the process, less an electro-mechanical means to an arbitrary end, then this bleeping overpriced, under tech'd Leica. And dammit, dammit, dammit, its made it just so bleepity, bleepity, bleeping hard not to fall... hard.  

 

So after going back and forth on the wisdom of producing this camera let alone owning it, oddities not withstanding, I'm happy for its existence. If the M-D is the hunk of alloy that yanks on the heart strings for some, be they collector or curmudgeon, photographer or pictorial philosopher, while I'm unlikely to buy it, I do get it. 

[scott_233]

Some worries with this idea: how is date and time checked and set? how is file numbering set? how do you check on battery level and exposures taken/remaining?

Is there discussion somewhere about what the thumb wheel does?

Any why no Automatic ISO setting? Please don't say "tradition!" -- I see an A on the shutter dial.

I think the M-D is a great idea. It would be really great if (for the premium price) there was direct WIFI to an app (Q style); an invisible feature that can be ignored by the Zen photographer but desirable in some use cases...and allows access to selected in-camera settings.

[Exodies]

If ignoring features was adequate there wouldn't be a market for a M-D. 

[jim0266]

Mike Evans over at MacFilos already received his M-D. http://macfilos.com/photo/2016/4/29/leica-m-d-spartan-warrior-unboxed-first-camera-in-britain

 

I noted in his image of the back of the camera there is not a monitor sensor below the wording "Made in Germany." Makes sense as there is no monitor on the camera. On the Leica site all their images show a body with a monitor sensor. See https://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Leica-M-D/Details

The M-D instruction manual does not show a sensor. Interesting...

 

 

 

[Stealth3kpl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

Mike Evans over at MacFilos already received his M-D. http://macfilos.com/photo/2016/4/29/leica-m-d-spartan-warrior-unboxed-first-camera-in-britain

 

I noted in his image of the back of the camera there is not a monitor sensor below the wording "Made in Germany." Makes sense as there is no monitor on the camera. On the Leica site all their images show a body with a monitor sensor. See https://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Leica-M-D/Details

The M-D instruction manual does not show a sensor. Interesting...

 

He needs to read through that article and sort out all the M-P M-D MP mistakes.

Pete

[Guest]

The "A" setting on the shutter speed dial has a far deeper detent than the other settings and I can set set it by feel without seeing it at all or even removing it from my eye. Have you tried that?

 

 

of course Peter H but even my M7's have a much more visible orange AUTO rather than the barely discernible red A on my digital M's and Q ...........Even with the slightly more pronounced A indent I'd still prefer it to be more visible too when just a glance will show the shutter setting choice. It's a simple thing to do and why not?

[Peter H]

of course Peter H but even my M7's have a much more visible orange AUTO rather than the barely discernible red A on my digital M's and Q ...........Even with the slightly more pronounced A indent I'd still prefer it to be more visible too when just a glance will show the shutter setting choice. It's a simple thing to do and why not?

I'm not disagreeing with you at all. Just trying to be helpful by offering a suggestion.

[Guest]

I'm not disagreeing with you at all. Just trying to be helpful by offering a suggestion.

 

 

totally understood Peter, thanks!

[Steve Ricoh]

I'm wondering what's the attraction of a digital camera without a screen? Is it a fashion statement or something, or maybe seen as an investment opportunity. 

I know less is often more in many aspects of living, but having a digital camera without a screen seems to be less without the benefit of less equating to more.

 

PS, I'm not trolling, it's a serious enquiry.

[Peter H]

I'm wondering what's the attraction of a digital camera without a screen? Is it a fashion statement or something, or maybe seen as an investment opportunity. 

I know less is often more in many aspects of living, but having a digital camera without a screen seems to be less without the benefit of less equating to more.

 

PS, I'm not trolling, it's a serious enquiry.

 

 

I tend to agree with you, but others feel strongly that it helps them concentrate on their photography. They'll speak for themselves.

 

It always feels to me as though it's a camera more for those who enjoy their cameras and the act of using them, than for people whose first priority is the photograph itself. But my opinion is filtered through my own preferences and experiences, which are no more valid than any others.

Edited April 30, 2016 by Peter H

[-Lss-]

I'm wondering what's the attraction of a digital camera without a screen?

 

 

Removing something that you don't need or use allows, for example, using the same resources for something you do need or use. A screenless camera is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Very few things genuinely are, although appearing as one can be a strong selling point.

[Steve Ricoh]

Removing something that you don't need or use allows, for example, using the same resources for something you do need or use. A screenless camera is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Very few things genuinely are, although appearing as one can be a strong selling point.

I guess the M-D and the M60 are only of use for the really experienced photographer, and not the likes of me. I still get the exposure wrong (meaning not as I imagined) the first time and usually chimp to make an adjustment up or down. I'm not one for bracketing or for using live view on an M (the lag is almost equivalent to the way transatlantic broadcasts were in the 60's using cable with limited bandwidth). But I recognise others are able to assess the light just by looking, setting exposure accordingly, and don't really miss the rear screen. Interesting thread!

[Morry]

I guess the M-D and the M60 are only of use for the really experienced photographer, and not the likes of me. I still get the exposure wrong (meaning not as I imagined) the first time and usually chimp to make an adjustment up or down. I'm not one for bracketing or for using live view on an M (the lag is almost equivalent to the way transatlantic broadcasts were in the 60's using cable with limited bandwidth). But I recognise others are able to assess the light just by looking, setting exposure accordingly, and don't really miss the rear screen. Interesting thread!

 

 

We all know the exposure for digital sensor is much more difficult than for negative film... and nobody is perfect.

 

I tend to check histogram frequently and got tired of it honestly...

 

It may be true though, that we may miss decisive moments by looking at screen to worry about correct exposure all the time.

 

So I can turn it off, or better idea might be to use the one without screen

 

This approach may work for people shooting street or reportage where "reaction" is the priority rather than perfect exposure.

 

 

It should depend on what each of us is looking for.

[BerndReini]

While I will not be getting the M-D, I certainly understand its appeal and I would love to try one out for a few days. In some ways it is like an M-A without the "hassle" of dealing with film. I like the look of film, so I don't mind using a film camera and I do enjoy the lack of distractions. I find champagne helpful in many situations, but it is hard to break the habit in situations when it is absolutely unnecessary. A lot of times, the moment is so fleeting that checking to see whether you got the shot, in the worst case, will only put you in a bad mood if you missed it. I also find the M-D incredibly beautiful, truthfully like most Leicas, and for an object that I use in my spare time, this is very important to me.

 

I used to shoot slide film rather successfully, and there was no histogram or abundant latitude. I do use Auto ISO quite frequently, and I would have to change my shooting discipline, and probably use an incident meter to get a base line for any location, but I really think I would enjoy the experience.

 

I haven't been following the whole thread, and I am sure this has been posted before, but I find that this is an interesting read on the Leica blog about the experience of shooting M-D:

 

http://blog.leica-camera.com/2016/04/28/one-city-three-photographers-and-the-leica-m-d/

[Mike Rawcs]

I'll probably look at the M - D when it becomes available, but I suspect that the size and weight will preclude purchase. If it had been the same the dimensions as a film M I would buy one - no doubt. 

[Herr Barnack]

No ten minute video capability nonsense.  Thank God!!

Edited April 30, 2016 by Carlos Danger

[Exodies]

Sweet spelling corrector fail, BerndReini. Bolly all round, Hic!

Edited April 30, 2016 by Exodies

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[enboe]

On order, hope it gets here in time for a trip the end of May.

 

For me, I like the idea of no distractions, no explanations, just an old camera for taking snapshots that I like.  My personal shooting style when using Leica is more aligned with the film M bodies than the digital ones, meaning I chimp very little and only in tricky lighting.  I get >95% correct exposures with film, so a similar digital body will work fine for me.  I even used to shoot the old R-D1 with the screen flipped over, back in the days before the M8.  As for no explanations, Leicas are less threatening than DSLRs, and film Leicas even less so.  When you have no screen, you can't be a pro in most people's minds.  Just an old man with an old film camera taking snapshots, nothing to see here.

 

Black lacquer - well, I would have preferred silver chrome for the full retro look, but maybe this will be the first digital that I actually brass.

 

Eric