Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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

 

+1 but if it had just been the same size as a film camera ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

x

The deed is done. My new M-D is now sitting in its box on my desk, waiting to be unpacked and charged up. I'm interested to see that it was built on 22 Apr this year, so it's only a week since it rolled off the line at Wetzlar. To me, it's a thing of absolute beauty, Can't wait to try it in anger. 

 

When testing the M-D in Red Dot Cameras today, I reflexively tilted it to look at the back each time I took a shot, so I'll have to ditch that little habit........

 

I'm off on a 3 day business trip tomorrow, so it will be packed along with a couple of lenses and my Macbook.  I'll report back!

Edited by jcraf
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

In theory, removing the screen could have allowed them to reduce the thickness of the body since the display pack has to sit behind the sensor. However, the thickness is also determined by things like the battery and SD card slot which will not have changed. Most important of all, this is a niche product and there could have been no justification in redesigning the body to take advantage of there no longer being a display. If the price disappoints, losing the screen and associated hardware removes $100 at most from the material content and it may be the limited volume camera back and ISO setting dial claws that back.

 

At the end of the day, it's a de-contented M240 just as the M262 was. All fine, and I get the point. However, I'm more interested in where they are taking the M forwards instead of into these "essentliche" backwaters. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having a screen to chimp begs the question how do you get the exposure bang on with a digital sensor - digital being less forgiving than film? An error in metering won't be seen until you download the results in the processing tool of your choice, presumably LR if you're shooting RAW (which you should be doing of course :)).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I paid more for less...and I'm so happy I did.

I went from Japanese Nikon's that had layers and layers of menus. That I hated everytime I picked up the camera.... wondering how it was set...what was hidden from my view....I got so tired of the bad experience I finally went to Leica.

 

 

 

Really? That is not my experience at all. I have a D750 and after I spent no more than an hour adding things to the my menu setting, I found it to be much easier to access the menu than my M240. I love my Leica cameras but I still think Nikon has it perfected and the glass is great too. 

 

Not sure I would ever buy the new M-D, it's just not what I would ever want in a digital Leica. Hope they do well with it though.

Edited by Mikeleica
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having a screen to chimp begs the question how do you get the exposure bang on with a digital sensor - digital being less forgiving than film? An error in metering won't be seen until you download the results in the processing tool of your choice, presumably LR if you're shooting RAW (which you should be doing of course :)).

 

 

Practice?  Bracketing?

 

I have preview turned off on all my digital cameras.   I rarely check shots (but like having a screen available for when I do).   If I didn't have a screen I'd do the same thing I do with my film cameras... if in any doubt I bracket the shots.  I sometimes even bracket when using an incident light meter.

 

My choice is the M 262.   It's right for me.  I have no doubt there are shooters who will find the M-D just right for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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

There is another advantage. A few months ago I was being asked very agressively if I had deleted the pictures I took from a couple in the street of Stuttgart. When I said yes ( I did ) , they wanted to see all my pictures on my screen, in case I had forgotten one.  With the M-D such a thing just is not happening anymore. :)

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

When testing the M-D in Red Dot Cameras today, I reflexively tilted it to look at the back each time I took a shot, so I'll have to ditch that little habit........

 

 

Long time ago I asked a street singer with a very loud nice voice: " How do you know for certain, people further in the street can hear you? "

He said: " I just know. "

 

You'll forget the screen very quicky. Just like 20 years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 but if it had just been the same size as a film camera ....

Well, it is of course a little bit bigger than a film M. But to me, the lack of screen, buttons and control wheel on the camera's  back gets it pretty close to the feel of a film M.

 

All subjective of course, but to me my M-D  feels nicer in the hand than any previous digital M. 

Edited by jcraf
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

... 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.

 

 

That's the great advantage of no screen. You don't need to take a battery or worry about SD cards. The camera is lighter, and no one knows you're not actually taking pictures because there's no screen to check.  It's the ultimate in simplicity - you don't even need to focus and there's no post processing. Best of all, no one knows what a crap photographer you are and you don't bore everyone with your cat pictures. 

 

If you want a car analogy, my Audi is practical and does the job nicely, but if I had the money I wouldn't buy a Nissan GTR, I'd get a Singer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? That is not my experience at all. I have a D750 and after I spent no more than an hour adding things to the my menu setting, I found it to be much easier to access the menu than my M240. I love my Leica cameras but I still think Nikon has it perfected and the glass is great too. 

 

Not sure I would ever buy the new M-D, it's just not what I would ever want in a digital Leica. Hope they do well with it though.

 

 

I couldn't disagree with you more. Nikon all Nikons do too much stuff, you cant see at a glance what your camera is set on .

Not so with the M there are only 3 controls....and "settings" one button has the rest on one screen.

...but that just me German is simpler 

 

"after I spent no more than an hour adding things to the my menu setting"...What does this mean? ......setting up profiles?

Yes there are very many great Nikon lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps a good compromise would be to get a MD half case when they're available, put your trusty M240/262 in and then essentially you'll have a camera without a LCD screen...........until you need it.

A couple of hundred bucks compared to several thousand spent for a 240/262 sans screen. After all the MD is pretty much the same camera.......but less for more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the M262 was billed as being lighter in weight - as light as the M9 was.

That was one of the selling point - 100 grams lighter.... 

 

 

Would the top plate from the M262 fit on the M-D? It seems very similar.

 

To be honest, 100g lighter is interesting, and so to is having a red dot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would the top plate from the M262 fit on the M-D? It seems very similar.

 

To be honest, 100g lighter is interesting, and so to is having a red dot.

 

No, it's not the same top plate.

The M-D 's has the usefull "Function" button, and M (type 262) no button.

 

Arnaud

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...