The Leica M-D thread - merged.

[-Lss-]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do use the LV feature from time to time, and 3 profiles to setup starting points for well lit vs. low light scenarios.  I'll also use my EVF occasionally when shooting within a very thin DOF to ensure critical focus (my eyes are not what they used to be).  Again, all functional features/benefits and not all that complicated to figure out how and why you would use them.

Perhaps it is good to clarify that while the M-D does not provide live view or EVF support, the M (Typ 262) camera the M-D is based on does not provide these features either. The M (Typ 262) however sports a screen on the back.

[colint544]

I'm just wondering where the join in the camera leatherette is. In a standard digital M, it meets either side of the screen/button module. In a film M, it's either side of the back door. But on the M-D, the leatherette wraps all the way around both sides of the camera, with no visible join. It's a nice touch.

 

I think the camera is brilliant. Desirable. I don't really get the beef about coming home with a misaligned rangefinder and all your shots ruined. We all shot (many of us still do) film Ms for years, and this never happened. It's certainly never happened to me. I don't think Leica are stupid. Nobody has to buy this camera. I bet they sell every one they make.

 

Best wishes all,

 

Colin

[colonel]

So I have just had a look at the M-D

 

I have changed my opinion. It's totally cool in an inexplicable way. I think I am going to buy one. It's extremely beautiful and the absence of a menu system or any buttons on the back is weirdly appealing .....

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MT0227]

Er...there is no LCD on the M-D! Do you mean the viewfinder? None of the buttons mentioned are there on the M-D.

 

File format? JPEG or RAW only? There seems to be some confusion. If it really shoots only in RAW that will decreases the number of exposures available on each SD card.

 

I didn't realize your question was specific to M-D; my comment was specific to digital M with LCD given your LCD discussion a few posts above your jpg questions.  Apologies for the confusion.

[MT0227]

My comment was a general response to Digital M(240)  being too complicated or too custom feature heavy vs. the M-D.  The post implied the M-D is simpler due to no EVF, JPG, White Balance...etc.  My point was most of these are digital features to assist with future workflow and not adjustments; some of which you set and forget, and you're are back to the same 4 adjustments we all make across the board: focus, aperture, ISO and shutter speed.  

 

To be fair, I pointed out that I do use LV and EVF features because I have the need and why I would choose a 240 over the M-D or other non LCD digital Ms.  I also pointed out that being able to shoot in both DNG and JPG could be a useful feature for those who need to deliver both on a regular basis.  

 

Simply put, once I configured all the digital features in my M240 to meet my shooting preferences (which was quite simplel), it's just as simple to use as my M6... same levers/adjustments to control your frame:  focus, aperture, iso, shutter speed.

 

Porsche has different models with different features and price points, so does Leica.  We have options to pay for what we need, and leave the rest.  This is a good thing, and not an indicator of who is more of a "purest" and or a 'better photographer" for choosing one option over another.

 

 

Perhaps it is good to clarify that while the M-D does not provide live view or EVF support, the M (Typ 262) camera the M-D is based on does not provide these features either. The M (Typ 262) however sports a screen on the back.

[Herr Barnack]

So I have just had a look at the M-D

 

I have changed my opinion. It's totally cool in an inexplicable way. I think I am going to buy one. It's extremely beautiful and the absence of a menu system or any buttons on the back is weirdly appealing .....

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I'll go along with that.

 

At first, I wasn't sure about the M-D, or the M60 for that matter.  While I have yet to see either in the flesh (or brass, I suppose), I find the concept of "no screen/no chimping, wait till you get home and download to see" appealing.  Some may think this an impediment; I think it is an arrangement that pushes the photographer to be better and demands a highr level of skill. 

 

In some ways, a display screen is a security blanket or safety net.  When you remove the safety net, the price of poker goes way up.  The camera requires more of you as a photographer and makes you strive to be better at your craft.

 

Damn; now there are two new M cameras I want, the M-D and the M Monochrom.  So many cameras and lenses, so few gold bars and bags of diamonds... 

Edited May 4, 2016 by Carlos Danger

[ECohen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'll go along with that.

 

At first, I wasn't sure about the M-D, or the M60 for that matter.  While I have yet to see either in the flesh (or brass, I suppose), I find the concept of "no screen/no chimping, wait till you get home and download to see" appealing.  Some may think this an impediment; I think it is an arrangement that pushes the photographer to be better and demands a highr level of skill. 

 

In some ways, a display screen is a security blanket or safety net.  When you remove the safety net, the price of poker goes way up.  The camera requires more of you as a photographer and makes you strive to be better at your craft.

 

Damn; now there are two new M cameras I want, the M-D and the M Monochrom.  So many cameras and lenses, so few gold bars and bags of diamonds... 

 

 

 

Can you explain why you would want  to "fly without a net" if you don't have to?

 

I'm not suggesting anything bad about this camera. I can see many of you like the idea. I even understand why.

But as Carlos suggests  "a display screen is a security blanket or safety net" (..... to me it's more of a tool)

Photography is not gambling, its a creative expression. The picture is not better and I don't think one is a better photographer because you don't have an LCD.

Remember no LCD is a choice.....in the old days you didn't have a choice so it not the same thing.

 

So why "fly without a net" if you don't have to?  

 

OK to be clear this next statement  is just a joke:

​The real skill comes in fixing your photographs in Post that should have been fixed in the camera.  

[RITskellar]

To whoever already has an M-D (262), please start an "I love my M-D" porn thread now. This is almost a perfect camera for me and my preferences, and I'm very much looking forward to getting one. Or two.

[Tailwagger]

I find LCDs can be useful but at least on the M9 they only give you an approximation of the final result; it's best to wait and see it full size once downloaded. 

 

An important observation in my view. I recall when I had a GR and shooting raw only, its rendering on the LCD was worse than useless in some situations... jagged lines, noise, artifacts. Early on I actually deleted a few of shots in the field that I thought were lost due to missed focus or camera shake, until I realized, after not deleting a few suspected misses, that in fact the captures were fine, rather it was the nature of the LCD screen rendering that was the problem. 

[Jeff S]

 

I am sure the difference in philosophical approach is worthy of thoughtful analysis by Erwin Putts. I'll look out for it.

Puts did weigh in on the M60 in this rambling 'Intro' post...  http://www.imx.nl/photo/index.html

 

An excerpt.... "The M 60 shares one important aspect with the M6J and the original M3. Taking pictures is again an act of trust and reliance on one’s own expertise and judgment. With film-loading cameras in general the result of one’s photography became visible after the stage of the film development. There was that thrill of expectation and anxiety when inspecting the still wet negatives if the special shoot was sharp and correctly exposed and framed. If so, you are content and if not you are doomed. Digital cameras changed all this and killed in fact that basic intrinsic experience of film-based photography. The instant inspection of the result, so familiar with current digital cameras and the automatic control of the basic elements (focus, and exposure) by software (AF and AE) have eliminated the thrill of basic photography. The important signal of the M 60 is Leica’s dedication to reframe the basics of photography and re-align photography to the experience of the M6J and M3. 

 

(snip)

 

There are two different ways to assess the M 60. As a modern digital camera it is a statement to shrink the digital conveniences that we have been learned to love so much to insignificance  and to re-instate the experience of film photography in a digital world. On the other hand the Leica M 60 is a camera that is intimately connected to Leica’s past and one looks in vain for truly innovative features. The M 60 is a masterly example of the art of reduction. The list of features that have been omitted (no frame selector lever, no JPEG, no video, no monitor) is larger than the list of features that have been added compared to the M (new materials for body parts)."

 

 

And he has more than weighed in lately on the broader issue of film vs digital, essentially 'trashing' the latter and committing himself to the former...

 

http://www.imx.nl/photo/blog/files/4f22d2125702582ec8f3826e3e077819-36.html  ....complete with the juicy comment "The SL is the camera that will presumably cater for the photographer suffering from featuritis and a big ego to accompany the size of the camera The S is for sumo wrestlers who need to impress their clientele."

 

And this...  http://www.imx.nl/photo/blog/files/0ecb45e7cb822204d869ca7da6a19ab9-39.html

 

Jeff

Edited May 4, 2016 by Jeff S

[Peter H]

Poor old Erwin. He showed such promise.

 

Where did it all go wrong for him?

[jcraf]

To whoever already has an M-D (262), please start an "I love my M-D" porn thread now. This is almost a perfect camera for me and my preferences, and I'm very much looking forward to getting one. Or two.

Well, not sure about starting another thread for endless debate. Sorry I started this one....

 

But I do love my new M-D. Lovely sunny day in store here tomorrow, so I'll be out and about in London with mine.

[pico]

Poor old Erwin. He showed such promise.

 

Where did it all go wrong for him?

Age. I have profound respect for old, especially when it is bottled.

[jmahto]

Puts did weigh in on the M60 in this rambling 'Intro' post...  http://www.imx.nl/photo/index.html

 

An excerpt.... "The M 60 shares one important aspect with the M6J and the original M3. Taking pictures is again an act of trust and reliance on one’s own expertise and judgment. With film-loading cameras in general the result of one’s photography became visible after the stage of the film development. There was that thrill of expectation and anxiety when inspecting the still wet negatives if the special shoot was sharp and correctly exposed and framed. If so, you are content and if not you are doomed. Digital cameras changed all this and killed in fact that basic intrinsic experience of film-based photography. The instant inspection of the result, so familiar with current digital cameras and the automatic control of the basic elements (focus, and exposure) by software (AF and AE) have eliminated the thrill of basic photography. The important signal of the M 60 is Leica’s dedication to reframe the basics of photography and re-align photography to the experience of the M6J and M3. 

 

(snip)

 

There are two different ways to assess the M 60. As a modern digital camera it is a statement to shrink the digital conveniences that we have been learned to love so much to insignificance  and to re-instate the experience of film photography in a digital world. On the other hand the Leica M 60 is a camera that is intimately connected to Leica’s past and one looks in vain for truly innovative features. The M 60 is a masterly example of the art of reduction. The list of features that have been omitted (no frame selector lever, no JPEG, no video, no monitor) is larger than the list of features that have been added compared to the M (new materials for body parts)."

 

 

And he has more than weighed in lately on the broader issue of film vs digital, essentially 'trashing' the latter and committing himself to the former...

 

http://www.imx.nl/photo/blog/files/4f22d2125702582ec8f3826e3e077819-36.html  ....complete with the juicy comment "The SL is the camera that will presumably cater for the photographer suffering from featuritis and a big ego to accompany the size of the camera The S is for sumo wrestlers who need to impress their clientele."

 

And this...  http://www.imx.nl/photo/blog/files/0ecb45e7cb822204d869ca7da6a19ab9-39.html

 

Jeff

Regarding last link...

I am not sure you can generalize "Digital is becoming boring" for every user. Look at the instant photo sharing culture. High velocity makes it rather exciting, not boring. There is more to traditional way of creating/consuming photographs and it is enabled by digital.... and it has nothing to do with Marissa Mayer getting megabucks despite failure (however repulsive it is).

Edited May 4, 2016 by jmahto

[Adam]

High velocity sharing is exciting as high velocity eating. It also triggers the same response in me, especially if the shared product is garbage.

 

In general, I find over-stimulation to be boring. But I know it is profitable: more data -> more addicts -> more ads - > more money.

 

I tend to agree with a lot what Puts says, especially when I see people insta-sharing a stylized image of their half eaten Lasagna.

[jmahto]

High velocity sharing is exciting as high velocity eating. It also triggers the same response in me, especially if the shared product is garbage.

 

In general, I find over-stimulation to be boring. But I know it is profitable: more data -> more addicts -> more ads - > more money.

 

I tend to agree with a lot what Puts says, especially when I see people insta-sharing a stylized image of their half eaten Lasagna.

Not every advancement of technology (like digital) will have "good/productive/..." usage. Technology is always double edged sword. But there is lots of useful applications in going digital (photography included). I can share my Dad's echo report with a doctor across the world instantly using smartphone camera and web. Imagine doing it so easily 20 years ago. There is an advantage of high velocity sharing. Not for Lasagna for sure.

 

BTW, I didn't add earlier that I do agree with the overall content of his article. I just think he is bored and assumes everyone is bored too.

Edited May 4, 2016 by jmahto

[Tailwagger]

Poor old Erwin. He showed such promise.

 

Where did it all go wrong for him?

 

He seems to have forgotten that photography isn't about the photographer, it's about the photograph.  

[jaapv]

There is no photograph without the photographer

[honcho]

Poor old Erwin. He showed such promise.

 

Where did it all go wrong for him?

Leica kept throwing curve balls at him.... everything from central veiling flare to bling without threaded releases and screens. No wonder he doesn't know which way to turn, poor man.

 

At least Huff has being as thick as pigshit in his favour.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[colonel]

The web suffers an intense case of guruitis

 

All because someone said some good things it doesn't mean everything they say is good

 

At my age, rather the trying to be right all the time, I am trying just to be slightly less wrong ......