The Leica M-D thread - merged.

[Joshua Lowe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Did you really miss this thing: http://blog.leica-camera.com/2016/04/28/one-city-three-photographers-and-the-leica-m-d/

 

I did miss that, yes.  So thanks for letting me know about it.  But I was referring to photos from that specific day when he was taking photos at the skatepark.

[Advertisement]

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

[Nick Bedford]

Oh my, I think I've become a film/display-less convert in two weeks. Just sent off a bunch of rolls shot on my mate's MP, bought a Mamiya 7 on Monday and seriously have not missed my M's display at all. It's a completely different experience without having any display to always be tempted to review. It's, dare I say it, zen-like.

 

I have no idea if my photos turned out the way I may expect yet but that's half the fun I guess.

Edited June 7, 2016 by nickjbedford

[IkarusJohn]

Still day at the marina - M60 & 28 Summilux.  I had a pretty good idea how this would turn out ...

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!

[enboe]

Oh my, I think I've become a film/display-less convert in two weeks. Just sent off a bunch of rolls shot on my mate's MP, bought a Mamiya 7 on Monday and seriously have not missed my M's display at all. It's a completely different experience without having any display to always be tempted to review. It's, dare I say it, zen-like.

 

I have no idea if my photos turned out the way I may expect yet but that's half the fun I guess.

 

 

Nick - rather than Zen-like, I like to think of screen less shooting as achieving some level of skill or mastery of the photographic process and use of the gear for the same.  In nine days of serious shooting, the M-D has proven to be deterministic and predictable, giving results that only surprised me maybe 1% of the time, the same rate as if I were shooting film.  Add the reliability, as in no freezes, corrupt files, or frames that failed to write, and you have a great tool that enables the process, doing exactly what you ask it to do.

 

Have fun!

 

Eric

[Exodies]

In 21 days of serious shooting my M typ 240 has proven to be deterministic and predictable, giving no results that surprised me and my doubts caused me to press Play only twice. Also no freezes, corrupt files or frames that failed to write.

Is the M-D actually different from a 240 in terms of the pictures?

[jaapv]

No.

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In 21 days of serious shooting my M typ 240 has proven to be deterministic and predictable, giving no results that surprised me and my doubts caused me to press Play only twice. Also no freezes, corrupt files or frames that failed to write.

Is the M-D actually different from a 240 in terms of the pictures?

Can't think why it would be.

 

Oh, I get it. Rhetorical.

[Nick Bedford]

Nick - rather than Zen-like, I like to think of screen less shooting as achieving some level of skill or mastery of the photographic process and use of the gear for the same.  In nine days of serious shooting, the M-D has proven to be deterministic and predictable, giving results that only surprised me maybe 1% of the time, the same rate as if I were shooting film.  Add the reliability, as in no freezes, corrupt files, or frames that failed to write, and you have a great tool that enables the process, doing exactly what you ask it to do.

 

Have fun!

 

Eric

 

I also feel that way about my M 240. It's a predictable, high quality image delivering tool, and for that very reason I covered the screen last night to experiment with "screen-less" digital shooting. In other words, I trust the camera, and I trust my knowledge of its quirks (in say, metering complex light for example).

 

I just received a whole lot of HP5+ scans back from two rolls I shot on a Rolleflex two years ago and the results came out exactly as I thought they would. Metered, focused, framed, click.

[Peter H]

 

 

Perhaps it's a reaction against the ubiquity of phone photos that makes us want to re-establish the idea that skill is a pre-eminent photographic virtue. It can be an essential part of the photographers creative process of course, but there's so much more to interesting photography than skill and I hope the M-D doesn't put a heavy finger on this delicate balance.

[Bill Livingston]

Perhaps it's a reaction against the ubiquity of phone photos that makes us want to re-establish the idea that skill is a pre-eminent photographic virtue. It can be an essential part of the photographers creative process of course, but there's so much more to interesting photography than skill and I hope the M-D doesn't put a heavy finger on this delicate balance.

 

Couldn't agree more! 

[IkarusJohn]

Perhaps it's a reaction against the ubiquity of phone photos that makes us want to re-establish the idea that skill is a pre-eminent photographic virtue. It can be an essential part of the photographers creative process of course, but there's so much more to interesting photography than skill and I hope the M-D doesn't put a heavy finger on this delicate balance.

 

 

I'd rephrase that - I love taking pictures with my phone, my SL and my M cameras; there's so much more to photography than technology, and the M-D/M60 are, in part, a reminder of that.

 

I've never missed an image because my M60 doesn't have an LCD, but I've lost many fucking about with menu settings and peering at the LCD.  The thing is, I take better pictures not looking at my camera, so the M60 serves a useful purpose.  It doesn't do everything - no camera does.

[Peter H]

I'd rephrase that - I love taking pictures with my phone, my SL and my M cameras; there's so much more to photography than technology, and the M-D/M60 are, in part, a reminder of that.

 

I've never missed an image because my M60 doesn't have an LCD, but I've lost many fucking about with menu settings and peering at the LCD.  The thing is, I take better pictures not looking at my camera, so the M60 serves a useful purpose.  It doesn't do everything - no camera does.

 

 

John, your experience is the exact opposite of mine: there have been plenty of shots I'd have missed had I not had a screen or, more accurately, either a screen or an EVF/LV arrangement.

 

But I'm not aware of ever missing a shot for being too busy changing menu settings. I virtually never change menu settings.What menu settings do you change? I can't even think of anything I'd want to change except maybe iso at the start of the session. And I never look at the screen unless I need to or, in a more relaxed mode, choose to, much as I may look at my phone or talk to a real live person and miss an opportunity I suppose.

 

I'm not aware of looking at my camera. I'm aware of using it though. I did a long (three day) photo shoot of a potter at work very recently. It was fascinating.  Fortunately LV enabled me to get some impromptu extreme close-up shots that were never part of the original idea. They were in very poor light and would have been impossible otherwise, and they have been some of the most successful photos of all. The potter is delighted and they'll be published in his upcoming book  and probably one of them will be the front cover. 

 

I'd find the M-D too limiting, but yes, we're all different.

[IkarusJohn]

I'd find the M-D too limiting, but yes, we're all different.

 

 

Neither of us crippled or making a statement, but just taking pictures with cameras which suit our preferences?

[Peter H]

Neither of us crippled or making a statement, but just taking pictures with cameras which suit our preferences?

Crippled, like castrated, are subject to context and tone and I don't give any guarantee that I shan't find them appropriate in the future! But yes, in all seriousness, of course we just use them to suit our preferences.

 

But I make statements sometimes(!) and I will fight to the death to defend your right to do so, should you ever choose do so. T & Cs apply.

[IkarusJohn]

To be honest, while I find the tealeaf analysis of Leica's offerings entertaining, the angst over the release of cameras like the M-D are strange. They reveal a deep seated insecurity over the base camera, and its future. 

 

Surely Leica developing interesting versions of its M camera is something to be celebrated?  As many have observed, you could just buy the base camera, and not use the video (M262), convert your images to b&w in post (Monochrom) or set your menu settings once and put gaffer tape over the LCD (M-D). But, let's be honest - the owners of these cameras don't want that, and those suggestions are patronising, and intentionally so.  The M262, Monochrom and M-D seem to sell well (despite the slow sales of the M60). I think Leica has been quite remarkable doing these curious versions of their flagship camera for apparently small market demand. 

 

The interesting question is, will the next M be evolutionary (SL quality EVF and improved sensor), or will those evolutionary improvements be saved for the entry level M (the M(240) version of the M-E) with the next M being a big, revolutionary step?

 

How far would Leica go with such a camera?  Presumably, it would keep the M mount, coupling and optical viewfinder ... the basplate has less justification. My understanding is that the new(ish) manufacturing facilities in Portugal and Wetzlar, with CNC machines has meant that Leica can be more adventurous with its production (the stainless steel M60 is a case in point). Leica has shown with the SL that, given a relatively clean sheet of paper, they can still produce fabulous groundbreaking cameras. 

 

How much of the next M will be nothing more than legacy?  Or will they really rethink some of the camera's attributes. Leica does have a good history of challenging conventional thinking.

 

Baseplate? Or no baseplate?

Edited June 10, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[Morry]

Sooner or later camera will be equipped with artificial intelligence and start to tell us how to shoot based on database with full of good images taken by HCB, Erwitt or whoever... and this is no joke.

 

If we consider photography as an art, one way of thinking may be that "less the technological assistance the better" because then it will reflect more of our decision out of inner self.

 

Having said so the boarder line can be different for each.

One may prefer no autofocus, the other may prefer no light meter, and some others may prefer no screen.

(and of course at this moment I do not deny using DSLR/mirrorless cameras for art work)

 

Now what is remarkable when there is no screen i.e. no ability for instant checking by playback, is that we can let our small ambivalence go away easily.

If there is a screen, even when we turn it off, we are not completely free from small hesitation to go forward before checking if the previous shot was OK.

Particularly for my personal works that hesitation is unnecessary, so I like M-D very much.

 

If I were to take something for client or whoever, and then mitigating the risk of mis-shot or pursuance of perfection is more important, then that would be completely different story.

 

I really appreciate Leica is making cameras like SL and M-D, the two digital cameras heading for different directions to offer variety of tools.

For me at least M-D worth its value and they are not making this to fool us by putting outrageous price tag onto out-dated platform.

There should be more behind it.

 

I wish even when they make next M quite evolutionary, they maintain those "classic" line at the same time (and I am quite sure they will).

[Peter H]

To be honest, while I find the tealeaf analysis of Leica's offerings entertaining, the angst over the release of cameras like the M-D are strange. They reveal a deep seated insecurity over the base camera, and its future.

 

Surely Leica developing interesting versions of its M camera is something to be celebrated? As many have observed, you could just buy the base camera, and not use the video (M262), convert your images to b&w in post (Monochrom) or set your menu settings once and put gaffer tape over the LCD (M-D). But, let's be honest - the owners of these cameras don't want that, and those suggestions are patronising, and intentionally so. The M262, Monochrom and M-D seem to sell well (despite the slow sales of the M60). I think Leica has been quite remarkable doing these curious versions of their flagship camera for apparently small market demand.

 

The interesting question is, will the next M be evolutionary (SL quality EVF and improved sensor), or will those evolutionary improvements be saved for the entry level M (the M(240) version of the M-E) with the next M being a big, revolutionary step?

 

How far would Leica go with such a camera? Presumably, it would keep the M mount, coupling and optical viewfinder ... the basplate has less justification. My understanding is that the new(ish) manufacturing facilities in Portugal and Wetzlar, with CNC machines has meant that Leica can be more adventurous with its production (the stainless steel M60 is a case in point). Leica has shown with the SL that, given a relatively clean sheet of paper, they can still produce fabulous groundbreaking cameras.

 

How much of the next M will be nothing more than legacy? Or will they really rethink some of the camera's attributes. Leica does have a good history of challenging conventional thinking.

 

Baseplate? Or no baseplate?

Yes, I agree; giving this degree of choice to customers is a very good thing, especially considering the choice comprises cameras of the type that no other manufacturer makes, such as rangefinder, monochrom, and screen less.

 

When I'm negative, it is firstly just an expression of my personal camera preferences and in conversation about photographic styles just as we all indulge in from time to time. The other part of it is to do with the question you ask about the direction of the development of the M. You know I'm a bit concerned about it, and that's because of the very conservative nature of many Leica customers.

 

Perhaps the success of these largely conservative derivative variations will enable Leica to be more progressive and adventurous with the core M camera, knowing that stripped-down versions can work well for those who prefer them. Equally it may persuade them that there's far less demand than they might previously have thought for more technologically advanced M cameras, especially since some say that the SL is a viable M- alternative, though I question that.

 

I don't like speculating about next-generation products or playing the armchair CEO, but I worry a bit that this chiselling away at the core-M customer base by providing so many derivative alternatives may restrict the potential for developing the core-M itself by virtue of reducing demand for it.

 

So yes, you're right, there is a sense of insecurity about the future of the M. I hope it's terribly misplaced and that the next M will be a revolutionary step forward whilst retaining its essential qualities that we all admire. With or without a base plate.

Edited June 11, 2016 by Peter H

[Nick Bedford]

Well, I shot today with a tape covered LCD on my M and LOVE it. Took about 5 shots to learn not to think about hitting the Play button and the cover prevents you from giving in to temptation. I can totally understand why you would need an LCD (seriously I do), but personally I'd be at home on an M-D for my own photography purposes.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Hey You]

I'm not a fan of the lcd for reasons given by other contributors.

But I also prefer not to have one because I find it hard to see images on it.

The palm of my hand and my cheek invariably leave greasy marks on my lcd.

In daylight, these marks create glare and obscure the image.

 

Under these circumstances, the lcd becomes futile, an annoyance.

[Dougg]

The M-D is an intriguing product, and I salute Leica for it. I've had an M2 for 50 years, so obviously most of that time there was no LCD to look at. I am not accustomed to looking at a screen, and while shooting it just doesn't occur to me to do so, and I'm not tempted to chimp. I will see the "take" soon enough. My 240 is thus effectively an M-D for my usage.

 

But somewhat better, as it does have that rear screen for me to step through the photos once back home as I make notes about the subjects and locations of the day. I've been doing the notating for that same 50 years, originally on 4x6 file cards, one for each roll of film... now on the computer. And once in a while I'll put the Olympus viewfinder on top and mount a Pentax lens, using live view. I don't really need live view or video capture, though, and I could review the day's take on the computer straight off the SD card, so an M-D would suit me fine!

 

Doug

Edited June 13, 2016 by Dougg