New Leica M 240 follow-up in 2017 : The speculations.

[keithlaban.co.uk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

-

[keithlaban.co.uk]

I like the idea of a compact  full frame interchangeable lens Q with EVF that takes M lenses. But for me it would also need a few reasonably compact and fast FF AF lenses to make sense.

 

I also like the idea of a new improved M rangefinder that has the option of an industry leading accessory EVF.

 

Either, or perhaps even both could see me putting my hand in my pocket.

 

[Rick]

 

I like the idea of a compact  full frame interchangeable lens Q with EVF that takes M lenses. But for me it would also need a few reasonably compact and fast FF AF lenses to make sense.

 

 

 

I don't understand this.  Folks keep saying this.  I thought we already had this wish answered and it is called the SL???

 

Rick

[kkonkkrete]

SL ain't compact.  But I agree, I don't see the appeal of an interchangeable lens Q.

 

 I'd rather they derived products from the Q in the 'other' direction: smaller, no EVF, point and shoot, but with a Q lens and full frame sensor.  Leave out the manual focus and macro modes, make it a full frame replacement of the X.  The single best thing about the Q is the super-fast autofocus IMO.  When I borrowed one, I didn't want to waste my time with manual focus, that's what the M is for.  It's a great, but bulky point and shoot.  So make it a great but not bulky point and shoot!

 

Not that I actually need another camera (just wish I was better at this silly hobby!  Need to learn the art of persuading strangers to feel comfortable while I shoot them WAY more than I need a new lens or body or flash or whatever).

[Rick]

Thanks.  I think the rub comes from the word compact.  

 

I full blown mirrorless with wide mount becomes the SL.  And I agree that falls outside the definition of compact.  Sony has done more compact, but the AF lenses push it back over the line of compact.  With M lenses on it with adaptor places the Sony stuff at about the size of the M.

 

A new M the size of a film M would be pretty close to most folk's definition of compact.  Put a Summicron on it and a lot of us are going to be over the moon.  I'd gladly give up any desires for AF or an in-body EVF for a simple compact set up like that.  

 

For me, that would be pretty close to my perfect camera system.  

 

Rick

[Peter Kilmister]

Jono is probably user testing the next edition (or has already). He may know more than anyone else except the developers. Smoke and mirrors. Secret squirrels.

"Wait and see pudding", is what my mother said when we (as children) asked what was for pudding before we'd eaten the main course. Good words. Wise words. God bless her, she died 10 years ago today but her words still echo sense through time.

[SonomaBear]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

SL ain't compact.  But I agree, I don't see the appeal of an interchangeable lens Q.

 

 I'd rather they derived products from the Q in the 'other' direction: smaller, no EVF, point and shoot, but with a Q lens and full frame sensor.  Leave out the manual focus and macro modes, make it a full frame replacement of the X.  The single best thing about the Q is the super-fast autofocus IMO.  When I borrowed one, I didn't want to waste my time with manual focus, that's what the M is for.  It's a great, but bulky point and shoot.  So make it a great but not bulky point and shoot!

 

Not that I actually need another camera (just wish I was better at this silly hobby!  Need to learn the art of persuading strangers to feel comfortable while I shoot them WAY more than I need a new lens or body or flash or whatever).

 

Wow, I think that you missed the reason for the Q.  AF (I call it assisted focus) i lovely but I still manually focus my Q most of the time. You must nail the focus exactly on the target of each image -- the Q can do that in AF or MF mode.  I just find the focus peaking reassuring.  I KNOW that I nailed it just right on the Q.

I used the SL on Monday with a Summilux 50M -- loved the EVF but the camera did not impress me. The focus peaking seemed to me to be too lax.  The 1.4 lens should have been shallow DOF at 1.4

I really prefer the simplicity of the Q. If you want AF, then the SL/TL family will be your cup of tea with their huge lenses.  The M lenses IMHO are too small on the SL, just right on the M and would be perfect on a new Q.

Announce a MQ and watch how fast I order it!

[Mike Rawcs]

 

A new M the size of a film M would be pretty close to most folk's definition of compact.  Put a Summicron on it and a lot of us are going to be over the moon.  I'd gladly give up any desires for AF or an in-body EVF for a simple compact set up like that.  

 

For me, that would be pretty close to my perfect camera system.  

 

Rick

 

Rick,

        that's all I want.

 

Peter,

        'wait and see pudding'. I like that. Wise words indeed.

 

Mike.

[rosuna]

 

A new M the size of a film M would be pretty close to most folk's definition of compact.  

 

Rick

 

 

I could be even smaller and lighter with an EVF. The optical viewfinder and rangefinder are complex, expensive and relatively large elements.

[rosuna]

Indeed . . . I agree with almost all of this . . but it wouldn't be an M would it? 

Why not keep an M and have a different camera . . Why not call it a QL and supply it with a free TL to M mount adapter? That way you could also use it with TL and SL lenses at a pinch, use it as a back up to an SL or an M.

 

And have a new M which reflects the heritage and improves on the M240?

 

 

It would be an M because the mount. 

 

The SL with adapter may be fuctional, but is not an elegant solution. It looks like a frankenstein.

 

I mean a camera made for M lenses: mount, size, proportions. This implies a very small camera. You cannot use those huge SL lenses on a very small body anyway. 

 

The M and the SL are very different systems. There is not fully satisfactory intersection between them.

 

Just an M with EVF.

[lct]

Yes i suspect that a lot of photogs are not interested by optical rangefinders and would prefer a compact mirrorless camera fitting small M lenses. Sony would offer that if its sensor stack would be thinner the same way as Kolari Vision does currently. Now there is one thing that Sony bodies cannot do. They cannot bring up the magnification window automatically when focusing M lenses. Not every photog likes that but it is still a superiority of the M240 and having this feature in a compact mirrorless body with interchangeable lenses could be interesting provided this new body can compete with Sony but this is another (hard) story.

[jaapv]

Do  you really think that will happen? From Leica's website:

 

 

The Leica M-System lets you experience photography in its purest form. Lovers of the art of photography have perfected their skills with its unique combined rangefinder and viewfinder technology for more than 60 years. Fast, discreet and compact – closer to the decisive moment.

 

M STANDS FOR MESSSUCHER
 

Messsucher is the German term for a combined range/viewfinder, which shows you action outside the actual frame.

See the scene unfold, set the shot and have more direct interaction with the subject.

 

M – as in ‘Messsuchersystem’

‘Messsucher’, the German term for a combined rangefinder and viewfinder, found in every Leica M, presents a bigger picture - a broader view of your subject - and opens up a whole new world of creative freedom. The rangefinder system enables the capture of authentic, natural images, taken from heart of real life itself. Photographers become part of the action and frame, whatever they wish to capture in the viewfinder – a scene, a mood, a moment.

Meanwhile, the photographer can still see what’s happening outside the viewfinder frame. A decisive advantage in stark contrast to the dictates of the view through the finder of a single lens reflex camera. Here, you will see a finished picture in terms of framing and levels of sharpness. The rangefinder of a Leica M widens the photographer’s artistic horizons. At any moment in time, the photographer has complete control over all creative aspects of composition and subject framing.

[IkarusJohn]

Oh, yes. Everything on the Leica website is absolutely true. "Camera for life". Yep.

[keithlaban.co.uk]

I don't understand this.  Folks keep saying this.  I thought we already had this wish answered and it is called the SL???

 

Rick

The SL is of no interest to me.

 

I'm hoping for a compact full frame interchangeable lens Leica with compact AF lenses that also gets the most out of Leica M lenses.

[kkonkkrete]

Wow, I think that you missed the reason for the Q.  AF (I call it assisted focus) i lovely but I still manually focus my Q most of the time. You must nail the focus exactly on the target of each image -- the Q can do that in AF or MF mode.  I just find the focus peaking reassuring.  I KNOW that I nailed it just right on the Q.

I used the SL on Monday with a Summilux 50M -- loved the EVF but the camera did not impress me. The focus peaking seemed to me to be too lax.  The 1.4 lens should have been shallow DOF at 1.4

I really prefer the simplicity of the Q. If you want AF, then the SL/TL family will be your cup of tea with their huge lenses.  The M lenses IMHO are too small on the SL, just right on the M and would be perfect on a new Q.

Announce a MQ and watch how fast I order it!

 

 

Well, not everyone has to use their cameras the same way ... whatever works for you! Personally I hated the manual focus on the Q, because I was comparing to how glorious it is on the M (or even on an SLR).  All this 'focus peaking' jiggerypokery is for the birds in my opinion.  But that's just my opinion for the way I like to work.  I think a smaller, cheaper point and shoot with the Q image quality would be glorious.  You use it like a super high end phone camera. 

 

BTW, I'm not looking for AF, I'm perfectly happy with my M-D!  But if I were I'd want a camera that is smaller, like the Q, not bigger, like the SL (If I were going to shoot something as big and bulky as the SL I'd be shooting medium format).

[jaapv]

The SL is of no interest to me.

 

I'm hoping for a compact full frame interchangeable lens Leica with compact AF lenses that also gets the most out of Leica M lenses.

Which would be a compact SL, or an IL Q, L-mount, not a tarted-up M...

[keithlaban.co.uk]

Which would be a compact SL, or an IL Q, L-mount, not a tarted-up M...

Precisely.

 

I'm not looking for a tarted-up M other than perhaps an M with a vastly improved accessory EVF. The camera I described as a compact full frame interchangeable lens Leica with compact AF lenses that also gets the most out of Leica M lenses would not be a tarted-up M and neither would I want it to be.

[rosuna]

The SL is of no interest to me.

 

I'm hoping for a compact full frame interchangeable lens Leica with compact AF lenses that also gets the most out of Leica M lenses.

 

 

That is not possible. High performance AF lenses have to be large, and the supporting body has to be large as well.

 

A compact SL does not make sense, because of the size of the SL lenses... look at the zooms, or that Summilux 50mm.

 

A second body with M mount, for M lenses, but with EVF is not a bad idea (lets call it ML), but I don't know if it makes economic sense... for Leica.

[lct]

[...] High performance AF lenses have to be large, and the supporting body has to be large as well [...]

 

 My Sonnar FE 55/1.8 is indeed more or less 1 cm longer than my Summilux 50/1.4 aph with adapter and is significantly larger too. Now there is no need for bulky bodies IMHO even if the lenses are bigger. Remember the compact R4 to R7 bodies compared to the big R3, R8 & R9. Been using the R280/4 on my R4s with no problem at all. Same on the even smaller A7s mod. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Paulus]

Oh, yes. Everything on the Leica website is absolutely true. "Camera for life". Yep.

Well, maybe not the camera, but the brand..Shure!