chris_tribble Posted December 20, 2016 Share #501 Posted December 20, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Certainly the Q form factor would be infinitely more attractive than the angular and bulky SL. Why Leica had to go down that faux retro route I can't imagine. Something based on the R8 would have been a lot more attractive IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 20, 2016 Posted December 20, 2016 Hi chris_tribble, Take a look here Leica M 10. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted December 20, 2016 Share #502 Posted December 20, 2016 Not sure if there is any future for bulky 24x36 mirrorless cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted December 21, 2016 Share #503 Posted December 21, 2016 Certainly the Q form factor would be infinitely more attractive than the angular and bulky SL. Why Leica had to go down that faux retro route I can't imagine. Something based on the R8 would have been a lot more attractive IMHO. The viewfinder (partially because of the optical block taken from the S-system) is absolutely gorgeous though. I think Leica had to make the system this big in order to accommodate lenses with a bigger exit pupil and be able to optimize them for digital. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-ph- Posted December 21, 2016 Share #504 Posted December 21, 2016 The viewfinder (partially because of the optical block taken from the S-system) is absolutely gorgeous though. I think Leica had to make the system this big in order to accommodate lenses with a bigger exit pupil and be able to optimize them for digital. I can see the viewfinder needing size - but as the mount is exactly the same as the one of the T, the SL or any L mount camera, would not have to be larger than the T for optical reasons. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 21, 2016 Share #505 Posted December 21, 2016 Certainly the Q form factor would be infinitely more attractive than the angular and bulky SL. Why Leica had to go down that faux retro route I can't imagine. Something based on the R8 would have been a lot more attractive IMHO. Stephan Schulz explained the decision in a discussion with David Farkas, quoted in this review... http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/ Excerpt... "In one of my discussions with Stephan Schulz, manager of professional products, he explained the design direction. “We initially thought about making the SL a smaller version of the S, using the same shape and design aesthetic. And, we made design studies to look at this. But, in the end, we went with this approach as it is very tool-like. It gives the impression of a professional, strong tool.” I would have preferred the alternative. Maybe they could have called it the RL. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted December 22, 2016 Share #506 Posted December 22, 2016 I can see the viewfinder needing size - but as the mount is exactly the same as the one of the T, the SL or any L mount camera, would not have to be larger than the T for optical reasons. Peter That is true, but the SL is borderline too small and too light when paired with the 24-90mm zoom it was designed to handle. I guess I would have preferred a removable handgrip. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 22, 2016 Share #507 Posted December 22, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Removing the video is a strange decision for me. Now I am little bit worried M10 won't improve the bulb mode over M 240. It's biggest weakness for me. We shall see... We don't know that yet. Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 22, 2016 Share #508 Posted December 22, 2016 Stephan Schulz explained the decision in a discussion with David Farkas, quoted in this review... http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/ Excerpt... "In one of my discussions with Stephan Schulz, manager of professional products, he explained the design direction. “We initially thought about making the SL a smaller version of the S, using the same shape and design aesthetic. And, we made design studies to look at this. But, in the end, we went with this approach as it is very tool-like. It gives the impression of a professional, strong tool.” I would have preferred the alternative. Maybe they could have called it the RL. Jeff I hear what Mr. Schultz is saying, but personally I think it looks like a cross between a Leicaflex and a Sony A9, both cameras that are not very high up my esthetic list. A R8-like shape would have been far more Leica-like in my eyes. Mayby they could go for an R4-looking camera next time Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted December 22, 2016 Share #509 Posted December 22, 2016 Yea it does have that aggressive aesthetic http://www.etrouko.com/tank.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 22, 2016 Share #510 Posted December 22, 2016 [...] Mayby they could go for an R4-looking camera next time My compact R4s dreams to meet its grandson at last. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/266426-leica-m-10/?do=findComment&comment=3172058'>More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted December 28, 2016 Share #511 Posted December 28, 2016 The latest rather odd rumor over at LR involving a Leica M mount zoom, a true zoom, has me wondering if the upcoming camera might be a bit more substantial on the EVF side than perhaps one might have initially thought. Or perhaps theres something new behind the framing mechanism. Or maybe its all BS. Regardless, its wacky enough to be interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 28, 2016 Share #512 Posted December 28, 2016 The latest rather odd rumor over at LR involving a Leica M mount zoom, a true zoom, has me wondering if the upcoming camera might be a bit more substantial on the EVF side than perhaps one might have initially thought. Or perhaps theres something new behind the framing mechanism. Or maybe its all BS. Regardless, its wacky enough to be interesting. Discussion here.... http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/267565-new-vario-elmar-m-28-75mm-f34-56/ Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 28, 2016 Share #513 Posted December 28, 2016 Yes, the alleged lens was discussed here before. It would indeed not be suitable for OVF use, it might not even have an RF coupling. However, even the current EVF would be able to make use of this type of lens, my R zoom lenses work just fine. With an EVF of at least T level there would be no problem at all. It would be a clear indication, though, of the future direction Leica might take with the M. Not necessarily to everybody's liking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted December 28, 2016 Share #514 Posted December 28, 2016 The rangefinder is about to be put to rest even the diehards are rethinking as their eyesight ages Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 28, 2016 Share #515 Posted December 28, 2016 Yes, the alleged lens was discussed here before. It would indeed not be suitable for OVF use, it might not even have an RF coupling. However, even the current EVF would be able to make use of this type of lens, my R zoom lenses work just fine. With an EVF of at least T level there would be no problem at all. It would be a clear indication, though, of the future direction Leica might take with the M. Not necessarily to everybody's liking. No no no no no! Messucher means rangefinder ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted December 28, 2016 Share #516 Posted December 28, 2016 No no no no no! Messucher means rangefinder ... One can find their range by various means ......................... an instrument for estimating the distance of an object Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 28, 2016 Share #517 Posted December 28, 2016 One can find their range by various means ......................... an instrument for estimating the distance of an object Among those various instruments there is one called rangefinder. You know this thing with three windows on top of your (and my) R-D1. Modern ones have two windows only now but they still work the same way more or less. If you're interested in the next M, it will have that same instrument i'm afraid but also a (not so) modern EVF i suspect. This way your non ageing eyesight will be able to play with appealing albeit slower substitutes like focus peaking and image magnification . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted December 28, 2016 Share #518 Posted December 28, 2016 All that is needed is a range finder ................. unlike the rangefinder Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted December 28, 2016 Share #519 Posted December 28, 2016 Yes, the alleged lens was discussed here before. It would indeed not be suitable for OVF use, it might not even have an RF coupling. However, even the current EVF would be able to make use of this type of lens, my R zoom lenses work just fine. With an EVF of at least T level there would be no problem at all. It would be a clear indication, though, of the future direction Leica might take with the M. Not necessarily to everybody's liking. Hi There Jaap I don't think you're right about it not being suitable for OVF use - remember that the WATE is also a true zoom - but with detente for each of the focal lengths - this lens might be the same - detentes for 28,35,50,75 and then the option to use it as a full zoom with the EVF. I wouldn't hold my breath though! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted December 28, 2016 Share #520 Posted December 28, 2016 The rangefinder is about to be put to rest even the diehards are rethinking as their eyesight ages The problem that few will acknowledge is that the range of M lenses is geared towards use with an optical rangefinder. Lose that and you compete unequally with other lenses - not something that many want to accept. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.