Printmaker Posted December 31, 2016 Share #601 Posted December 31, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I just put my name on a list for a M10. My drug dealer admitted plans of going to Germany for the announcement. So I'd say the odds are 99% certain this is more than a rumor. Crunching the numbers, odds are I'll be selling my S2 and M9 (with a new sensor) when it comes back from NJ. It may not be the smartest move going from MF to M but it fits my current needs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 31, 2016 Posted December 31, 2016 Hi Printmaker, Take a look here Leica M 10. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
anupmc Posted December 31, 2016 Share #602 Posted December 31, 2016 ... Crunching the numbers, odds are I'll be selling my S2 and M9 (with a new sensor) when it comes back from NJ. It may not be the smartest move going from MF to M but it fits my current needs. Coincidentally, I just sold my S2 this week in anticipation of the new M... just wasn't getting enough use on the S2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Printmaker Posted December 31, 2016 Share #603 Posted December 31, 2016 Coincidentally, I just sold my S2 this week in anticipation of the new M... just wasn't getting enough use on the S2. Exactly. Before I retired I used my S2 in the studio almost daily. Now it sits in the bag most of the time. I love the images it produces but not enough to drag it around. Still, it is a superb studio camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted December 31, 2016 Share #604 Posted December 31, 2016 That is a new year's resolution you're bound to break within weeks :-) I am sure he did as he was a baker Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 31, 2016 Share #605 Posted December 31, 2016 No more new cameras in the Williams household............I'm cool with what I've got Haven't I read that one before? Several times? Better make a resolution to start a feud with your camera shop owner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted December 31, 2016 Share #606 Posted December 31, 2016 I understand what 'dumb' means in this context Paul... no need to be quite so patronising. Sorry, there was no intent to be patronising - just trying to avoid a misunderstanding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted December 31, 2016 Share #607 Posted December 31, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) pgk, I am not for one moment suggesting the M changes to an EVF camera and is no longer an OVF... I was thinking of an additional model, I think it was Jono who commented on a previous post of mine where he mentioned an M and an E in the same form factor. How would a second option of a body, in M form, detract from the uniqueness of the M? Unless you think it would vastly outsell the existing OVF option and Leica decide to drop it and run with that, instead? Currently there are M 240, M240P, MD, MM2, M262, MA (and isn't the MP and M7 still available?). I think a single E version would be fine... and probably outsell many of the existing cameras in the range. HI There Bill . . Trouble is that putting an M mount on misses so many opportunities - If you're going to have an EVF only camera, why not give it an SL mount - that way it gets the best of both worlds (SL quality use of M lenses and AF if you want it). . . . But maybe that really amounts to the QL that we were talking about. Personally I'd rather see the M keep on keeping on - because I think that an optical rangefinder is still a wonderful way to take photographs (enhanced by the advent of digital). But I also think a small, EVF based SL mount camera would be a great idea (give it an M shaped body if you like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 31, 2016 Share #608 Posted December 31, 2016 But I also think a small, EVF based SL mount camera would be a great idea (give it an M shaped body if you like. Presumably the SL camera is the size it is for reasons other than being a counterweight to the large native AF lenses? I know time (and technology) marches on but is an M sized version of the SL possible yet without compromising on aspects such as the EVF quality? By the way, we don't see you around these parts so much lately, Jono. I guess you have been busy putting the M10 through its paces and writing up one of your blog pieces about it. Happy new year to you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted December 31, 2016 Share #609 Posted December 31, 2016 I'd love one to use as a second body alongside my M-P... I was so used to two film camera bodies years ago (Nikon F2A's) and I loved the speed and flexibility... but if anyone here has worked like that, they will know that two different camera bodies makes it really weird and that just gets in the way of getting on with the job at hand. I was doing a lot of backstage photos with bands at the time, and you are not at the periphery, you are actually engaged in the conversation and the after gig banter and to be changing lenses or fiddling with cameras was just too messy and would pull you out of the moment. Two identical bodies with two different focal lengths was perfect (in those days, both bodies were black and white film and obviously manual focus). I suppose today you could use a DSLR and a 24-90 zoom... but they are just too intrusive when you are just across the table from someone engaged in conversation, or in a small group in a dressing room or something, it just kills the atmosphere and separates you - turns you into an observer rather than a participant. I'm off on a road trip with three others in a week or so... I'll probably be using my new 35FLE pretty much permanently on my M-P. If I had an EVF M, I would put my 90 Elmarit on it and just carry two cameras rather than a camera bag with lenses and stuff in it. They would both be pretty fast to use and the field of view in each camera would be very similar... and no confusion as to what framelines to work with... and very fast, specific area of manual focus on the 90... rather than a vague, oversized area (relative to the frame size) you currently get on the rangefinder patch on longer lenses. I think I'm looking at this from a very different perspective from some others on here. The M seems to fit precisely with the way I like to work when it comes to 35 and 50 lenses... but at wider, such as 21 or longer, such as 90, it's out of its comfort zone... and a different body type, as I have said before, just makes handling awkward and you kind of use both mental and physical muscle memory when using identical cameras quickly and that's a huge advantage. I think I've come to realise that this is a difficult topic. I understand that taking an M down an EVF path could mean that the uniqueness that it now has is lost, particularly if it should become so successful that Leica focus more on adding functionality rather than keeping the simplicity. But that's not what I am saying. I would like a very simple, manual focus, EVF version of the M to use with short or longer lenses, but it must be the same size, shape and layout so it feels identical in the hand. I think Leica understand the M and why it still holds such a unique place in the market, particularly for photographers for whom it meets a need that no other camera now can, very well..! So I don't really understand the fear some have that this could herald the end of the M as we know it. Surely it could be seen as a new dawn... because it could introduce new customers into the fold, who simply couldnt get their heads round manual focus on a rangefinder after years of auto everything. Maybe using an EVF M for a year or two could introduce them to the OVF... or even a film M! I see this as an opportunity, not a threat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted December 31, 2016 Share #610 Posted December 31, 2016 Coincidentally, I just sold my S2 this week in anticipation of the new M... just wasn't getting enough use on the S2. Exactly. Before I retired I used my S2 in the studio almost daily. Now it sits in the bag most of the time. I love the images it produces but not enough to drag it around. Still, it is a superb studio camera. Hmmm...it's the opposite for me. I'm hoping, or at least open to surprise, but Im fairly sure I'm going to move to the S for my small camera in the early New Year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distagon Posted December 31, 2016 Share #611 Posted December 31, 2016 For those wanting an 'M mount' camera with and evf can I suggest that a full-frame T with a bolt on electronic viewfinder... It sounds as though you are describing the rumoured M10. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distagon Posted December 31, 2016 Share #612 Posted December 31, 2016 I'd rather see the M evolve in other ways with subtle changes aimed at retaining its uniqueness. And I'd rather continue to use it for its existing attributes than see it sink slowly as it tries to compete. This sounds like the latest iteration of the Messsucherkamera's identity crisis, which has persisted ever since Single Lens Reflex cameras with pentaprism optics came to dominate the industry with Through-The-Less photography. The irony is that DSLR giants like Nikon and Canon have now proven very slow to meet the latest Full Frame MILC evolution of On-Sensor metering, focus, framing and composition, exactly because they, too, are invested in a specific, mature technology. The viewfinder-rangefinder is just a photography aid. In spite of the name, it is not what makes the M system great. The essential elements of the M system are its (relatively) small form factor, superb quality, and simplified manual operation. No other camera offers these elements, and the M system would continue to offer a unique proposition even were the viewfinder-rangefinder technology of 1954 replaced by On-Sensor photography using an EVF. The real challenge for Leica design would be how to offer such a MILC in a way that preserves the "sophisticated simplicity" of the M system concept. Of course, there is a demonstrable market for the "classic M" product. So long as is turns a profit, Leica will make M cameras with rangefinders and no LCD. But to claim that is all the M system can aspire to is to relegate the M to a historical curiosity, when it should honour its long tradition of continuous technical innovation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 31, 2016 Share #613 Posted December 31, 2016 Hard to follow the discussion here. Must be me i guess but at the risk of sounding redundant the 'M10' or whatever name of the next M will be a rangefinder with an accessory EVF. Only question (AFAIK) is to know if Leica will launch a compact SL (aka "QL") mirrorless body separately to the 'M10'. Or am i missing something again? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distagon Posted December 31, 2016 Share #614 Posted December 31, 2016 Only question (AFAIK) is to know if Leica will launch a compact SL (aka "QL") mirrorless body separately to the 'M10'. Or am i missing something again? I think that's a fair characterisation. Rather than focussing on the body, though, the real question comes down to the lenses. The M system lenses are as compact as it gets for Full Frame. In contrast, the SL lenses are gargantuan. (TL lenses are still biggish and only throw an APS-C image circle.) So it would not so much be launching a compact SL, as the SL system lenses are anything but compact. It is about launching a Full Frame MILC for the M system. The rumoured M10 seems to keep a foot in each camp. (I preface these comments with the observation that they are about a camera that is only rumoured, and that I have no direct knowledge of. So... grain of salt.) It will still be a Messsucherkamera, in a more classic, small form factor. With the TL's external EVF, it would also make a formidable MILC. But by doing both, it is optimised for neither, whether in form, function or cost. And that is a problem for the M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 31, 2016 Share #615 Posted December 31, 2016 The viewfinder-rangefinder is just a photography aid. In spite of the name, it is not what makes the M system great. The essential elements of the M system are its (relatively) small form factor, superb quality, and simplified manual operation. I couldn't disagree more. For me, the RF is the defining ingredient of the system. The other elements you list are available from other systems. The non-TTL optical view is pretty much the only reason I still use a Leica and, without it, I dare say I'd move elsewhere. Horse for courses, as Jeff is fond of saying. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 31, 2016 Share #616 Posted December 31, 2016 [...] So it would not so much be launching a compact SL, as the SL system lenses are anything but compact. It is about launching a Full Frame MILC for the M system. [...] Compact SL or maxi TL or QL or whatever name (what does 'MILC' mean BTW?) it would not be an M anyway since it would not have a rangefinder. And its mount would not be an M either, why would it? Its owners would want to use M, R, SL and T lenses on it so an L mount would be the way to go IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted December 31, 2016 Share #617 Posted December 31, 2016 This sounds like the latest iteration of the Messsucherkamera's identity crisis, which has persisted ever since Single Lens Reflex cameras with pentaprism optics came to dominate the industry with Through-The-Less photography. The irony is that DSLR giants like Nikon and Canon have now proven very slow to meet the latest Full Frame MILC evolution of On-Sensor metering, focus, framing and composition, exactly because they, too, are invested in a specific, mature technology. The viewfinder-rangefinder is just a photography aid. In spite of the name, it is not what makes the M system great. The essential elements of the M system are its (relatively) small form factor, superb quality, and simplified manual operation. No other camera offers these elements, and the M system would continue to offer a unique proposition even were the viewfinder-rangefinder technology of 1954 replaced by On-Sensor photography using an EVF. The real challenge for Leica design would be how to offer such a MILC in a way that preserves the "sophisticated simplicity" of the M system concept. Of course, there is a demonstrable market for the "classic M" product. So long as is turns a profit, Leica will make M cameras with rangefinders and no LCD. But to claim that is all the M system can aspire to is to relegate the M to a historical curiosity, when it should honour its long tradition of continuous technical innovation. Excellent post. (I understand the point of view expressed by Wattsy and others... I really do. But to me the M is SO much more than a rangefinder camera... and those virtues you point out are actually not found in other cameras... I know, I looked before I bought my M. Pick up a Sony or a Fuji, excellent cameras that they are, and you will see instantly they are neither as simple, as organic nor as beautifully built as an M... and if I'm going to invest money in Leica glass, I would want a Leica body built to the same standards to put them on... to have to buy an alternative manufacturers product in order to get a camera that Leica should build themselves seems just plain wrong. And as we keep saying... this is not 'instead of', it is 'as well as...' so those of you who think an M is just a rangefinder, nothing changes... the only thing that changes is that those of us who would like an EVF version to run alongside it, and those new customers who have avoided an M in the past for perfectly understandable reasons, have an option...). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 31, 2016 Share #618 Posted December 31, 2016 Options do exist already. We've got both Visoflex and TTL cameras since the seventies. Now with a fast electronic Visoflex the M should be able to work like a modern mirrorless camera (touch wood). If the LV/EVF features of the M240 had not been err... what they are i would not have ordered my little S**y body most probably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted December 31, 2016 Share #619 Posted December 31, 2016 EVF's are dull. Homogenised and consistent photography made easier is dull. Dull, dull, dull. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 31, 2016 Share #620 Posted December 31, 2016 You find EVFs dull dull dull, i find them useful useful useful but who cares really? A well designed 'M10' should offer what both of us are waiting for (touch wood again) i.e. an excellent RF and a not too outdated accessory EVF hopefully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.