Jump to content

Leica M 10


rijve044

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Neither do I.

 

I find a camera relying on two viewfinders confused too... especially as one of them is exceptionally expensive to manufacture and yet redundant when the other is fitted. Far better in my opinion (and maybe less expensive to produce?) to have a second body EVF M option... or as a first M for those who find rangefinders either too difficult to focus on a wider range of lenses or who are irritated or put off, often unnecessarily, by focus shift, the need for lens/body calibration or even rangefinder adjustment. 

 

 

 

Having got used to the Fuji X-Pro 2 I can see plenty of benefits of having two types of viewfinder available in or on the same camera, especially if they are both superb. I understand people arguing for different cameras for different purposes, but not everyone wants or can afford multiple cameras, or even if they can they may not want to carry them around together.

 

I don't mind what mount the camera has though I'd prefer it not to affect the size and obviously an adapter is never ideal. But I don't feel it would be a huge problem and certainly not a matter of principle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

x
  • Replies 2.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera

Sorry, I shouldn't use too many acronyms but I thought that one might be in common enough usage. Perhaps not!

 

 

I'd never heard of "MILC" before.

 

Many years ago (about two) we called them EVIL didn't we?  I can't even remember what that meant without thinking hard about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The EVF is for this time - view a virtualized world through a virtual viewfinder. Not my preference.

One might say that the entire concept of a camera is virtual, as soon as one starts modifying light through refracting glass.

We're just critiquing the flavour of which virtual experience we prefer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

EVIL sounds indeed more familiar to me but to summarize my point of view, for what it's worth, i will just say that If ever Leica sells a compact full frame EVIL (or 'MILC'), which i feel yet hard to believe per se, it will not be an M due to the lack of rangefinder and it won't have an M mount either due to the lack of compatibility with SL and T lenses. But i may be wrong as often (who said always?)....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

But what's wrong with an M-sized body with an L-mount? As with the SL, you can use M lenses exceptionally well. Those who wish to can just forget about AF and treat it like an M with an EVF. The only downside is having to use the M-L adapter; the upsides are that you have access to a growing range of new lenses with AF and IS, as well as all the M lenses. OTOH, stick to the M-mount and you are cut off from those.

 

As I've said before, I don't get emotionally involved with my cameras (they can't fondle me back), so I'll accept whatever Leica produce without getting upset by it. I'm just puzzled why there is antipathy to the idea of an L-mount small camera, and preference for an M-mount camera with EVF.

 

 

Antipathy is perhaps a little strong and I take your point completely, there are advantages in the L mount.

 

I suppose if anything, I am just acknowledging those who consider taking the M down an EVF path could compromise what the M actually is... and I wanted to avoid that. I personally wouldn't need IS or AF, hence my personal preference, but if there was a new EVF M with an L mount, but had the same form of the M as it is, then I would buy it.

 

Either version would be a welcome addition to the range. So perhaps I am being too cautious, fearing a backlash from those who are so utterly convinced that anything that departs from the 1950's M too much is heresy...  even if it increasingly alienates new customers from Leica and Leica keep trying to win them back with a myriad of different camera types and lens mounts. How many is it now? For a small specialist company?

 

I think they should consolidate and stop ignoring the elephant in the room.

 

Better to actually grasp the nettle and build what people actually want... a modern M... at least as an alternative, and see how the market reacts.

 

I think there is still a hangover from the M5 days... and therefore fear at doing just that. But if it was an option (M, my preference because it is the minimum departure required, or L Mount, which seems to be Pauls preference, and is far more flexible and maybe more attractive to new customers), but either way, how does that compromise or risk anything?

Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>Those who wish to can just forget about AF and treat it like an M with an EVF.

<snip>

 

 

Except we know they can't - we have a history in here of people being unwilling to ignore the M button, unwilling to not press PLAY - they absolutely need there to be no movie capability and no LCD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy new year, some interesting snippets on M10 from Dr Rohde no less...

 

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58875065

 

I quote:-

 

The lens design is simply brillant

 

 

View: original size

 

 

View: original size

 

The weather slightly less.

 

The new generation of the Leica lenses starting with the zoom of the unnecessary ill fated X Vario (processor not enough horsepower ). the high performance T set of lenses and the SL lenses have enjoyed huge success in the optimized Q sensor and 28 mm lens arrangement . The firmware 2,2 of the SL "rescued" the 24 to 90 mm zoom and the SL 50 mm 1.4 lens, while a bit large, is just astonishing. The Jan 18th event is focused of the M 240 successor, all indications are it will be a very pleasant surprise. The Peter Karbe's team has been enhanced by the addition of brilliant and proven lens designers and the Volker Zimmer sensor group and company made the new M is such a relatively short period possible. I am very curious about the learned specialist that will show their pictures and will give far reaching advise to the faithful, who like me, bet on the great things to come from Leica. With this "Happy New Year " soon to all Leica contributors, including those who give me advise how to take better pictures , not an easy task ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

/snip/  So perhaps I am being too cautious, fearing a backlash from those who are so utterly convinced that anything that departs from the 1950's M too much is heresy...  even if it increasingly alienates new customers from Leica and Leica keep trying to win them back with a myriad of different camera types and lens mounts. How many is it now? For a small specialist company?

/snip/

Investing in too many cameras is one way of looking at it. Another is that in the last 5 years they have invested in a small number of platforms and technologies which can relatively easily/cheaply be used to produce a range of related products that are actually very similar under the skin:

- M, SL/TL and S systems (the Q and X systems are outliers, though the former includes elements from other systems).

- CNC machined alloy camera bodies.

- the L mount and associated data communication systems.

- firmware development capacity (I remember the cursing on this forum about the poor M9 and M240 firmware updates; the SL and TL f/w is not perfect, but it is a real step up in sophistication).

 

I suspect their lens design capacity has also taken a step forward as well to allow them to deal with AF, OIS and digital corrections, but it is not clear exactly how they've done it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One way that Leica could promote their fundamental classic aesthetic would be to partner with a wet-lab to process their film cameras. Yes, if we look back that has been tried, but in a different era and half-baked.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Investing in too many cameras is one way of looking at it. Another is that in the last 5 years they have invested in a small number of platforms and technologies which can relatively easily/cheaply be used to produce a range of related products that are actually very similar under the skin:

- M, SL/TL and S systems (the Q and X systems are outliers, though the former includes elements from other systems).

- CNC machined alloy camera bodies.

- the L mount and associated data communication systems.

- firmware development capacity (I remember the cursing on this forum about the poor M9 and M240 firmware updates; the SL and TL f/w is not perfect, but it is a real step up in sophistication).

 

I suspect their lens design capacity has also taken a step forward as well to allow them to deal with AF, OIS and digital corrections, but it is not clear exactly how they've done it.

 Leica still has to have one foot in the smartphone game with Nokia on the comeback, camera centric smartphone development will only increase.  This side of the camera market will not go away and  some software will find their way into "mainstream cameras" as we know them now. The M  in Leica will refer to Memory

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Leica still has to have one foot in the smartphone game with Nokia on the comeback, camera centric smartphone development will only increase.  This side of the camera market will not go away and  some software will find their way into "mainstream cameras" as we know them now. The M  in Leica will refer to Memory

Eh? Leica is associated with Huawei, not Nokia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Investing in too many cameras is one way of looking at it. Another is that in the last 5 years they have invested in a small number of platforms and technologies which can relatively easily/cheaply be used to produce a range of related products that are actually very similar under the skin:

- M, SL/TL and S systems (the Q and X systems are outliers, though the former includes elements from other systems).

- CNC machined alloy camera bodies.

- the L mount and associated data communication systems.

- firmware development capacity (I remember the cursing on this forum about the poor M9 and M240 firmware updates; the SL and TL f/w is not perfect, but it is a real step up in sophistication).

 

I suspect their lens design capacity has also taken a step forward as well to allow them to deal with AF, OIS and digital corrections, but it is not clear exactly how they've done it.

Q and SL rely heavily on Panasonic technology. Not a bad idea at all, as long as Leica manages to instill their own identity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I will add the comma  and  a bold font so that you can see that the reference to  Nokia refers to what is stated after not before.......... I am quite aware of its association with Huawei. The new Nokia stuff hasn't been released its divorce from Microsoft is only just finalized.

 Leica still has to have one foot in the smartphone game ,with Nokia on the comeback camera centric smartphone development will only increase.

 

 

Do the leaked pics in the FCC filing look like a Memory to you??  :D

 

 Eventually Leica will have to find a new meaning to the M  I never stated that it will happen overnight. The leaked pictures will be a distant memory when the camera comes out

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...