david strachan Posted December 7, 2016 Share #61 Posted December 7, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) A very nice image Mr Exodies. It has a nice distinct feel of a stage picture...I think you've done well with the light...you've caught all the faces. cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 Hi david strachan, Take a look here Whenever the new M arrives, who's going to buy one?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
LocalHero1953 Posted December 7, 2016 Share #62 Posted December 7, 2016 Interesting responses. I note that for most people the loss of video is a non-issue, so if the new M doesn't have it, it's not going to be a deal breaker for many (though it will raise concerns for me), and I also hear some of my feelings echoed re the SL. It may be that those of us who do buy the M10 (or whatever number it has) will be looking for: improved ergonomics reduced weight improved EVF (This will make a lot of difference for me as I want something much better than the current M-240's solution. I can guess the framing with the 21, but would rather have an optically correct view + I can focus the 90 and 135 reasonably accurately, but I know I could do better with a good EVF). Above all, I'll be looking for a step up in image quality. For me this would mean a base ISO of 50 or 100 and field leading performance up to 6400. If we have all of these + the option of black chrome instead of paint I'll keep my name on the list that at least one London based dealer has now started (I'm number 2). Whether I go for two straight away, or try running an M10 and M-240 in parallel I'm unsure... I would feel differently about my choice if I didn't have the SL. With both SL+SL lenses (for music/stage/performance/portrait/event) and M (for travel/hiking/street/social) I have the best of both worlds IMO. If the new M shifted significantly towards the SL's territory (built-in EVF or hybrid EVF/OVF, IBIS etc) then I suspect it would lose those characteristics that I value (size, lens size, simplicity, direct optical view etc). So I can't think what the new M would have that would make me upgrade: silent shutter, better DR/ISO, better add-on EVF, thinner body, better flash system, integrated GPS/wifi, user-adjustable RF, no baseplate ( ) - all these things are realistically possible, but would I change for them when I have my eye on a Summicron 90SL or even (get thee behind me, Satan) a Noctilux? If the IQ (colour rendition and DR, but not pixels) made a step change then I might be tempted, but that is just a matter of waiting and seeing. Go on, Leica, surprise me! Edit: although this isn't the place to defend the SL, I note that your objections are about size/weight and the EVF. For what I use it for (see above) size and weight are not a major problem for me (though smaller and lighter would be good). I like the EVF and use it without a moment's thought that I am not using an OVF; it only becomes a problem for me with moving subjects in very low light (requiring ISO6400-12500). I don't often use it outdoors in bright light; when I do, I'm aware of the cons you describe, but I can live with them in the same way I live with the cons of the OVF. I mostly use the SL with the SL lenses, so I don't have much experience of manual focus with manual lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenInTime Posted December 7, 2016 Share #63 Posted December 7, 2016 As a M9, MM and film M user, I've a mental block against buying a M.240 derived body. I'm looking for more than the same old car with new paint and re-modeled tail fins. If that happens, I can see a path to buying a pair of M10-P bodies two years hence. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted December 7, 2016 Share #64 Posted December 7, 2016 ... I'll keep my name on the list that at least one London based dealer has now started (I'm number 2)...Interesting that dealers have started listings... I just called one in Italy who told me "I accept names on a list... but no money because I have NO evidence of ANY date..." (but, with a semi-joking attitude, told me also that IF I WANT TO LIST MY NAME (which I don't) maybe he can tell me some more Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ELAN Posted December 7, 2016 Share #65 Posted December 7, 2016 I will buy the next M, whatever it might be. There is bound to be at least one improvement over the M 240 that I would love to have. I suspect others will also crave that one new thing that will eventually push them to buy. But unlike iPhones that I buy on day one, Leica will needlessly makes me wait for the M-P version. Oh well, I love my M-P 240 and could happily keep using it for years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 7, 2016 Share #66 Posted December 7, 2016 Unless the M10 has special features i don't know of, i won't do the upgrade if it cannot compete with my A7s mod. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted December 7, 2016 Share #67 Posted December 7, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) The M is starting to fall between two stools for me. On the one hand I can have an excellent 24mp camera with OIS, AF, and the choice of optical and E-viewfinders in a lighter package than an M. It comes in the form of a Fuji, with no significant sacrifice in image quality and in practice, some considerable improvement due to its greater ability to reliably deliver the photo I ideally want in a wider range of circumstances. On the other hand I can go upwards to a larger sensor camera with AF/MF options where the image quality improvement is visible but perhaps a touch more difficult to achieve in more photographic situations. The middle ground that the current M occupies is now the area that involves the most sacrifices. It is hard to imagine what a new M can offer that will close the gap on the alternatives in either direction, but from my point of view that is Leica's challenge; make the M competitive with the contemporary alternatives again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted December 7, 2016 Share #68 Posted December 7, 2016 The middle ground that the current M occupies is now the area that involves the most sacrifices. It is hard to imagine what a new M can offer that will close the gap on the alternatives in either direction, but from my point of view that is Leica's challenge; make the M competitive with the contemporary alternatives again. I suspect that the new M will not be a game changer (whatever that could entail). Anything that incorporated greater "technology" (EVF, IBIS, novel focusing technology) would remain handicapped by legacy issues, and that technology would handicap the manual, simple M experience. So I'm guessing Leica won't bother. After all, there remains a gap in the line up between the TL and the SL for an M-sized body with L mount, full frame, with EVF and AF. It would make far more sense to put the technology there rather than add it to a body and mount where it doesn't fit. Whether Leica decide to fill this gap depends on how much life they think there is in the M system, what damage filling the gap would cause to the M, and how much they are missing sales by not having an M-sized L body. The M will not last for ever, so at some stage Leica will bite bullet and provide an alternative with greater electronic potential. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted December 7, 2016 Share #69 Posted December 7, 2016 I suspect that the new M will not be a game changer (whatever that could entail). Anything that incorporated greater "technology" (EVF, IBIS, novel focusing technology) would remain handicapped by legacy issues, and that technology would handicap the manual, simple M experience. So I'm guessing Leica won't bother. After all, there remains a gap in the line up between the TL and the SL for an M-sized body with L mount, full frame, with EVF and AF. It would make far more sense to put the technology there rather than add it to a body and mount where it doesn't fit. Whether Leica decide to fill this gap depends on how much life they think there is in the M system, what damage filling the gap would cause to the M, and how much they are missing sales by not having an M-sized L body. The M will not last for ever, so at some stage Leica will bite bullet and provide an alternative with greater electronic potential. I wonder why additional beneficial newer technology-based incorporations would "handicap the manual, simple M experience". It doesn't take much to implement those - IBIS is mostly automatic in camera and just needs one more menu option to turn it off or on, focus peaking and magnification also doesn't take much more effort to choose from in a menu with EVF present. And if you don't like it, simply deactivate the options. I find it better to have options and not to use them than not to have them in the first place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belle123 Posted December 7, 2016 Share #70 Posted December 7, 2016 Will remain an M owner always, but probably won't upgrade. Can never say never. The M246 does everything I desire for an M. If however they come out with a new monochrome, I will contemplate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnwolf Posted December 7, 2016 Share #71 Posted December 7, 2016 I wonder why additional beneficial newer technology-based incorporations would "handicap the manual, simple M experience".... It is a handicap if what one values is absolute simplicity, which has been the hallmark of the M line.When I joined here to support my Digilux 2, the constant chorus of M benefits was small size, light weight, and the bare essential for picture-making. I recall a good bit of ridicule of DSLRs as "computers with lenses." How things change. To Leica's credit, they preserve those values in some of their products. But the market moves forward as markets must. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted December 7, 2016 Share #72 Posted December 7, 2016 It is a handicap if what one values is absolute simplicity, which has been the hallmark of the M line.When I joined here to support my Digilux 2, the constant chorus of M benefits was small size, light weight, and the bare essential for picture-making. I recall a good bit of ridicule of DSLRs as "computers with lenses." How things change. To Leica's credit, they preserve those values in some of their products. But the market moves forward as markets must. John Understood, but if someone really likes M simplicity, why not shooting with a film-based M instead? Why would you pay >$4-5K for a digital M which can be seen as sort of crippled compared to other brands offering more mirrorless technology for less? Yes, you could argue that it is the M "feeling" which makes the difference here, but then you would also need to admit that this camera is not state of the art and that you paid an excessive price for this technology. Believe me, I can preserve the value of simplicity similar to my Leica M cameras also within my digital mirrorless camera by using M mode and disabling the majority of electronic options. But I can make use of options if I need them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 7, 2016 Share #73 Posted December 7, 2016 Minimalism is for M-D or M262 folks. The regular M has no reason to be outdated at all. At least i hope so... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnwolf Posted December 7, 2016 Share #74 Posted December 7, 2016 Minimalism is for M-D or M262 folks. The regular M has no reason to be outdated at all. At least i hope so... Or, like Martin said, the film folks. Unlike most camera makers, Leica cover pretty much everyone. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted December 7, 2016 Author Share #75 Posted December 7, 2016 I've just come back from a job where all I ended up using was the Canon 5D mkIII and a 24-70 f2.8 L lens. It's kind of brutal, it's massive - but it does the business, which is why so many people who actually make a living with a camera (or try to!) stick with CanNikon... But the beast weighs a ton and I know I'd never take one on a trek or use as a device of choice for the photo-documentary work I normally do. It gets in my way and it gets in the face of the people I'm working with. I reflected on this and did some sums. Canon 5D3 860 gms Canon 24-70 950 gms TOTAL 1810 gms Leica SL 847 gms Leica 24-90 1140 gms TOTAL 1987 gms Leica M240 680 gms Leica 21 super elmar 3.4 279 gms Leica 50 summilux asph 335 gms Leica summarit 75 f2.4 220 gms TOTAL 1514 gms What I've put here is the choice I'd make from the range of M lenses that I own and which I'd carry as an alternative to the Canon and Leica zoom setups. Of course, there are all sorts of horses for courses / apples and pears issues here, but at the end of the day an M system weighs less! And if I use my legs rather than swapping lenses, I can (and often do) get away with using just the M and a Summicron 35 asph which weigh only 934 gms together. I know - fast zoom, reliable auto-focus, programme mode when you're in a hurry, and all the whistles and bells do make life easier (and I've got my Canon kit for the times that I need it). But as the SL with M lenses has not proved to be a viable alternative for me - though it clearly works for others, what continues to meet the greater part of my needs as a photographer is the M. If I had to only have the one system I'd not think twice - it would be the M. And if Leica can come up with something that will make life a bit lighter, handling a bit easier, and image quality even better, I at least will be going for it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted December 7, 2016 Share #76 Posted December 7, 2016 The only thing that will make me 'upgrade' my M9s is when one dies. Unlike most here I don't see the limitations of the camera body (even the M9) on my photography. Its a fabulous camera as are later Ms. I've realised that I've reached the point in my photography of enjoying what I can do with what I have, and I now have little desire to upgrade unless actually necessary. I'd actually sell off some lenses except that they now cost nothing to own, except insurance, and I may regret their disposal so why do it? What I most like about the idea of an M10 is that it will enable me to continue to shoot rangefinders - unless Leica do something radically stupid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted December 7, 2016 Share #77 Posted December 7, 2016 I doubt that I've ever enjoyed using a camera more than my Ms, although Rolleis have been similarly wonderful as were my original Olympus OMs. But, aside from keeping my M simply for the joy of handling it, it is now not as capable of helping me achieve the photos I want as some other cameras. I wish it were otherwise, but there we are. So the next M has to do a lot to win me over to the point of buying it, regardless of how affectionate I expect to feel towards it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted December 7, 2016 Share #78 Posted December 7, 2016 I wonder why additional beneficial newer technology-based incorporations would "handicap the manual, simple M experience". It doesn't take much to implement those - IBIS is mostly automatic in camera and just needs one more menu option to turn it off or on, focus peaking and magnification also doesn't take much more effort to choose from in a menu with EVF present. And if you don't like it, simply deactivate the options. I find it better to have options and not to use them than not to have them in the first place. I suspect IBIS would result in a thicker body. An internal EVF of a quality to rival the SL would probably need more space than the M offers. A hybrid VF, even if possible with a RF, would be a visual distraction for many people. And my reference to novel focusing was about the much touted digital rangefinder, which would be tricky to integrate with legacy M mounts. Suggestions that "one can just turn it off" are rational and sensible, but utterly unacceptable to many M owners . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted December 7, 2016 Share #79 Posted December 7, 2016 I doubt that I've ever enjoyed using a camera more than my Ms, although Rolleis have been similarly wonderful as were my original Olympus OMs. But, aside from keeping my M simply for the joy of handling it, it is now not as capable of helping me achieve the photos I want as some other cameras. I wish it were otherwise, but there we are. So the next M has to do a lot to win me over to the point of buying it, regardless of how affectionate I expect to feel towards it. Peter, it appears, that you and I have exactly the same feeling toward the M. I too am torn between the utility of the XPro2 and the build quality of the M. Although the M is far more enjoyable the Fuji gets the shot. And the SL also gets the shot at the cost of some weight and size. The M remains, however, the most enjoyable camera to use, by far. I will always have affection for the M but with the SL and Xpro2 in the cupboard it's hard to see where on a practical level the M fits in. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted December 7, 2016 Share #80 Posted December 7, 2016 Understood, but if someone really likes M simplicity, why not shooting with a film-based M instead? Why would you pay >$4-5K for a digital M which can be seen as sort of crippled compared to other brands offering more mirrorless technology for less? Yes, you could argue that it is the M "feeling" which makes the difference here, but then you would also need to admit that this camera is not state of the art and that you paid an excessive price for this technology. Believe me, I can preserve the value of simplicity similar to my Leica M cameras also within my digital mirrorless camera by using M mode and disabling the majority of electronic options. But I can make use of options if I need them. The answer to your question is that they like the M simplicity as it is in the digital age. Why is navel fluff always blue, even if your shirts aren't? (Another great unanswerable question). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.