Whenever the new M arrives, who's going to buy one?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've just been looking at Thorsten's interesting user report on the M-D-262 (http://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-M60-and-Leica-M-D-262-digital-rangefinder-camera-page-1.html).  In his discussion of the sensor he says:

 

 

If this is correct, it's potentially interesting.  Assuming that the M10 doesn't have video (and the compromises that appear to be associated with this) it could be a killer reason for going for the new M10.  A camera that is uncompromisingly optimised for still photography appeals to me enormously.  Yes, I've use the video on the M-240 from time to time.  However, the number of these occasions has been so small as to be trivial - and if the new M really does offer a measurable improvement on ISO performance and IQ across the ISO range, then my decision to get a one asap is further justified.

I very much doubt it; it is far more likely that it has to do with the choice of transmission frequencies on the Bayer filter and algorithms in the firmware.

[lct]

Again i have nothing to sell here but if the Leica microlenses made a significant difference, i would see superior results out of my M240 compared to my A7s mod but is not the case to be honest. The main difference i can view is red edges/corners of M240 pictures are not red but cyan out of the A7s mod with wides. But i have not felt the need to use Cornerfix on either cameras so far. I don't use wider lenses than 21mm though.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Peter H]

Peter, you've written similar things quite often, but I have lost track of where you have said what advances you would like in a future M, or which Leica should have made long ago? Can you point me to a thread/post, or explain further?

(I have no ulterior motive in asking, other than to understand your comments on the M, SL and X1D better).

 

 

Paul, do you really think I'm methodical enough to know precisely where and in which threads my various outbursts have landed?

 

But to recap if I can: I am not an engineer so I don't do what many here try to do and specify what type of sensor they want, how many mp and that sort of thing. But I know that the SL which has been around for a good while now has a better sensor than the M's, so that is one important area where I hope for improvement.

 

The SL's EVF is also better for focussing on than the M's in a number of situations, so there again, I want an external detachable EVF at least as good as the SL's. I want it to be detachable because I want the M to stay small, and I don't want to lose the OVF?Rangefinder that sets it apart from everything else.

 

Not being an engineer I can't instruct Leica in how to make further improvements in the rangefinder to make it even easier to use in adverse conditions and even less prone to misalignment or miscalibration. The M 240 is vastly improved over the M9 in this respect, and others. I hope that the next M may be at least slightly further improved.

 

I don't want any new features. I simply want a continued evolutionary development of the basic manual focus system and sensor, I want it to be small and light and produce better pictures than the SL. Not because I'm dissatisfied with the M240 or that I feel any competitive antagonism towards the SL but if I'm to spend money on a new camera, these are the type of things I'd be hoping to find in 2017.

 

The SL doesn't offer me what I want in a package that is attractive to me. The X1D, however, does. It is nicer and more comfortable for me to use than the SL and in my hands has produced photographs that I prefer to either the M's or the SL's. They have a quality that is visibly different and to my mind definitively superior. It is as simple to use as an M and lighter and more comfortable than an SL. It suits me better.

 

Is that what you were asking?

[pico]

[...] Well with an incredibly good system, but one which may start to creak without some radical solutions. I'm especially thinking about wide-angle shooting [...]

 

Leica should wonder how Voigtlander's 10mm performs so very well on the old M9. Really, it's better than VC's 12 or 15mm V1 or later.

.

Edited December 14, 2016 by pico

[IkarusJohn]

I think you will get what you seek, Peter. Based on 60 years of M development, and the most recent attempt to explore every permutation, my guess is you will get an evolutionary improvement of the current M, with other permutations to follow.

 

I'm not sure why you neeed the image quality to be better than the SL - you're not buying that camera, so what does it matter provided it's at least as good. The S007 apparently has better image quality, but it is also bigger and heavier ...

 

I think the interesting question is, after offering all the bells and whistles with the M(240), will Leica also offer an M mount camera, manual everything, but liberated from the constraints of the optical viewfinder - something like a manual Q in M mount? If they did that, then would we see M mount lenses developed outside the existing focal range? They could also re-introduce some historic classic R lenses in M mount. I doubt the 28 Summaron project was that expensive. What about some R classic lenses in re-released M mount without the aperture stop down, like the 180/2.8 Elmarit-R?

 

My guess is they won't. They seem to be investing in the L mount for the future of the company.

 

So, why is it taking so long for the next M version to be released? Because the M(240) is selling well? Because the variants are recent, current and selling well? The S, SL, M variants, TL & Q are reasonably crowded, and they want things to settle down? Or perhaps are they trying to work out the wrinkles on something new - the SL release went well by Leica standards, and I suspect they want to continue that way ...

 

Cheers

John

Edited December 14, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[LocalHero1953]

................................

Is that what you were asking?

Yes, thank you!

I also agree that the next M is likely to meet your requirements in terms of IQ - I expect it to leapfrog the SL - though I wonder if any delay (if delay there will be) is just down to the need to make it sufficiently different from the M240 for marketing reasons. 

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, thank you!

I also agree that the next M is likely to meet your requirements in terms of IQ - I expect it to leapfrog the SL - though I wonder if any delay (if delay there will be) is just down to the need to make it sufficiently different from the M240 for marketing reasons.

 

Sufficiently different is an interesting concept. Both the SL and M are full frame still cameras, one fully electronic/AF etc, the other with a manual heart. My comment above was not intended to be protective of the SL, I'm just wondering what could be improved on the SL sensor? I'm sure there is plenty, but is there a reason for the SL sensor to be different from the M? The housing is bigger, it is more capable with video.

 

I have no understanding of these things, but a different sensor technology in each camera could help to distinguish them - if there is a reason to ...

[pgk]

Leica should wonder how Voigtlander's 10mm performs so very well on the old M9. Really, it's better than VC's 12 or 15mm V1 or later.

.

 

I'd be interested to see how its design differs. I suspect its more of a retro focus design which will help avoid colour casts but might increase distortion. The problem isn't new lenses but balancing old/existing with a new sensor. My experiences suggest that when everything works well together few problems can be seen, but try an awkward subject (mine often seem to be) under tricky (contrasty or very flat) conditions where exposure is a compromise and then coloured edges and distortions can become apparent. Equipment is not judged on what it does well, but on where it fails to deliver.

Edited December 15, 2016 by pgk

[LocalHero1953]

Now that we've all now agreed there will be both a new M10 and a new QL, Chris's question should be amended to:

"Which one would you buy?"

 

I've never had more than two actively used cameras at a time, so unless I change the habit of a lifetime, my options would be:

- status quo (M240 & SL).

- upgrade the M240 to the M10 (a better version of what I have now).

- sell the M240 for the QL (the tech future).

- sell the SL for the QL (the compact option - except for the two remaining SL lenses).

[Peter H]

.............

I'm not sure why you neeed the image quality to be better than the SL - you're not buying that camera, so what does it matter provided it's at least as good. The S007 apparently has better image quality, but it is also bigger and heavier ...

 

.......................

 

 

"Better than the SL's" is a just convenient measure.

 

I don't want the image quality to be better than the SL's as a matter of principle. It's just that after a couple of years' extra development compared with the SL it you'd imagine it ought to be.

 

As long as both lines exist I expect new versions of the M and the SL will have staggered releases and will leapfrog each other in terms of image quality, or at least up-to-date sensors. I wish there could be simultaneous releases so that we could choose our cameras on a more level basis but I don't think that's ever likely to happen. Too many sales to be lost.

[cirke]

48 mp with an option 4 x 12 faster and better high ISO

Edited December 15, 2016 by siangue

[rosuna]

If this is true, I want one:

 

http://leicarumors.com/2016/12/15/more-leica-m10-specifications-and-rumors-no-video-only-three-buttons-on-the-back-m7-size.aspx/

 

.

[Martin B]

If this is true, I want one:

 

http://leicarumors.com/2016/12/15/more-leica-m10-specifications-and-rumors-no-video-only-three-buttons-on-the-back-m7-size.aspx/

 

.

 

I would be in for a competitive price of other similar mirrorless cameras in the market regarding the main properties mentioned there - let's say for about $1500? Make it $2K for the Leica name and the unique rangefinder system.

[IkarusJohn]

"Better than the SL's" is a just convenient measure.

 

I don't want the image quality to be better than the SL's as a matter of principle. It's just that after a couple of years' extra development compared with the SL it you'd imagine it ought to be.

 

As long as both lines exist I expect new versions of the M and the SL will have staggered releases and will leapfrog each other in terms of image quality, or at least up-to-date sensors. I wish there could be simultaneous releases so that we could choose our cameras on a more level basis but I don't think that's ever likely to happen. Too many sales to be lost.

True, but there's a different point here - is there a reason to differentiate the sensor in the SL from the sensor in the M? From a technological perspective? Or will they both be leapfrogging versions of the same 24MP sensor from the same manufacturer (assuming that Leica has capped the MP for 35mm on principle), with the differentiation just being available technology at the time of the release?

 

I don't know the answer. The Japanese manufacturers have largely fed the arms race on MP and the like. I think that technology plateaued some time ago for handheld photography. Sure, there will always be those who want more, bigger, better, faster, but for most of us it's completely pointless. Much like Porsches stuck in traffic, or driven on public roads in a speed limited world.

 

Put another way, are we facing a standardised sensor, with different packaging? SL, M, Q? Or will there be more to it?

[Martin B]

I don't know the answer. The Japanese manufacturers have largely fed the arms race on MP and the like. I think that technology plateaued some time ago for handheld photography. Sure, there will always be those who want more, bigger, better, faster, but for most of us it's completely pointless. Much like Porsches stuck in traffic, or driven on public roads in a speed limited world.

 

 

Just surprising that I shoot mostly handheld with my 36 MP A7R as I did before with my 22 MP 5D MkII camera. The difference in resolution is still huge - but I need to be a bit more cautious that I use a short enough shutter speed on my A7R for example to avoid any kind of blur. I wouldn't shoot with 1/15 sec handheld with my A7R which I can do with my film cameras or lower MP sensor cameras. The newer A7R II doesn't has this issue anymore with the in-body image stabilization system. This said, I see definitely a benefit in higher resolution sensors - also for handheld cameras.

 

Also absolutely okay to continue with a 24 MP camera - but the question is then would you really pay $$$$ for such sensor based camera still? Hmmmmm......at least this would be a deal breaker for me personally.

[lct]

If this is true, I want one:

 

http://leicarumors.com/2016/12/15/more-leica-m10-specifications-and-rumors-no-video-only-three-buttons-on-the-back-m7-size.aspx/

 

What are we supposed to do with an iso dial on the top left corner of the camera? With an AF camera i could understand (possibly...) but with a manual camera? The left fingers are used to hold the lens and turn aperture and focus rings aren't they. Reminds me the SL at its launch... Amateur ergonomics again?

Edited December 15, 2016 by lct

[IkarusJohn]

Just surprising that I shoot mostly handheld with my 36 MP A7R as I did before with my 22 MP 5D MkII camera. The difference in resolution is still huge - but I need to be a bit more cautious that I use a short enough shutter speed on my A7R for example to avoid any kind of blur. I wouldn't shoot with 1/15 sec handheld with my A7R which I can do with my film cameras or lower MP sensor cameras. The newer A7R II doesn't has this issue anymore with the in-body image stabilization system. This said, I see definitely a benefit in higher resolution sensors - also for handheld cameras.

 

Also absolutely okay to continue with a 24 MP camera - but the question is then would you really pay $$$$ for such sensor based camera still? Hmmmmm......at least this would be a deal breaker for me personally.

Probably. Actually, I did. I have two 24MP cameras and one 18MP, and resolution isn't a limiting factor. As technology improves (marginal), I'm sure MP will increase, but it's not a driver for the photography that interests me. I've had two 37MP cameras, and my photography did not capture the benefit (actually, with the A7r, the increase in MP seems to have been a problem, along with a truly dreadful user interface).

 

So, I paid more than I shoild have for my cameras, and they give me tremendous pleasure. MP is really neither a benefit, nor a hindrance.

[IkarusJohn]

What are we supposed to do with an iso dial on the top left corner of the camera? With an AF camera i could understand (possibly...) but with a manual camera? The left fingers are used to hold the lens and turn aperture and focus rings aren't they. Reminds me the SL at his launch... Amateur ergonomics again?

Oh, I don't know - the ISO dial was on the left for every film camera I ever had, if I recall correctly.

[Martin B]

Probably. Actually, I did. I have two 24MP cameras and one 18MP, and resolution isn't a limiting factor. As technology improves (marginal), I'm sure MP will increase, but it's not a driver for the photography that interests me. I've had two 37MP cameras, and my photography did not capture the benefit (actually, with the A7r, the increase in MP seems to have been a problem, along with a truly dreadful user interface).

 

So, I paid more than I shoild have for my cameras, and they give me tremendous pleasure. MP is really neither a benefit, nor a hindrance.

 

I can agree with this, because mostly this is driven by personal preference. There is no right or wrong - in the end it simply has to work as potentially best tool for the user depending on situation and purpose. I also agree that the user interface of the A7R is not the best and also took me some time to get used to.

Edited December 15, 2016 by Martin B

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pgk]

What are we supposed to do with an iso dial on the top left corner of the camera? With an AF camera i could understand (possibly...) but with a manual camera? The left fingers are used to hold the lens and turn aperture and focus rings aren't they. Reminds me the SL at his launch... Amateur ergonomics again?

 

If that photo is real then the ISO dial is in a very vulnerable place and likely to get rubbed constantly by the strap. Makes me wonder.