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

[Distagon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I certainly don't need wifi... seriously, who shoots with an M and needs those things?

I don't need WiFi for photography.

I need WiFi to transfer photos rapidly to the Missus' iPhone, which earns me a licence to buy the body in the first place.

In that indirect sense, it turns out to be mission-critical function.

[pop]

I don't need WiFi for photography.

I need WiFi to transfer photos rapidly to the Missus' iPhone, which earns me a licence to buy the body in the first place.

In that indirect sense, it turns out to be mission-critical function.

The Eye-Fi storage card does this quite well in the M (Typ 240), albeit a bit slow.

[cirke]

SD card Toshiba FlashAir W-03 (WIFI)   works very well with M240 and iPad or iPhone

[ianman]

I don't need WiFi for photography.

I need WiFi to transfer photos rapidly to the Missus' iPhone, which earns me a licence to buy the body in the first place.

In that indirect sense, it turns out to be mission-critical function.

 

 Can't she just take a picture of your LCD screen... that would be even faster 

 

Anyway, the whole M10 hoohaa kicked off with someone posting the wifi test report for FCC approval (or something like that), so I guess you'll all be able to share your snaps to all your facebook friends within seconds ! And I mean, just how great is that ?? 

[jmahto]

I don't need WiFi for photography.

I need WiFi to transfer photos rapidly to the Missus' iPhone, which earns me a licence to buy the body in the first place.

In that indirect sense, it turns out to be mission-critical function.

Here is another (and cheapest at $9) solution to this mission-critical function.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/222226467526?lpid=82&chn=ps&ul_noapp=true

[Distagon]

I guess you'll all be able to share your snaps to all your facebook friends within seconds ! And I mean, just how great is that?

I don't have a Facebook account and my photography is not for sharing 'snaps' or selfies.

But I'm also not the only adult in the family.

So, yes, the WiFi helps me to sell the camera.

[Distagon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here is another (and cheapest at $9) solution to this mission-critical function.

In the eyes of the financial approval authority, my tardiness in using that $9 solution is the reason why the WiFi has wings.

[algrove]

I'm with Rick. No way and my nearest dealer is not too far away. Better stay away. Dealer calls might be hard to resist, but I love my XT2 system now.

[steamboat]

Here's some backward thinking but we've all been there. Perhaps. In October or so I ordered another battery for my M8.2. With cold weather the older batteries aren't happy. I ordered from a big retailer and the battery came and I threw the envelope onto my desk. I opened it about a month later. Oddly it contained an M8 battery BOX, but inside was a new M240 battery. So I thought that to be some kind of message so I really got hot and heavy into getting a new camera. You know. I had the extra battery already. I went back and forth on what to get then all the rumors of the "M10" started. Now? I'm pretty well cooled to cold on a new camera. I have the feeling any problems with my photography will not be improved with a new camera. I've been using Leica M cameras for 50 years. This M8.2 with 120,000+ activations will chug along for a bit longer. 'Just like I'm planning on doing.

[algrove]

Western MI- Sure love that ice cream place just east of Holland (If I remember correctly) going out toward Gingerman Raceway.

 

Sounds like you cooled off just like the temperatures.

[steamboat]

Western MI- Sure love that ice cream place just east of Holland (If I remember correctly) going out toward Gingerman Raceway.

 

Sounds like you cooled off just like the temperatures.

 

 

You may be right about the weather cooling off my desire for a new M. Part of my thinking was that I'd been using M Leicas for 50 years (gawd that makes me old - sheesh) and I wanted my own 50-Jahre M camera. I visited a Midwest Leica dealer and spent some time with him discussing this and that and he said "he" could do the engraving - that there was no reason for an alacarte M (with engraving). The next time I called him he didn't remember me at all. Nothing. Like I hadn't spent time with him at all. Sooooo, that, too, cooled me. The concept of a new M10 is intriguing but unless it's just right I won't consider it. BTW, I live near Grand Haven and don't get down to southern Ottawa County much so don't know of the ice cream place or the Raceway. Sounds interesting. Thnx.

[algrove]

That salesman is no salesman. OMG!

[Guest]

Well to return to the thread's topic for a moment, would I buy a new M to replace my existing M240 when the "M10", or whatever it will be called, finally arrives?........Probably not, actually no, I just don't see good reason to do so.

My work, the paid work, slips between film-making and stills most in the digital realm though not exclusively so and what I need by way of equipment is quality and reliability. With Leica we certainly have quality, especially so with the lenses, but reliability not so much......and then there's the never-ending problems with getting timely service when it's needed.

I recently completed work a documentary in Eastern Europe where I used the 240's for the stills part of the job and whilst I'm happy enough with much of the results I was more annoyed with the dud frames due to focus and exposure problems.....Ok I guess 30-40% of those errors were probably down to me, but in general I found that the M240's didn't let me react quickly enough causing me to miss shots when the buffer stopped the flow of work and missing critical focus with quickly moving subjects in dodgy lighting conditions. In retrospect the M240's were a bad choice for that particular documentary shoot.

 

So to be better prepared next time I've just upgraded my Nikon gear to a D810, and for some portions of my filming work where I need an unobtrusive camera I've pre-ordered a Panasonic GH5 to replace or supplement the excellent GH4 that has served me so well these past few years.

I am amazed as to how solid and well made these cameras are. The D810 replaces my venerable D700 that hasn't hiccuped once in all the years I owned it, ( I've had it from new when they first came out, I can't remember how long ago now ). I've never run up against buffer problems with the D700 and as sure as heck I'll not do so with the D810 I'm certain. The D810 is a hugely capable camera, just look at the specs, and it appears to be at least as solidly constructed as the D700 so I know the camera will earn it's way for me for a good number of years, and you can buy three of them for the price of an M!

 

Same with the GH4 and probably the GH5 when it appears in a month or two. Really great results with that camera when using it for stills and exceptional results with video that are way way better than anything you can achieve out of an M, a Q or probably, ( but I have not tested it ), a SL too......Plus the GH4 has had 4K for a couple of years for God's sake! The GH4's EVF and touch screen LCD was better than anything that Leica offers right now, yes even better than the Q's and the SL's EVF's.

The producer on this last job was using an iPhone for video B roll shots, the results were much more impressive than what I could have gotten from the M if I foolishly decided to shoot video with it. 

The M's should dump the video functions, if you cannot provide good 4K these days then forget it......It's not a good camera form for video anyway.

 

I know all this appears to be a rant against Leica, but honestly it's not that at all. I am a huge Leica fan having used them professionally and for personal work for many decades, ( ok, back to the late 60's ), but the M's especially are a limited function tool. I should have taken the Nikons with the GH4 on that last job, good fast AF would have saved many of the shots taken on the M240's that have since hit the bin, so that's a lesson learned and I am happy with my decision now to upgrade the Nikon and Panasonic parts of my kit rather than spend a large chunk of change on a new Leica that whilst I am sure it will have some really attractive new features and tweaks to offer I doubt if they will be that much more than what we have now in the M240 / 240P's.

And anyway having bought the D810 and pre- ordered a GH5 I've still got more than a couple of grand I guess to waste than if I was to buy the next M, M10 or whatever, and I'm certain that's not going to be any cheaper that the existing M's are right now.  

 

Ok, fire away!

[Exodies]

You have put your finger on the problem with not buying Leica - you are left with money you have no use for.

[lct]

[•••] Ok, fire away!

 

If you insist... The cameras you're referring to are not rangefinders. If you don't need RFs you will be better off with TTL cameras for sure but if you do, Nikon and Panasonic can do nothing for you. If you intend to use your M lenses on TTL bodies, the Leica SL and Sony or Fuji bodies would be better options. Nikon and Pana user speaking .

[Guest]

No Lct, perhaps you misunderstand me here. I love using my Leicas and always have since my first M3's, and believe it or not I do understand that the D810 and the GH4/5's are not rangefinders. I can tell by weight in a dark room.

 

I've looked at and rejected the SL for a number of reasons that made sense to me, however I do have a Q along with two M240's, a MM1 and probably too much Leica glass that's accumulated over the years.

 

What I was trying to say was that I learned a lesson when I chose with my heart to use the M's on that shoot rather than listening to my head and going with cameras that would have in retrospect been a far better choice for that job. 

 

I've looked at and tried the Sony and Fuji Mirrorless options and I find them lacking too. I guess a great part of all of this is what you're used to. I've really only had Nikons and Leicas for all the past decades of work so on picking up a new model of either of those marques everything is quickly familiar, I've only in recent years found the GH4 which I use almost solely for it's video capabilities and it's S16 'ish sized sensor with which I am able to use a lot of my PL mount cine glass. 

I also wanted to say that Leica doesn't really have a stranglehold on quality as far as camera build is concerned, not in my experience anyway and that goes back a long way in professional usage. 

 

My camera of choice when doing personal work or I'm travelling has always been an M, in whatever form I had at the time and I think that will continue to be the case, but I doubt very much if I will find a good reason to move up to a M10 or whatever it'll be called when it's available.

[lct]

If what you want to say is Leica is not the best camera for your professional needs i can hear you as i've never used my Ms or Rs for my job either. No need for a rangefinder there, not reliable enough for this purpose and too expensive and too long to replace and repair if needed. Now this is hardly new is it. Been like this since the eighties for me.

[Guest]

Hello again lct, what I am saying is that whilst personally I love using the M system  and I go back a long way with it, I have not found it reliable enough for some of the work I have done and still do, though perhaps some of that unreliability could be "operator error" as well but those failings would have been mitigated if I'd used an AF DSLR where and when I should have.

But the digital M's meagre buffer and thirsty battery use has made it for some shoots not the system to turn to even though I vastly prefer shooting with a rangefinder 80% of the time. You're so right too in regards to serviceability and maintenance with the digital M's if one is using them professionally, the film M's you could drag through mud, ( many were ), and they'd still come out ticking, not so much the digital M's I think.

And yes I too have used, and still own a R system. Ergonomically one of the very best SLR's ever made in my opinion, great to operate and with a gorgeous viewfinder. The lenses I still use on my film and digital cinema cameras and I love the look they produce.

[Distagon]

And yes I too have used, and still own a R system. Ergonomically one of the very best SLR's ever made in my opinion, great to operate and with a gorgeous viewfinder.

 

Given the size of the SL and its lenses, it would've been great if it had echoed the form factor of an R9, which was a very nice body ergonomically.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[chris_tribble]

...the M's especially are a limited function tool. I should have taken the Nikons with the GH4 on that last job, good fast AF would have saved many of the shots taken on the M240's that have since hit the bin, so that's a lesson learned and I am happy with my decision now to upgrade the Nikon and Panasonic parts of my kit rather than spend a large chunk of change on a new Leica that whilst I am sure it will have some really attractive new features and tweaks to offer I doubt if they will be that much more than what we have now in the M240 / 240P's.

And anyway having bought the D810 and pre- ordered a GH5 I've still got more than a couple of grand I guess to waste than if I was to buy the next M, M10 or whatever, and I'm certain that's not going to be any cheaper that the existing M's are right now.  

 

Peter - absolutely no intention of firing at anyone as I agree with a lot of what you say.  Yes, for the money shot, you need the right tool, and very often that's not an M.  HOWEVER, I'd also say that the majority of the best / most successful images I've taken in recent years have been with a digital M - and nearly always with a 28 lens.  In my experience - and especially in low light settings + landscape work, the M offers outstanding ease of use, image quality and portability.  The M isn't my only camera - but when I stop doing client work, and I keep something for me and me alone - I know it will be a rangefinder camera.  If life is really hard on me and I can only have a minimum set of lenses, it would be heart breaking but the list would include glass from the range 28-75.