Sell M to get M10?

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think Peter's suggestion is a bare minimum, frankly.

 

If the Rumour's site is accurate, seems they might have fallen short. Best optical viewfinder and rangefinder mechanism - basically a further improvement of what we've had since the M3. But what about the EVF?

 

We're told the M(240) was stuck with the VF-2 because of the processor. The EVF from the T was okay, but the blackout was unacceptable. I sold mine for that reason alone. What the M10 should have, in my view, is a detachable EVF of the quality of the SL, with minimum black out, little lag, moveable focus and meter point etc - in other words functionality as good as the SL for when you need an EVF.

 

I bet it doesn't get it as it would mean a significant rethink of the electronics, and a way better processor. It seems instead, Leica has poured its energy into making it thinner.

[Advertisement]

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

[Peter H]

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

 What the M10 should have, in my view, is a detachable EVF of the quality of the SL, with minimum black out, little lag, moveable focus and meter point etc - in other words functionality as good as the SL for when you need an EVF.

 

I bet it doesn't get it as it would mean a significant rethink of the electronics, and a way better processor. It seems instead, Leica has poured its energy into making it thinner.

 

 

Yes, exactly.

 

And if this is indeed the route Leica is following it would be the retrogressive approach to developing the M that I've been fearing for a while now. I hope we're both wrong John. 

[ECohen]

Do you really think the majority of M users really care about an EVF?

 

Most shoot 28mm to 90mm ..... for macro and wider ......How often does it come up ?

 

And whats the big deal, I have live view and a quirky EVF that I use once in a while.

 

If I wanted the M to be an everything camera I'd buy something else.......Like the SL

 

The M like almost everything Leica makes is a specialty camera ....the last of the simple Rangefinders.

 

Isnt that what the M market is?

[Peter H]

Do you really think the majority of M users really care about an EVF?

 

Most shoot 28mm to 90mm ..... for macro and wider ......How often does it come up ?

 

And whats the big deal, I have live view and a quirky EVF that I use once in a while.

 

If I wanted the M to be an everything camera I'd buy something else.......Like the SL

 

The M like almost everything Leica makes is a specialty camera ....the last of the simple Rangefinders.

 

Isnt that what the M market is?

 

 

Being the last of the simple rangefinders means nothing to me, in this context, anyway.  

 

Being the best of the current viewfinders is what I care about when it comes to developing a new M.

[ECohen]

"Being the best of the current viewfinders is what I care about."

 

With respect to the M. What exactly do you want Leica to change on the next M's viewfinder ?

[Peter H]

"Being the best of the current viewfinders is what I care about."

 

With respect to the M. What exactly do you want Leica to change on the next M's viewfinder ?

 

 

I want them to add a detachable SL-quality EVF.

 

I do not want to sacrifice all the other virtues of the M each time I want to use a different kind of viewfinder.

 

In particular I do not want to sacrifice the superlative rangefinder/OVF for the occasions when an EVF is better suited to the job, which is the SL proposition, amongst other things. It is not an attractive option for me.. This is especially so since the OVF/RF is my preferred method of shooting most of the time, but not all of the time.

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

In particular I do not want to sacrifice the superlative rangefinder/OVF for the occasions when an EVF is better suited to the job, which is the SL proposition, amongst other things. It is not an attractive option for me.. This is especially so since the OVF/RF is my preferred method of shooting most of the time, but not all of the time.

And having an evf is not an attractive option for me. I would rather Leica simplified the M rangefinder than make it more complex. If an evf is better suited to the job (I'm personally baffled as to why an evf is the ideal for any job other than using magnified view on a tripod however.....) in hand then a rangefinder M is the wrong camera to be using.

 

Problem here is quite simple: we do not learn from history. Leica's last attempt to revise the M camera substantially was a spectacular failure and still people argue over the M5 decades later. Those wanting add ons would IMO be far better off looking at other cameras rather than expecting the M rangefinder to accept modifications which will ultimately cripple its original purpose. I am sure that Leica are aware that their 'flagship niche' product is such because of its uniqueness and will continue to offer a model which reflects this.

 

Personally I think that the rangefinder M is extraordinarily good at what it does - within its inherent limitations. Trying to make it do more (which it will do uncompetitively if forced) is in the long term in nobody's interest, not Leica's, and certainly not for those of us who value the M rangefinder camera for what it is. I see the future of the M rangefinder as one which offers a very alternative way of taking photographs and whilst it will never have a huge market, it will have its adherents. Enough said. 

[Peter H]

Problem here is quite simple: we do not learn from history. Leica's last attempt to revise the M camera substantially was a spectacular failure and still people argue over the M5 decades later. Those wanting add ons would IMO be far better off looking at other cameras rather than expecting the M rangefinder to accept modifications which will ultimately cripple its original purpose. I am sure that Leica are aware that their 'flagship niche' product is such because of its uniqueness and will continue to offer a model which reflects this. Personally I think that the rangefinder M is extraordinarily good at what it does - within its inherent limitations. Trying to make it do more (which it will do uncompetitively if forced) is in the long term in nobody's interest, not Leica's, and certainly not for those of us who value the M rangefinder camera for what it is. I see the future of the M rangefinder as one which offers a very alternative way of taking photographs and whilst it will never have a huge market, it will have its adherents. Enough said. 

 

 

We're talking about an accessory of the type that has been offered for many years now (when was the Visoflex first introduced?) without damaging the "original purpose".

 

This is absolutely not an attempt to add features to the existing camera beyond the natural evolution that has been underway since the M was invented Or before, actually. 

 

Nothing I'm proposing in any way undermines the unique features of the M or compromises its ability to do what it does superlatively. 

[imants]

It wasn't long ago that the EVF was referred to as Evil on forum..........

[ECohen]

It wasn't long ago that the EVF was referred to as Evil on forum..........

It because it doesn't look cool or work very well.

Some would say Live View is evil too......I just work with what I got.

...and I love the M's lenses and IQ

 

I do agree a better EVF isnt much to ask for.......I doubt I'd upgrade the one I have for $1000

I'd rather have another lens

[pop]

It wasn't long ago that the EVF was referred to as Evil on forum..........

still is, under certain circumstances, since EVIL stands for Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens.

[MarkP]

I want them to add a detachable SL-quality EVF.

 

I do not want to sacrifice all the other virtues of the M each time I want to use a different kind of viewfinder.

 

In particular I do not want to sacrifice the superlative rangefinder/OVF for the occasions when an EVF is better suited to the job, which is the SL proposition, amongst other things. It is not an attractive option for me.. This is especially so since the OVF/RF is my preferred method of shooting most of the time, but not all of the time.

 

 

Well I want to have only one camera system if possible so for my purposes the EVF saves me needing another one. The option of using an OVF for the few times I want to use something like my 28-90 Vario-Elmarit-R, or a longer lens, or have more precise framing/alignment, or shoot wide open with a fast lens in low light makes the EVF an attractive option. I would go months without using it but every once in a while it's good to have.  Once it is removed I'm back to my good old uncluttered OFV again, with that small electronic connector slot the only remaining clue that I'd just used an EVF.

[jmahto]

Having state of the art EVF (auxiliary) doesn't change M (for purists) in any way. For M it should be sinple. Give us the best

- M body (slim/light) (almost there)

- sensor (almost there)

- haptics (we are already there)

- aux EVF (not there)

 

We already have a winning formula. Why reinvent?

[Peter H]

Having state of the art EVF (auxiliary) doesn't change M (for purists) in any way. For M it should be sinple. Give us the best

- M body (slim/light) (almost there)

- sensor (almost there)

- haptics (we are already there)

- aux EVF (not there)

 

We already have a winning formula. Why reinvent?

 

 

 

Who's asking for re-invention? Just a better accessory, basically, in keeping with the other small improvements we might expect a new model to incorporate without shaking the world.

 

It would be the best way to preserve all the traditional strengths of the M, all the reasons we bought it in the first place, whilst keeping the camera bang up-to-date in the one area where technology has moved ahead in a different direction. And it could be done in a way that doesn't compromise it at all, and which can be ignored by anyone who doesn't want to use the accessory.

 

The M embraced digital without losing us. I'm sure it can embrace another nice accessory without losing its integrity or its customers.

 

 

Good night, and a Happy Christmas and holiday season to all my friends and combatants! Let's hope 2017 offers everyone something good.

[pico]

I am beginning to think that the M9 is the new M3, especially with a .85 finder.

If it exists.

.

[imants]

The best way to preserve the traditional strength of the M is to remain as as a rangefinder  other than that it becomes  something else .........................me I enjoy focus peaking on a Fuji  but when taking images of textiles I use a  OM5 II (12mm lens) with a swivel screen and that is the only thing I use that camera for, a M8 or Epson  for B&W, a GM5 as a recording device etc etc

 

 Cameras for different uses ................... a thinner  Leica M digital rangefinder  would be great thus replace the Epson and M8 that are a bit wonky these days but that is my need 

 

 

Leica  has no need to cater for an individuals needs  just make a M that suits the majority .................... even though it will be a compromise and a path to probable mediocrity

[Jeff S]

So much angst over a still imaginary camera.  Maybe, as has been suggested before, Leica has multiple iterations in mind, with the M10 (or whatever it is) being just the next. Just think about all the M versions released in recent years that were imaginary at one point.

 

I see no reason to expend much energy on all this until whatever happens, happens. Plus the M doesn't exist in a vacuum. Does the S get EVF?  What about the next SL?  The next Q? Monochrom versions?  New lenses to support EVF viewing?

 

Lots of pics to be made in the meantime.....with no lack of more than capable gear.  And that's not even considering the plethora of alternative brand options.

 

Jeff

[Herr Barnack]

 

Sell M to get M10?

 

No. 

 

My M-P 240 works just fine.  It will not get "worse" once its successor is dropped on the market.

 

It's silly that people are throwing perfectly good M240 cameras overboard and stampeding blindly toward a camera that does not even officially exist yet. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Printmaker]

... It seems instead, Leica has poured its energy into making it thinner.

 

Thin is nice, but not exactly a high priority for me. Nor is the EVF. I just want a Leica that does not need to go in for a sensor replacement every 3 or 4 years. Other than this issue, the M9/MM are wonderful cameras. The S2 is a great camera as well. It is just so large that I hate to take it out of the studio. And paying $7 -$8,000 per lens is a bit extreme. Even the $4-$5,000 used price for a S lens is a lot of cash.

 

Give me a camera like my old M4; one that will last 45 years with minimal repairs/adjustments and I will be happy. A 36 MP sensor would be nice but since Leica is being Draconian on this issue, 24 MP, quiet, good high ISO and dependable will need to suffice. Still, if the M10 is only a thin M262 with EVF, selling the S2 will require some deep consideration. There may not be enough GAS in me to make the change.

[imants]

..............   http://konost.com/rangefinder/