So how long before video capture functionality arrives?

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Please, everyone, cut down on the use of ad hominems. 

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

Maybe the purists..should just go back to film mayhaps..and really be purists..instead of pretending...and imposing their restrictions..upon a forward looking evolutionary format..digital..

Let digital be what it is in full flower..and grow..

Or become a digital purist..and all that entails..video etc..yes...a digital purist..with an open mind..

Is that asking too much..

Let's shelve the word "purist" together with "fanboy". We don't need to categorize members.

However, you are right that there are two ways to regard the development of the M series.

 

The first is to incorporate those parts of the digital developments that fit within the functional use of the camera. If one regards it as a tool for reportage, travel, PJ, etc., conveniences like occasional video are quite within the concept.

 

If one regards it as limited to family, fine art street, etc use in a vintage style, any modernism is disturbing.

 

So: 21st century or 20th century with a hint of 21st century flavour? I think there is reason for two lines.

[lct]

[...] So: 21st century or 20th century? I think there is reason for two lines.

 

I would love to believe it but "Das Wesentliche" has won vs "Best of Both Worlds" so far. 

[jaapv]

My point: Not "best of two worlds", but "ready for the future".

das Wesentliche will die out with us old fogies, the future is the fountain of youth.

[lct]

Old fart asking for modern things here and proud to do so!

[LocalHero1953]

Let's shelve the word "purist" together with "fanboy". We don't need to categorize members.

However, you are right that there are two ways to regard the development of the M series.

 

The first is to incorporate those parts of the digital developments that fit within the functional use of the camera. If one regards it as a tool for reportage, travel, PJ, etc., conveniences like occasional video are quite within the concept.

 

If one regards it as limited to family, fine art street, etc use in a vintage style, any modernism is disturbing.

 

So: 21st century or 20th century with a hint of 21st century flavour? I think there is reason for two lines.

Neatly categorised: family, fine art and street are C20, wanting video is C21? 

 

I agree, we don't need to categorise members.

(TBH, IDGAF)

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My point: Not "best of two worlds", but "ready for the future".

das Wesentliche will die out with us old fogies, the future is the fountain of youth.

 

I'm far from sure that you are right on this one jaapv. Leica M is already niche but as niche it offers an alternative way of taking photographs and alternative appeal to those to whom they appeal - young or old. But trying to incorporate technology into something which is limited by its fundamental design in order to broaden appeal or in order to offer a compromised solution for which there are many other options, is IMO a bad move in that it dilutes the equipment into being less well thought of because it does some things well but other things (such as video), not so well. It really depends what you see the Leica M as being in the future - a specialist, alternative still camera or a more generalist camera with some good and some not so good features. Given that Leica are obviously trying to be innovative with other more modern camera designs, its seems pretty futile to modify the M to try to make it compete on a broader scale. And I know that there are many who want it to do so and who seem to think that 'technology can overcome', which it might be able to do so to an extent if Leica tried hard enough, but why pour resources into a perfectly good and effective design to add features when other models will be capable of doing things like video better? Its not about 'fanboyism' or 'purism' its about logic.

[LeicaFFM]

das Wesentliche will die out with us old fogies, the future is the fountain of youth.

 

I am not so sure about that.

I see a lot of younger people, that are drawn to the M10, analog, vinyl, etc.

Also I see mostly older people buying iPads, etc.

[jaapv]

I'm far from sure that you are right on this one jaapv. Leica M is already niche but as niche it offers an alternative way of taking photographs and alternative appeal to those to whom they appeal - young or old. But trying to incorporate technology into something which is limited by its fundamental design in order to broaden appeal or in order to offer a compromised solution for which there are many other options, is IMO a bad move in that it dilutes the equipment into being less well thought of because it does some things well but other things (such as video), not so well. It really depends what you see the Leica M as being in the future - a specialist, alternative still camera or a more generalist camera with some good and some not so good features. Given that Leica are obviously trying to be innovative with other more modern camera designs, its seems pretty futile to modify the M to try to make it compete on a broader scale. And I know that there are many who want it to do so and who seem to think that 'technology can overcome', which it might be able to do so to an extent if Leica tried hard enough, but why pour resources into a perfectly good and effective design to add features when other models will be capable of doing things like video better? Its not about 'fanboyism' or 'purism' its about logic.

Maybe, but I see a different niche than you do. Looking back, the M3 was displaced as a PJ camera by more (better?) features from the (japanese) SLRs. I would like to see it reclaim some territory now that the technological developments make that possible. I am not convinced that,for instance, a good video implementation is impossible in an M body .No, it does not need to be a tool for full feature films, but taking a quality video clip  through a rangefinder viewfinder or a decent auxiliary EVF is surely within the bounds of possibilities.

[Steve Spencer]

Maybe, but I see a different niche than you do. Looking back, the M3 was displaced as a PJ camera by more (better?) features from the (japanese) DSLRs. I would like to see it reclaim some territory now that the technological developments make that possible. I am not convinced that,for instance, a good video implementation is impossible in an M body .No, it does not need to be a tool for full feature films, but taking a quality video clip  through a rangefinder viewfinder or a decent auxiliary EVF is surely within the bounds of possibilities.

 

I agree it is within the bounds of possibilities but if they add video to an M camera it has to allow the shooter to focus on the essentials of video. I don't think the M240 video did that. One big difference between still photography and  video is that with video part of the essentials is being able to record good sound and that process should be easy and fluid. It simply was not with the M240. That in my view is a must if video is added to an M camera. Similarly focus and exposure must be more refined and able to be adjusted in finer increments. Unlike stills photography these must be adjusted during the shooting of video and in a way that is gradual. Leica has taken steps in this direction by offering some M lenses with steeples aperture and focus gears, but if they are going to really embrace video they need to rehouse these lenses to allow longer focus throw and a similar diameter and filter thread. Shooting video can be fiddly but it shouldn't be on a Leica camera. That is focussing on the essentials, at least to me.

[pgk]

The crux of this is also about 'quality'. Leica have always traded on producing high quality products. So unless a feature is implemented well it starts to dilute the inherent 'quality' image which is important to Leica, and of course many/most of their customers. Modifying an M camera to achieve a 'competitive' level of quality to that produced by its potential competitors in the 'dual stills/video' camera market may be possible, but would require more development, more switches/menus/sockets/lens modifications and so on. Is it worth modifying a tool which does what it does well, in order to offer something which is likely to constantly need updating and will always be somewhat compromised by the lack of lens data transfer? Honestly?

[jaapv]

I agree it is within the bounds of possibilities but if they add video to an M camera it has to allow the shooter to focus on the essentials of video. I don't think the M240 video did that. One big difference between still photography and  video is that with video part of the essentials is being able to record good sound and that process should be easy and fluid. It simply was not with the M240. That in my view is a must if video is added to an M camera. Similarly focus and exposure must be more refined and able to be adjusted in finer increments. Unlike stills photography these must be adjusted during the shooting of video and in a way that is gradual. Leica has taken steps in this direction by offering some M lenses with steeples aperture and focus gears, but if they are going to really embrace video they need to rehouse these lenses to allow longer focus throw and a similar diameter and filter thread. Shooting video can be fiddly but it shouldn't be on a Leica camera. That is focussing on the essentials, at least to me.

I quite agree. If you do, do so well. Still, I think the M240 was not too bad for a first effort. Some of the criticism loses track of the limited scope intended.

[IkarusJohn]

...However, you are right that there are two ways to regard the development of the M series.The first is to incorporate those parts of the digital developments that fit within the functional use of the camera. If one regards it as a tool for reportage, travel, PJ, etc., conveniences like occasional video are quite within the concept.If one regards it as limited to family, fine art street, etc use in a vintage style, any modernism is disturbing.So: 21st century or 20th century with a hint of 21st century flavour? I think there is reason for two lines.

I don't agree with that dichotomy. Why just two? And why those two?

 

The M has always been defined by its mount and the disconnect between the lens and the camera (other than the focusing cam). The M10 takes this system as far as it goes; future developments will be incremental, but for stills photography this is not a limitation. Any improvement in photographic quality will come with lenses, processors and sensors.

 

I don't see making the best stills camera in the mid range of focal lengths (the most popular use) as limiting the camera to fine art, family and street - but it does make macro, long tele and the like problematic, and video less than ideal. To do those things well, the best solution would be to remove the limiting factor - the core of the M camera and move to solutions better suited to those needs.

 

If reportage, photojournalism and travel require video, then a stills optimised crf camera isn't the best choice. If you want a reasonably compact camera which uses M lenses and takes good stills and video, then the SL is that camera. If the SL doesn't appeal, then consider in what respects - optical viewfinder? Not ideal for video for all number of reasons. Size? Dictated largely by that excellent evf, larger battery and the needs of video. Weight? The battery. Ugly? That's subjective - functionality is ultimately the issue.

 

I don't have a problem in the least with a video enabled M camera, but I don't see how Leica can achieve video to a quality that justifies the Leica red dot while maintaining the excellent stills camera that is the M10. Any video version will be something else - I don't have a problem with that either. How it fits with the SL is a strategic issue for Leica.

 

Oh, and by the way, the SL is an excellent reportage, photojournalist, travel and any other use 35mm format camera, either with its native AF lenses or any other Leica lens. Remember, Leica makes other cameras? Why push the M series into market segments occupied by other Leica products? Having traveled reasonably extensively in Africa, when I go back next year I will almost certainly take my SL, both zooms and one or two M lenses in a backpack. Not sure if I'll take an M backup.

 

Ultimately, I try to chose the best tool for the job, rather than trying to get the tools I like to do jobs that are not their inherent strengths.

[Stef63]

Ultimately, I try to chose the best tool for the job, rather than trying to get the tools I like to do jobs that are not their inherent strengths.

 

 

+1

 

I've never used video on my Canon Ftb, Minolta SRT 100, Minolta XD7, Canon A1, Canon 10D, Canon 1D MkII and Canon 1Ds III, nor on the Leica M9, Monochrom, M240 or M246.  So obviously I don't miss video on the M10.    But suddenly I'm now for whatever reason called a purist from the 20th century buying camera's for family use, fine street art and am told that modernism does disturb me.  Hmm ?

 

For MY needs the M10 does the job for still photography as well as my GoPro cameras for video.  And I'm afraid that for MY video needs nor the M10 with a video firmware update that probably never will come nor the M240 or the M11 will work.  I don't want to mount a 10k camera & lens on a suction cup on the leading edge of the wing of an airplane    For this job a 21st century toolkit like the GoPro is the best tool for the job.  

 

I have respect for everybody their needs but the primary goal of the Leica M is to be a very good still camera and that fits exactly my needs for that.    Call me whatever and disagree with me if MY needs ae not YOURS.  But I agree with IkarusJohn.  Choose the tool in function of the job.  If the specs of the tool change over time then so be it and look elsewhere for a better tool.

[jaapv]

I agree that the direction Leica has taken makes the M line less suitable for my wishes. I have drawn the consequence too. The Vario-Elmar 105-280 is in the buy and sell already and other stuff will follow. I concluded that the presnt quality of MTF is sufficient to replace my specific needs.

[jdlaing]

And easier to carry too.

[pgk]

If reportage, photojournalism and travel require video, then a stills optimised crf camera isn't the best choice.

 

I would go much further and suggest that the sort of camera required for such work would ideally be a video camera, from which stills of sufficiently high quality for print publication, OR whatever medium finally becomes the norm, can be produced. However much we might like the M, its not going to be viable in this category I'm afraid. The world changes. We should enjoy iconic designs for what they are best capable of, not wish modify them until it is absolutely clear that they are unfit for their compromised purpose.

[Stef63]

You know Jaap, the problem is that Leica made and makes those damn fine lenses. There is no other camera make that has the reputation of Leica on this area. And we, Leica folks, want to foster this heritage. The current M lenses, the Mandler M's and the R lenses are and were extraordinairy pieces of craftmanship. With the M and later the SL bodies we took the camera imperfections for granted because we could continue to use these old and new beauties.

 

But now with the M10 Leica returns with its newest body into a narrower field of use. My R lenses are for sale also because they were a good but never the right or best tool for the job on an M. Just my opinion of course but I came to this conclusion only very recently with the introduction of the M10. The Leica M10 is better on a lot of areas than the M240. They deleted functionality the M240 was not good at instead of choosing the course of improving these imperfections. The idea of an APO 180 R on the M or a Noctilux for video on an M is cool but Leica fanboys (I am conscidered as one, otherwise I would not post here I guess) will in the end have to admit regretting it is working only so so. The reality is there are far better balanced tools for the needs of a lot of current Leica M users in the area of video, photo safari work, thetered studio work etc. But to me the M stays the best tool for what it is intended to.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Nothing wrong with Leica branded lenses on Panasonic bodies, in fact pretty impressive I found. My select M glass will have to "make do" with the MM1 and M9; no real hardship.

[IkarusJohn]

... A bit surprised though, that an Australian has to ask "what outback"...

 

Worked out where Auckland is yet, Jaap?