So how long before video capture functionality arrives?

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dirk, I really wasn't arguing to cram a lot of stuff into an M240 successor. I was arguing to add ports--just three (mic in, headphones for monitor, and a mini HDMI). I was also arguing for very modest in camera recording. Just HD with a range of fps options and one log to aid processing. I see that as an incremental upgrade from what the M240 had. The M240, however, was crippled, IMO, by not having ports to allow decent audio, and not having options to allow smooth video. The HDMI, would let the camera directly output 4K video right off the sensor, which would require very little overhead from the camera. You would be letting the recorder do all the heavy lifting, so this external video capability really would not require much from the camera. This M240 upgrade would still have considerably less in camera capability than the SL, which can do in camera recording of 4K at quite decent quality, and I see the sort of video capability I am advocating as very much an incremental upgrade over the M240. Whether Leica should produce this camera to me is totally about the market. If enough people would buy it to make it profitable, then they should do it, but if the market is too small then it is hard to fight that.

 

The problem is that no matter what video Leica provides in the M, it will inevitably be compared against the class leaders in video capture (Panasonic and Sony) and be disparaged as "behind the curve." Those areas are where Panasonic and Sony excel, have a tremendous amount of history, and are almost impossible to beat at the price they can charge. I can hear it now ... 

 

Leica includes 1080p video capture in the M10-V for the convenience of users who requested it.

"eh, only 1080p? My Panasonic costs a quarter of that and does full 4K with S-Log out ..." 

 

Why frickin' bother? The SL does very nice 4K video capture and even it gets slammed on a regular basis. 

 

Video is just a passing fad anyway. We all know that Real Photography requires prints and until we have MotionPaper™ available, video capture is just a shill. 

Edited February 23, 2017 by ramarren

[Steve Spencer]

The problem is that no matter what video Leica provides in the M, it will inevitably be compared against the class leaders in video capture (Panasonic and Sony) and be disparaged as "behind the curve." Those areas are where Panasonic and Sony excel, have a tremendous amount of history, and are almost impossible to beat at the price they can charge. I can hear it now ... 

 

Leica includes 1080p video capture in the M10-V for the convenience of users who requested it.

"eh, only 1080p? My Panasonic costs a quarter of that and does full 4K with S-Log out ..." 

 

Why frickin' bother? The SL does very nice 4K video capture and even it gets slammed on a regular basis. 

 

Video is just a passing fad anyway. We all know that Real Photography requires prints and until we have MotionPaper™ available, video capture is just a shill. 

 

I do see your point, but I think you can actually seriously reply to that critic and say, "Just get a video recorder, and you can do everything with the M10-V that you can do with your Panny and get shallower depth of field if you want it." It wouldn't be that the Panny is categorically better. It would be better in some ways if you do in camera capture, but it would also be not as good in some ways if you do capture with a video recorder. That is a very different situation than what you could we had with the M240. The M240 just sucked compared to the competition. It is quite a different matter if there are tradeoffs with each camera having its strengths and weaknesses.

[Advertisement]

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

[Dirk Mandeville]

The M240 just sucked compared to the competition.

Well, the good news is: the M10 doesn't suck compared to its competition.

[Lax Jought]

Well, the good news is: the M10 doesn't suck compared to its competition.

 

No, it still sucks.  It's manual focus only.  What kind of 'modern' camera offers absolutely no autofocus for this much money, body only?   

 

 

/s.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Lax Jought

[IkarusJohn]

I remember buying a Sony Handicam years ago.  It was small, convenient, lots of seriously rubbish batteries, Sony's own "memory stick"; terrible menus and buttons all over the place, but the basics reasonably to hand and, after a while, reasonably predictable and intuitive.

 

It took stills.  Stills?  What for?  No aperture control; no shutter control; no reliable way of really knowing what you were framing; and quite random autofocus.  Never used it for taking stills.  The video output (for the time) was quite acceptable, and it was compact and convenient (for the time).

 

M camera, excellent lenses, optical view finder, really one of the best stills cameras money can buy.  Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should.  Leica started the 35mm camera, it released the M3 in 1954; 63 years later, it has taken the M system (lenses and cameras) to a point where it is almost as good as it ever will be - sure, there will be processor and sensor improvements, but the coupled range finder that has been at the core of the M system is relatively unchanged since the M3 - incremental improvement, but the fundamental concept is the same.  An M3 user, plucked from obscurity somewhere could be handed an M10, they would look at it and say - why have you moved the iSO dial to the top, and what is the screen for, but once they'd realised you need to turn the camera on, they would know exactly how to take a picture.

 

Video on an M?  About as useful as stills on a handicam - when you make the core functionality of your camera as good as it can possibly be, while stripping away everything that isn't absolutely necessary, why add half-baked functionality that has nothing to do with taking stills?  You might as well add a 2G cell-phone to it, and put a phone dial on the back where the ISO dial would go.  I know we've speculated about an M10-V or M10e, but I don't think it will happen for a minute.

 

Cheers

John

Edited February 23, 2017 by IkarusJohn

[tsleica]

They will and should..put video in there..and sooner..or later..they will..

If you cant see the wisdom in that..well..

Some views are..kinda like..

If man was meant to fly..he would have wings...

I don't like those newfangled things..automobiles that is.. my horse nellie..does me..jus..fine..

The internet...I don't believe in it..

The moon landing..didn't happen..

OK..

We believe what we want to..

The rest is fact..whether want it admit it..or not..

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

They will and should..put video in there..and sooner..or later..they will..

If you cant see the wisdom in that..well..

Some views are..kinda like..

If man was meant to fly..he would have wings...

I don't like those newfangled things..automobiles that is.. my horse nellie..does me..jus..fine..

The internet...I don't believe in it..

The moon landing..didn't happen..

OK..

We believe what we want to..

The rest is fact..whether want it admit it..or not..

 

I'm not sure where to start in responding to this.

 

I know, let's ignore the zero-sum analysis (you don't like video, therefore you don't think the moon landing happened), and disregard the straw man (men with wings), then overlook the complete lack of any respect to the reasoned views of others (if you can't see the wisdom ...), and focus on the rational and logical argument designed to further the discussion ...

 

Ah, there seems to be something missing.  tsleica, I see you're relatively new here.  We all have opinions, and we share them; we state preferences by saying things like "I don't want ..." or "it's not for me" or "I don't like this" etc.  I'm not sure what other forum you've come from (dpreview?  GetDPI? or some other forum where flaming is the norm), but here the sort of post you just made is not informative, is not entertaining and is most likely to get you ignored, if not slapped about a bit.

 

Conversely, if you wish to engage in discussion where you ask for help, help others, share news or entertain, you'll get a warm reception with far more respect that your post would suggest you deserve.

 

Cheers

John

Edited February 23, 2017 by IkarusJohn

[Dirk Mandeville]

They will and should..put video in there..and sooner..or later..they will..

Umm, they already did. It was called the M240. The majority of their actual customers didn't care for it and didn't use it. So they took it out and made the camera their customers were asking for. I would be quite surprised if they ever added video back to the M line, except maybe in some niche special edition that will sell very few units. They tend to understand their market and learn from their mistakes.

 

And if you think still photography is to video as horses were to the automobile, chances are pretty good that you were never in their target market to begin with. By the way, as John noted above, your post is needlessly condescending and contains no logical support for the opinions you express. Just a bunch of hyperbole, which makes it hard to take your comments seriously.

[Cliff S]

I remember buying a Sony Handicam years ago. It was small, convenient, lots of seriously rubbish batteries, Sony's own "memory stick"; terrible menus and buttons all over the place, but the basics reasonably to hand and, after a while, reasonably predictable and intuitive.

 

It took stills. Stills? What for? No aperture control; no shutter control; no reliable way of really knowing what you were framing; and quite random autofocus. Never used it for taking stills. The video output (for the time) was quite acceptable, and it was compact and convenient (for the time).

 

M camera, excellent lenses, optical view finder, really one of the best stills cameras money can buy. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should. Leica started the 35mm camera, it released the M3 in 1954; 63 years later, it has taken the M system (lenses and cameras) to a point where it is almost as good as it ever will be - sure, there will be processor and sensor improvements, but the coupled range finder that has been at the core of the M system is relatively unchanged since the M3 - incremental improvement, but the fundamental concept is the same. An M3 user, plucked from obscurity somewhere could be handed an M10, they would look at it and say - why have you moved the iSO dial to the top, and what is the screen for, but once they'd realised you need to turn the camera on, they would know exactly how to take a picture.

 

Video on an M? About as useful as stills on a handicam - when you make the core functionality of your camera as good as it can possibly be, while stripping away everything that isn't absolutely necessary, why add half-baked functionality that has nothing to do with taking stills? You might as well add a 2G cell-phone to it, and put a phone dial on the back where the ISO dial would go. I know we've speculated about an M10-V or M10e, but I don't think it will happen for a minute.

 

Cheers

John

Very well said. While admittedly I was in the 'for video' camp, having the M10 for a few reminded me that I never used video on the M240. It was a pain to use. Having no video makes me focus on why I got the M10. Not as a do everything workhorse but as a sophisticated tool to have me concentrate on making the best stills I can. Aside from a Q and SL, I would use my iPhone 7 which takes great videos AND lets me zoom in. For art, I want the best and simplest M there is. And I have it.

 

I can pick up the M10 after not using it for a month and I remember right where I left off. The SL? Not son much. Need 5 minutes to remember what I programmed the buttons for and how I set focus aids. The M10 doesn't inspire me to do video and doesn't make me feel I wish it were available.

[Lax Jought]

I never used video on the M240. It was a pain to use.

It is indeed a pain to use. It's not 'video' that is a pain to use, it was Leica's execution of it.

 

It is the equivalent of when I purchased an A7 - the IQ was excellent but it was just a pain to use, and while I was able to produce some good work with it, I just didn't find it an enjoyable experience when compared with my M which was broken at the time.

Edited February 24, 2017 by Lax Jought

[lct]

Pain for some, joy for others. It's just a bit sad that Leica users cannot find a modern RF at the level of much cheaper mirrorless cameras. Don't recall how many years it took to get a mere TTL meter in the M6. We will have video and a responsive EVF before the next century hopefully...

[jaapv]

Still, I have been analyzing my sense of disappointment with the M 10. It is not the camera, which clearly is a superior product which surely will find many enthusiastic buyers.

It is the direction in which Leica is steering the M system. I was hoping for a further development for it to be the best tool to take into the Kalahari, on an Amazon expedition, to the top of the Himalayas or into a war zone. Instead they decided to build the best retro camera in the world.

[Cliff S]

Still, I have been analyzing my sense of disappointment with the M 10. It is not the camera, which clearly is a superior product which surely will find many enthusiastic buyers.

It is the direction in which Leica is steering the M system. I was hoping for a further development for it to be the best tool to take into the Kalahari, on an Amazon expedition, to the top of the Himalayas or into a war zone. Instead they decided to build the best retro camera in the world.

Interesting but I don't get it. What would you need for the Amazon that is missing on the M10? Video?

[jaapv]

Amongst other things. You would not want to carry a suitcase full of camera gear.

[Cliff S]

But how has this changed since the first Leica M. Always need a bag full of lenses.

[jdlaing]

You only need a bag full of lenses because you want a bag full of lenses.

 

You only need one or two.

[anickpick]

I think Jaap is right: There are cheaper and better options out there nowadays if you want a camera that does it all in all circumstances.

 

The M does not have the same relevance to photography as it used to have. Times change. 

 

For me however, the M10 is exactly what I want. No other camera out there motivates me as much to take it with me on a regular basis:

A camera to take on a short walk in the city once or twice a week if time allows,a camera for traveling, for a very occasional assignment, 

a camera that brings me to perceive my surroundings more consciously.

 

I am not really interested in video. To me, the iPhone is good enough.

[jaapv]

But how has this changed since the first Leica M. Always need a bag full of lenses.

But you needed an R to go with it. And a Leicina. That was changed with the M240, just one body and a few lenses is enough.

Leica could have chosen to make the camera more robust, add a really good EVF, add a flash interface, improve the video, weatherseal the Summarit lens series (the present "upgrade" was neither here nor there), introduce a compact EVF-only Apo-Telyt 200 M, etc. and turn the M system into something that any correspondent or travel photographer would aspire to.

The M 10 is aimed at  light street and family use by the discerning affectionado, a bit of fine art and wedding maybe, with  a strong retro flavour.

[david strachan]

As Jaap says..

 

Also, flash and macro have always been Leica's weak point.

For me that's important.

 

Also not very good zooms, albeit something at huge prices.

 

 

My M-P (with IIIc, M8's and M6) will be the end of "new" Leica's for me.  Just not flexible enough.  But I'll still love using them for specific situations.

 

all best...

Edited February 25, 2017 by david strachan

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Lax Jought]

Pain for some, joy for others. It's just a bit sad that Leica users cannot find a modern RF at the level of much cheaper mirrorless cameras. Don't recall how many years it took to get a mere TTL meter in the M6. We will have video and a responsive EVF before the next century hopefully...

 

 

You gotta give credit to Leica for trying to modernise the M with the M240, it was a clear attempt to catch up with today's DSLR functionality. 

 

But Leica fans have always been a weird lot.  Leica tested the waters when they released a very expensive camera that took only B&W photos, and it was a reasonable success.  I still remember how weird the concept was back then but it was a bold move and it worked. 

 

Then they tried the M262 which tested the customer response to an M240 but without the video (this is the promotional blurb: "...it is the Leica M (Type 262) that embodies the M-Philosophy in its purest form: with a focus on the functions essential for photography..."), and they sold a reasonable of units of those too. 

 

The other big thing they tried was the M-D with no screen whatsoever.  Correct me if I'm wrong but they managed to sell a few of those too.  I think after that, Leica figured they missed their demographic with the future-reaching M240 and went back to basics with the M10.  

 

The problem is Leica's price point - if their cameras were a cheaper, their demographic would expand into the kinds of photographers who would help push for more innovation.  But the current price point means only the very loyal and financially disposable have access to it.

Edited February 25, 2017 by Lax Jought