M 11 will be around in less than 4 years. The speculations and facts.

[rosuna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Having played with an M10 + Visoflex EVF for a couple of days ...

The only thing I'm left wanting for is the EVF to be integrated into the RF system (and toggleable, of course) ala Fuji x100-style. 

 

 

 

Maybe someday that will be possible. The problem is any hybrid viewfinder would ruin the wonderful optical viewfinder of the M cameras. I don't like the viewfinder (without rangefinder) of the Fuji cameras. 

 

There is a problem with the M line. The customer base is small... and divided. The traditional M users (I am one of them) want a traditional M camera, simple, small, elegant, with viewfinder and rangefinder. But there are other users asking for video, better EVF, better ergonomics, tele lenses, macro lenses... 

 

Leica tried to satisfy those two demands with the M240, but I think it was a failure. Not good enough for one side, not good enough for the other side.

 

The M10 is a comeback to a more purist concept. It could evolve, but in that direction. More simple, more elegant, some minor tweaks here and there.

 

Now it is necessary a new M class of cameras aimed at a different public, based on a top class EVF, lighter, with different ergonomics and materials, etc. 

 

The SL is not such a camera, because the SL is build for SL lenses. The strong point of the M system is size. You can use M lenses on the SL, but there is a interconnection between body and lenses.The SL body has to be big, for the SL lenses (that are huge and heavy). The M body has to be small, in perfect balance with the M lenses. 

Edited February 20, 2017 by rosuna

[jaapv]

you are right , Leica will be soon a company like Dior and Chanel

 

the M lenses are fantastic we need a modern body for them

No we don't need a different concept body for them. If people want a different camera there are alternatives. Try an SL.

Leica doesn't need to throw cameras at the wall and see which one will stick.

Leica was owned by Hermes for a while. Look where that got them. The present course appears to be viable.

[wlaidlaw]

I think the only failure on the M240 was the absence of an upgrade path for the viewfinder. If only we were able to use the mechanically but not electronically compatible VF-4, there would be very little to complain about on the M240. I suspect I could be more interested in an improved M240-2 than an M11. 

Edited February 20, 2017 by wlaidlaw

[Paul J]

I want an M240-2 because I need USB and I want video. Also the better EVF, 5fps, and better processor and buffer.

 

I don't think it's going to happen though.

[cirke]

No we don't need a different concept body for them.

 

You maybe not but We (many of us) do

Edited February 20, 2017 by siangue

[jaapv]

No - the M system is just that - a complete system of both lenses and camera concept. Take out one or the other and the whole concept dies.

 

 

You maybe not but We (many of us) do

So? there are plenty of alternatives already.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I want an M240-2 because I need USB and I want video. Also the better EVF, 5fps, and better processor and buffer.

 

I don't think it's going to happen though.

We can always hope, if Leica does go the two M-type route. Who knows?

[Steve Spencer]

I want an M240-2 because I need USB and I want video. Also the better EVF, 5fps, and better processor and buffer.

 

I don't think it's going to happen though.

 

Paul, 

I have a couple serious questions. Do you need a rangefinder OVF? Do you need an M mount or would an adapter that allows you to shoot M lenses be fine? Do you need or want a smaller camera? I know why the M11 doesn't suit you, although some ports may still be added at some point if they add a grip or something similar, but I doubt they will add video. I am wondering why the SL doesn't suit you, and all I could think of was the lack of a rangefinder OVF, the lack of an M mount, or the size. Perhaps I am missing something. I do think Leica may make another camera in between the M10 and the SL. I think it will have good video, ports (at least through a grip), the better processor and at least as big of buffer as the M10. It will at least work with the Visoflex 02. I am not sure it will have an M mount or if it will only adapt M lenses, however, and I am not sure if it have a rangefinder OVF. I could see it going one of two ways.

I can see an interchangeable lens version of the Q. This camera would likely have an L mount and not an M mount (to allow for the development of autofocus lenses). It likely wouldn't have a rangefinder OVF, but if all that offends you about the SL is the size, then this camera might be very appealing. I have seen a lot of people clamouring for such a camera. The potential downside for Leica in such a camera is that it would basically require the development of a set of small L mount AF lenses. If they released it with 35, 50, & 90 cron lenses, and added a 21 Elmar or Elmarit, and a 28 cron or Elmarit within a year. I think it could work. I just don't know if sales are there to justify the development resources and there would be pressure to develop a lot more lenses. All this while developing the lenses for the SL too. That is a lot to take on.

Alternatively, I could see a split in the M line of cameras. I could see a new M model--let's call it an M-V.  It would be an M240 successor resulting in a split in the line of cameras. I would expect it to be a bit bigger than the M240. It would have the new rangefinder from the M10. It would have robust video--not up to the SL video but close. It would have all ports available with a grip at least. It would have the same processor as the M10 and at least as big of buffer. It would work with the Visoflex 02 or perhaps even a new model EVF, but it would be an add on. This camera too, would make at least some people happy, but it won't be nearly as small as a traditional M. I would expect it to be over 700g (unless they made the top plate a lot lighter) and I would expect it to be at least as thick as the M240 and perhaps even a bit taller. Such a camera would give you a rangefinder OVF, and an M mount, but it wouldn't be that small. I know I would want a smaller camera.

In fact, for me the M10 is close to exactly what I want, and I think it will sell more than either of these cameras--but maybe that is just me thinking other people want what I want. If Leica makes one of these cameras, however, I think it could be successful and would satisfy at least some, if not most, of the people that feel left out by the M10.

[Paulus]

Maybe someday that will be possible. The problem is any hybrid viewfinder would ruin the wonderful optical viewfinder of the M cameras. I don't like the viewfinder (without rangefinder) of the Fuji cameras. 

 

There is a problem with the M line. The customer base is small... and divided. The traditional M users (I am one of them) want a traditional M camera, simple, small, elegant, with viewfinder and rangefinder. But there are other users asking for video, better EVF, better ergonomics, tele lenses, macro lenses... 

 

Leica tried to satisfy those two demands with the M240, but I think it was a failure. Not good enough for one side, not good enough for the other side.

 

The M10 is a comeback to a more purist concept. It could evolve, but in that direction. More simple, more elegant, some minor tweaks here and there.

 

Now it is necessary a new M class of cameras aimed at a different public, based on a top class EVF, lighter, with different ergonomics and materials, etc. 

 

The SL is not such a camera, because the SL is build for SL lenses. The strong point of the M system is size. You can use M lenses on the SL, but there is a interconnection between body and lenses.The SL body has to be big, for the SL lenses (that are huge and heavy). The M body has to be small, in perfect balance with the M lenses. 

 

In fact, I think the M 240 was in perfect balance with the M lenses, of which some are grown out of the original proportions since the 90's .

 

I well remember the comment of Alfons Schollz , looking at the future in the 1990's in his Leica M 6 book, that the future might show a smaller Leica than the M6. He also used the word "Klotz" pointing at the new 1990 summilux 35mm asph.  

 

The lenses have grown. So did the body of the M 240. Now the body gets smaller M6 like, one would assume the future lenses would shrink as well. But do they? 

 

I notice that with the M 10 I get cramp in my right hand after shooting extensively. It will be over in a while, because the body adjusts hopefully , but with the M6 it was an argument to take an ever ready case.

[Paulus]

You maybe not but We (many of us) do

 

Be careful what you wish for...and don't complain about the battery afterwards...

 

And...Have you any idea with how many you are?

[Paul J]

Paul, 

I have a couple serious questions. Do you need a rangefinder OVF? Do you need an M mount or would an adapter that allows you to shoot M lenses be fine? Do you need or want a smaller camera? I know why the M11 doesn't suit you, although some ports may still be added at some point if they add a grip or something similar, but I doubt they will add video. I am wondering why the SL doesn't suit you, and all I could think of was the lack of a rangefinder OVF, the lack of an M mount, or the size. Perhaps I am missing something. I do think Leica may make another camera in between the M10 and the SL. I think it will have good video, ports (at least through a grip), the better processor and at least as big of buffer as the M10. It will at least work with the Visoflex 02. I am not sure it will have an M mount or if it will only adapt M lenses, however, and I am not sure if it have a rangefinder OVF. I could see it going one of two ways.

I can see an interchangeable lens version of the Q. This camera would likely have an L mount and not an M mount (to allow for the development of autofocus lenses). It likely wouldn't have a rangefinder OVF, but if all that offends you about the SL is the size, then this camera might be very appealing. I have seen a lot of people clamouring for such a camera. The potential downside for Leica in such a camera is that it would basically require the development of a set of small L mount AF lenses. If they released it with 35, 50, & 90 cron lenses, and added a 21 Elmar or Elmarit, and a 28 cron or Elmarit within a year. I think it could work. I just don't know if sales are there to justify the development resources and there would be pressure to develop a lot more lenses. All this while developing the lenses for the SL too. That is a lot to take on.

Alternatively, I could see a split in the M line of cameras. I could see a new M model--let's call it an M-V.  It would be an M240 successor resulting in a split in the line of cameras. I would expect it to be a bit bigger than the M240. It would have the new rangefinder from the M10. It would have robust video--not up to the SL video but close. It would have all ports available with a grip at least. It would have the same processor as the M10 and at least as big of buffer. It would work with the Visoflex 02 or perhaps even a new model EVF, but it would be an add on. This camera too, would make at least some people happy, but it won't be nearly as small as a traditional M. I would expect it to be over 700g (unless they made the top plate a lot lighter) and I would expect it to be at least as thick as the M240 and perhaps even a bit taller. Such a camera would give you a rangefinder OVF, and an M mount, but it wouldn't be that small. I know I would want a smaller camera.

In fact, for me the M10 is close to exactly what I want, and I think it will sell more than either of these cameras--but maybe that is just me thinking other people want what I want. If Leica makes one of these cameras, however, I think it could be successful and would satisfy at least some, if not most, of the people that feel left out by the M10.

 

Hi Steve,

 

Rangefinder OVF is actually where I have nicely settled. OVF is essential for me at this stage, a clip on EVF is certainly very useful. Rangefinder focussing is certainly my preferred method.

 

M Mount is essential. My "holy trinity" is 35mm Summilux, 50 Noctilux, 75mm Summilux, but I'll add 21mm Summilux to that too. That is my main rationale for wanting the M, it's the lenses and the M body works best with them.

 

I'm not interested in the SL at all. I don't like the EVF and I don't want to shoot with stopped down M Lenses. In a dark studio it's far less than ideal. I would use a Sony A7r2, a7r3 or a9 before I bought the SL. I don't feel much for the design  on whole.

 

An adapted body is something I am considering more. As it stands, with no USB option, I'm going to need to reluctantly migrate to a Sony A7r type body. I'm interested to see the A7r3 and also the A9. And also how the lenses work on the Fuji GFX, perhaps.

 

BUT...I would much prefer an M body - that is home for me. I just want the basic functions on a dial (aperture, shutter and now iso too is great) and a shutter button, Manual M lenses. Other than the fact there is no USB, I would consider the M10 the best M yet. I also want the 5fps, better OVF, better EVF, better processor and buffer and better high ISO would be useful too. That new sensor definitely looks more crisp and with better colour.

 

I'm not sure how I feel about an all EVF M and/or interchangable lens Q. I would have to try it but I am at this point skeptical. It's just not the sort of camera I like using. I'm not even that interested in Auto Focus M lenses. I like manual focus. Automation homogenises photography, IMO. I want my camera to be a camera not an electrical appliance. The designs I LOVE are Leica M, hasselblad V, Linhof Technika, Deardorff. They are all classic and archetypal designs that are rooted in photographic heritage. Technology and advancements is useful but it has to walk a line for me. I love with the M I can just swap to a film body, and with the Hasselblad, a digital back. The fact the CFV back and digital M looks and *feels* like the film equivalent is incredible to me too. it all has an effect on me. It's the experience and the bringing together past and future, old lenses, new lenses, EVF as well etc etc etc.

 

With Leica's current trajectory, a split in M line could happen and that is what makes sense but it is holding out for something I want but is it likely it will happen? I'm not sure about that anymore, Im feeling rather abandoned at the moment. If they just made an optional grip with USB for the M10 I would snap it up and it seems absolutely mad they would leave this out and cut off a certain market. Basically, if a pro is considering a new camera, one of the first things they'll check for is tether ability and what software. If it's not there it's really not an option. Why on earth give this up??? It's very frustrating!

 

For me, ideally, I would like to see an M10 with a usb and sca flash port on a grip, like it was. I would love 40-50MP but that is perhaps a bit too much to ask for at this stage. I would really like video and don't need it to be Hollywood Quality.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Paul J

[cirke]

Be careful what you wish for...and don't complain about the battery afterwards...

 

And...Have you any idea with how many you are?

 

We could easily be over 50%, if Leica release a SL-like camera into a M body you think it will not sell very well ?

[Paul J]

Actually thinking of Multifunction grips and also the lower battery performance of the M10 - It would be pretty amazing if Leica could create a deep grip (something like the new one) which is actually one big battery that can be charged by USB and is also a USB port for tethering with.

[IkarusJohn]

And the wagons turn (again) - I'm waiting for "M means messucher" all over again.

 

We all have wishlists and shibboleths. Accommodating them all would result in a very poor compromise - Leica clearly understands that. In 2009, who here would predict video, monochrome and LCD-less variants of the M camera (I can see Jaap puffing out his cheeks in outrage). But, when the M9 was released, perhaps a CMOS version, with the option of live view and an ISO dial wasn't too much of a stretch?

 

Offering variants of the M camera seems to be a success for Leica. The World did not stop turning when the M60 and M-D were released, and I doubt an electronic viewfinder version will spell the end of the optical rangefinder. For the moment, I suspect Leica's reticence relates purely to the qualityof EVF technology. The SL EVF simply won't fit into the M10 body, and the smaller versions are acceptable only as a clip on. That is a compromise, sure; but not one that impacts on the M camera itself.

 

The optical viewfinder, crf based camera will always be available for the "purists". Similarly, Leica will offer variations on that theme - it's one thing to limit the system to manual focus lenses, quite another to hobble future variants by saying there can never be a change to the optical viewfinder. The World is not going to come to an end if Leica can make this work, and similarly it does not mean the end of the optical viewfinder many of us love.

Edited February 20, 2017 by IkarusJohn

[jaapv]

No puffing of outrage. For me each successive M purchase has been about expanding the possibilities of the camera. M3 - M4 (added famelines)- M6 (TTL exposure measuring) M8 (gone digital) - M9 (full frame) m240 - (EVF and expanded lens range plus video). I don't see myself buying a camera that is a step backwards in that progression.

Having said that I would consider an improved M240 or maybe an EVF-only M mount camera as a separate non-M line. For the time being the M240 will have to serve.

BTW, I don't buy the "SL EVF proves a good one is too large" argument. The Panasonic GX8 EVF is amazingly good and small enough to fit an RF-style body - and Leica has access to Panasonic technology.

[IkarusJohn]

No - the M system is just that - a complete system of both lenses and camera concept. Take out one or the other and the whole concept dies...

Yet every time an innovation is suggested, this is your response - the M will die, M means messucher, there are other systems. Sure, you like video, now it's gone. Innovation keeps the system alive, as does questioning and redefining the core of the system. I agree entirely that opening the door to some possibilities can have unintended consequences - in some ways, switching to CMOS had that effect, with video and EVF on the M, and the SL ending up miles away from the M in size and functionality.

 

But suggesting every innovation spells the end of the M sysem has clearly been shown to be wrong.

[Herr Barnack]

Perhaps Leica's flagship dealers should create an M camera subscription service.  We sign up and the dealer debits our bank account $200 USD every month.  Every 30 to 36 months, the dealer sends its subscribers the latest, greatest M camera. 

 

It seems that such an arrangement would be a win-win for all who participate; the dealer has a constant cash flow and the subscriber gets Leica's newest M camera with minimal financial bloodletting when it hits the market. 

 

The only probable down side is that the gray market for used kidneys would take a hit.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Carlos Danger

[jaapv]

Yet every time an innovation is suggested, this is your response - the M will die, M means messucher, there are other systems. Sure, you like video, now it's gone. Innovation keeps the system alive, as does questioning and redefining the core of the system. I agree entirely that opening the door to some possibilities can have unintended consequences - in some ways, switching to CMOS had that effect, with video and EVF on the M, and the SL ending up miles away from the M in size and functionality.

 

But suggesting every innovation spells the end of the M sysem has clearly been shown to be wrong.

Well, obviously innovation does not keep the system alive, as Leica has removed some innovations from the M10 in favor of retro enhancement. And it appears to be a huge succes.

The only thing that is jealously guarded by Leica is the form factor and the rangefinder. I think the essence, in their concept, lies therein. And of course the baseplate

[IkarusJohn]

What? The M10 is not innovative? What rock are you under?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Leicauser7]

What I would like to see on the M11, really only 1 must have, namely an EVF as good as that on the SL. This would provide the ability to use the camera without misssokg shots due to focus failure when absolutely necessary. Nice to have features beyond that would be in camera motion stabilization coupled with higher MP's, provided the latter in no way compromises ISO/IQ of the M10, which is outstanding.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Leicauser7