M10? - Sorry, no!

[BerndReini]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own four M cameras, and I love Leica rangefinders. Is it such a bad thing to have a camera that can use M lenses for a quick b-roll shot or interview while traveling. Do I really have to spend extra money on an SL or a Sony, and worse carry around another camera when I'm spending 6.5k on a new still camera that could have easily integrated this? This withholding of a simple additional feature in the new M camera is kind of a bummer as far as I'm concerned, and I wonder whether it will be included in an M10P. The question really shouldn't be " why would you want video in the new M." the question should be "why not?"

[digitalfx]

when I'm spending 6.5k on a new still camera that could have easily integrated this? 

 

 

This is assuming it could be "easily integrated"...how are you so sure that this is indeed true?

What if in order to integrate it, the body would have to be the same size as the M240?

 

I agree if Leica could integrate video into the exact same body easily...it should be included ( really like the idea suggested in another thread of adding it in the menu). If thats not the case then id rather have the current M10 sans video.

The M240 is still an option after all.

[Vec]

This is assuming it could be "easily integrated"...how are you so sure that this is indeed true?

What if in order to integrate it, the body would have to be the same size as the M240?

 

See my post #100.

 

No technical reasons in the way of integrating video other than perhaps where to put a microphone and how to weatherproof it. Laid out in easy to follow format.

 

No increase of size would be needed. Otherwise, live view would not work.

[jaapv]

I own four M cameras, and I love Leica rangefinders. Is it such a bad thing to have a camera that can use M lenses for a quick b-roll shot or interview while traveling. Do I really have to spend extra money on an SL or a Sony, and worse carry around another camera when I'm spending 6.5k on a new still camera that could have easily integrated this? This withholding of a simple additional feature in the new M camera is kind of a bummer as far as I'm concerned, and I wonder whether it will be included in an M10P. The question really shouldn't be " why would you want video in the new M." the question should be "why not?"

The answer to that one is: Because of the slimming down oF the body the main board electronics have been miniaturised and built in to such an extent that the heat generated by the processor and sensor cannot be dissipated. The whole spiel about the users don't want it is a it of marketing spin.

[jaapv]

See my post #100.

 

No technical reasons in the way of integrating video other than perhaps where to put a microphone and how to weatherproof it. Laid out in easy to follow format.

 

No increase of size would be needed. Otherwise, live view would not work.

Live View requires far less processing and thus produces less heat than Video.

[digitalfx]

See my post #100.

 

No technical reasons in the way of integrating video other than perhaps where to put a microphone and how to weatherproof it. Laid out in easy to follow format.

 

No increase of size would be needed. Otherwise, live view would not work.

 

 

I've read your posts...but don't buy it.

The camera doesn't have a usb port...so how do you figure audio inputs, mic, hdmi or any video out can be added...not to mention the additional heat generated.

 

if it was as simple as everyone assumes we would have video.

[Vec]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

USB isn't needed. Read my post -- we're not aiming to overtake RED here, just shoot video. We don't need HDMI. Balanced mic inputs. Whatever. You need some audio input, which Leica has already showed it can do with the M240 mic hotshoe thing. This isn't making the M10 into a video recording monster -- it's the possibility of recording video at all that I'm arguing.

 

It is clearly evident that it's not a sensor limitation due to the fact live view does not cause the camera to burst into flames. The sensor reading would happen the same recording video as it does for EVF display. It's very comprable in tems of resolution -- in fact 1080p is fewer pixels to deal with than what the Visoflex 020 displays!

 

The only possible limitation is the Maestro II processor... of course, H.264 encoding in hardware is cheap. The Sony actioncam with no heatsinking or even airflow (since it's in a double-sealed waterproof case). It can do it with less than 2.2W for 1080p -- including running the sensor, image stabilization, GPS, compression, SD writing, bluetooth all at once. The Maestro II processor, the same one as the SL, does it for 4K while outputting 4:2:2 10-bit to HDMI and recording H.264 to the card. Video compression is a solved problem in hardware.

 

I don't even care about video for the M10. I have one and I don't need video. I'm just looking to overturn the arguments about "heat."

 

Leica, from a marketing perspective, is pushing video work to the SL. It's their right to do so. To pretend that it is purely a technical reason is baloney.

[digitalfx]

 

Leica, from a marketing perspective, is pushing video work to the SL. It's their right to do so. To pretend that it is purely a technical reason is baloney.

 

I disagree. Adding video to the M wouldn't hurt the SL. First, it will never be as good as the SL, and the SL video is far from perfect.

[Vec]

I'm not saying that M10 video would be better or worse than the M240. I agree that video from the M240 as it stands is crap. I tried on the 240 and it's... interesting. Not good... just interesting. It worked for some people -- not me -- so there is that.

 

But to argue that it's a peculiar limitation of the M10 compared to the M240 is nonsense. The M240 has the same limitations as well has having 3-4 year older tech in terms of the processor.

[drdannn]

This thread is titled, "M 10? Sorry, no!" So I thought I was going to read various reasons why people were saying "no" to the m10. Instead this entire thread was talk of the video -- and the participants in this thread were not voicing pertinent and various objections to the m10. This thread should have been titled, "Do you miss the video in the m10?". 

 

So I will chime in on the video wagon: I didn't care whether it was there or not on the 240. I am not a serious video person and my requirements for quality video are low. Therefore a short video on the 240 was just a bit of distraction and fun, then back to stills. I played with the m10 for about an hour today in a Leica store. Other than a fantastic ISO range, I have not decided to make the move on it yet. My 240 with a 50 lux does fine at 3200iso at night.

[Guest]

I own four M cameras, and I love Leica rangefinders. Is it such a bad thing to have a camera that can use M lenses for a quick b-roll shot or interview while traveling. Do I really have to spend extra money on an SL or a Sony, and worse carry around another camera when I'm spending 6.5k on a new still camera that could have easily integrated this? This withholding of a simple additional feature in the new M camera is kind of a bummer as far as I'm concerned, and I wonder whether it will be included in an M10P. The question really shouldn't be " why would you want video in the new M." the question should be "why not?"

 

I am buying the M10, for many reasons. One of those is that it does not have video, for me that is a refreshing change and a good move. When I look at a M, the last thing I think of is that would be great at video! I am not great at video either, it bores me trying to make a half decent video.

[adan]

I'm not saying that M10 video would be better or worse than the M240. I agree that video from the M240 as it stands is crap. I tried on the 240 and it's... interesting. Not good... just interesting. It worked for some people -- not me -- so there is that.

 

Now, Vec. You k-n-o-o-w you are just setting up the "My M10 cost $7000 and it only shoots crap video!???" threads.

[jaapv]

I disagree. Adding video to the M wouldn't hurt the SL. First, it will never be as good as the SL, and the SL video is far from perfect.

agree; it would be silly marketing, nobody in his right mind would buy an SL for occasional video. It would only drive M owners to hang on to their 240 or away from Leica.

[jaapv]

I disagree. Adding video to the M wouldn't hurt the SL. First, it will never be as good as the SL, and the SL video is far from perfect.

agree; it would be silly marketing, nobody in his right mind would buy an SL for occasional video. It would only drive M owners to hang on to their 240 or away from Leica.

[Steve Ash]

Thats not what I meant. What I mean is that to claim there are thinner cameras with video doesn't mean anything.

 

Just because Sony has produced a thinner camera has nothing to do with the M design...its apples and oranges. How do any of us know whats possible to squeeze into this body? I cant imagine there is any free space inside the M10 its very dense. All this speculation is irrelevant...only Leica knows the answer.

 

 

But just because Sony can do it, doesn't mean Leica can...besides do we want a Sony or a Leica? Do we want Leica to make compromises in the body materials, etc.?

 

And just to be clear, Im not claiming they can or cant do it...just saying because Sony can do it with the A7 is irrelevant. Sony's model is completely different...and so is their R&D budget.

I miss the whole rangefinder in the Sony design. How can they miss it while Leica can at almost the same size? Where is the Sony mega R&D budget going to? Confused. [emoji6]

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk Pro

[Mr.Q]

USB isn't needed. Read my post -- we're not aiming to overtake RED here, just shoot video. We don't need HDMI. Balanced mic inputs. Whatever. You need some audio input, which Leica has already showed it can do with the M240 mic hotshoe thing. This isn't making the M10 into a video recording monster -- it's the possibility of recording video at all that I'm arguing.

 

It is clearly evident that it's not a sensor limitation due to the fact live view does not cause the camera to burst into flames. The sensor reading would happen the same recording video as it does for EVF display. It's very comprable in tems of resolution -- in fact 1080p is fewer pixels to deal with than what the Visoflex 020 displays!

 

The only possible limitation is the Maestro II processor... of course, H.264 encoding in hardware is cheap. The Sony actioncam with no heatsinking or even airflow (since it's in a double-sealed waterproof case). It can do it with less than 2.2W for 1080p -- including running the sensor, image stabilization, GPS, compression, SD writing, bluetooth all at once. The Maestro II processor, the same one as the SL, does it for 4K while outputting 4:2:2 10-bit to HDMI and recording H.264 to the card. Video compression is a solved problem in hardware.

 

I don't even care about video for the M10. I have one and I don't need video. I'm just looking to overturn the arguments about "heat."

 

Leica, from a marketing perspective, is pushing video work to the SL. It's their right to do so. To pretend that it is purely a technical reason is baloney.

I'm not sure you know what you're talking about. 4K and 1080p video involves much more processing than Live View.

[Dirk Mandeville]

People are short-sighted by nature and think in terms of what can this or that camera do right now. Leica has to think longer term. They are developing platforms that will progress over time. They are surely already planning the upgrades for the M11 and SL II. And they have decided to draw a line in the sand with video. Video will always be crippled on the M system, so they have decided to return that system to the essentials of photography, to basically try to make the best rangefinder camera for stills photography that they can make. Nothing more and nothing less. And they will focus their design and development on that goal. I applaud that decision and I expect the majority of their customers are fine with it.

 

Truly, Leica is damned if they do and damned if they don't. The people complaining in this thread that they don't provide video on the M are all saying: "I don't mind if it's crippled; I just want the option to shoot some short video clips. Why can't they just give me that?" But that's just not how it works in the real world. If they include it, then all the reviewers are going to discuss is how poorly implemented the video is. There will be tons of forum threads just like this complaining about the limitations. Why can't Leica give us longer shooting times, 4K, HDMI ports, etc. ad nauseum. The SL can do it, why not the M? There's not really any technical limitations. It's a $7000 camera, for crying out loud. Why can't we have better video? All the same arguments that are being made now for including crippled video will be made for improving video functionality. It's inevitable.

 

All of this takes the Leica design and development team away from focusing on their vision of the M camera system: to make the best instrument for stills photography that they can create. This is why they have drawn a line in the sand and won't give you crippled video capability on an M. It is designed to do one thing exceedingly well. Nothing superfluous to that objective. If you want a hybrid camera that shoots video too, then they made the SL just for you. And the video functions on the SL will be developed and refined over time. It makes perfect sense from a product development standpoint. Those of us that solely shoot still photography are thrilled that time, efforts and resources aren't being wasted designing and implementing a feature we will never use. And if I absolutely must shoot a video clip? I'll pull out my iPhone and shoot one.

[Steve Spencer]

USB isn't needed. Read my post -- we're not aiming to overtake RED here, just shoot video. We don't need HDMI. Balanced mic inputs. Whatever. You need some audio input, which Leica has already showed it can do with the M240 mic hotshoe thing. This isn't making the M10 into a video recording monster -- it's the possibility of recording video at all that I'm arguing.

 

It is clearly evident that it's not a sensor limitation due to the fact live view does not cause the camera to burst into flames. The sensor reading would happen the same recording video as it does for EVF display. It's very comprable in tems of resolution -- in fact 1080p is fewer pixels to deal with than what the Visoflex 020 displays!

 

The only possible limitation is the Maestro II processor... of course, H.264 encoding in hardware is cheap. The Sony actioncam with no heatsinking or even airflow (since it's in a double-sealed waterproof case). It can do it with less than 2.2W for 1080p -- including running the sensor, image stabilization, GPS, compression, SD writing, bluetooth all at once. The Maestro II processor, the same one as the SL, does it for 4K while outputting 4:2:2 10-bit to HDMI and recording H.264 to the card. Video compression is a solved problem in hardware.

 

I don't even care about video for the M10. I have one and I don't need video. I'm just looking to overturn the arguments about "heat."

 

Leica, from a marketing perspective, is pushing video work to the SL. It's their right to do so. To pretend that it is purely a technical reason is baloney.

 

My position on this is simple. I don't see the point of having video in my camera unless it is better than the video in my iPhone which is always in my pocket. For the short 20 second clip or even a short interview it has to be better than a cell phone, and that mean more than simply adding a mic or the ability to add a mic in the hot shoe. It means have a full set of ports, so that I can monitor the audio with headphones and use an external recorder if I want. It also means having the ability to use lenses that are designed for video (the M lenses are really awful for video--I would want something at least as capable as the Zeiss Loxia lenses). We are not talking about a minor change here if we want video that is better than a cell phone, we are talking major change to the camera and ultimately to the line up of lenses. So, to me if you are going to make case for video you have to make a case for above cell phone quality of video.

[Peter H]

Dirk, this is more or less precisely the conversation we had when the SL was announced.

 

I'm sure you're right that most customers are quite happy to see the divergence between the M and the SL. But not everyone is and I believe this thread was supposed to be an opportunity for the disappointed minority to express their views.

 

Telling them how wrong or short-sighted they are probably won't make them feel better about the fact that Leica's most up to date cameras no can longer offer them quite what they want.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Paul J]

OK, trying hard not to turn this into another controversial thread closure.

 

I need USB for hardware tether. Without it I can't use the M.

 

Leica have to put it back, it seems crazy to me they would remove it when when it has existed and served the purpose for a decade of use and when so many people require this functionality - although they are not represented on this forum in great numbers.