M10? - Sorry, no!

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And then there is the other camp who want to keep the M in the fifties and still partially or fully resent the fact there is a digital M at all.

 

Putting an evf into the body isn't necessarily the problem. Keeping the mechanical rangefinder is. Having an auxiliary evf makes sense technically to me (not that I want one myself - been there not impressed). Putting one in the body raises a lot of issues. For the life of me I can see no logical reason to have both an in body evf and mechanical rangefinder - its by far the worst of both worlds - and technically I suspect that it would be a nightmare. Remove the rangefinder and you have an M mount camera which takes M lenses but hasn't got the M bit inside - the rangefinder.

 

I suppose the real question is whether an M mount, manual focus, mechanical aperture, internal EVF only camera would achieve sufficient sales to make it economic to produce and I very, very much doubt it. Anyway it wouldn't be an M - no rangefinder!

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

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

I suppose the real question is whether an M mount, manual focus, mechanical aperture, internal EVF only camera would achieve sufficient sales to make it economic to produce and I very, very much doubt it.

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

I agree. I have no problem with anyone wanting one of these but I doubt it will ever happen. 

 

The more likely investment would be in a full frame M-sized, internal-EVF, L-mount body, though I note UliWer's comments in the previous post. If I understand him correctly (and my understanding of optics is not up to agreeing or disagreeing with him), he is saying that L-mount full frame lenses have to be large by the nature of their essential design, making such a system less desirable (i.e. too close to the SL). I guess that's something that Leica's engineers will have to decide.

 

Edit: picking up my TL2 tomorrow, so I'll get a different perspective on the future .

[M11 for me]

Keep in mind that the M is all about the precision and the complexity of the rangefinder plus the superb lenses. When switching to OVF/EVF then the M develops to something like a Fuji or a Sony. Would many users then not rather choose a low cost alternative and adapt the M lenses (if at all)? The magic of the today's M body might get lost. Be frank: The excellent picture quality is not because of the body but because of the lenses. As Leica I would not dare to touch at that pure concept.

 

As myself, most coleagues in this forum have other camera systems besides the Leica. Even with an EVF Leica will not be able to make the M an all purpose tool so that we need no second system any more. If this statement is true then it is certainly better not to change the concept and move towards an electronic comodity. This comodity is then easily exchangeable. And once one has the EVF probably that person does not need the OVF any more. Think of the thousands of opinions you can read in the web: Once the user gets used to the EVF (sony etc.) he wants nothing else any more. The M might be dead then.

[LocalHero1953]

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

Be frank: The excellent picture quality is not because of the body but because of the lenses. As Leica I would not dare to touch at that pure concept.

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

Perhaps, though I also think Leica know a thing or two about getting the best out of sensors. 

 

But IQ is not everything. There's also handling, ergonomics, interface, responsiveness...and quite a lot of other things. Leica adds plenty of value to its other bodies here, not just in the M.

[Steve Spencer]

I agree. I have no problem with anyone wanting one of these but I doubt it will ever happen. 

 

The more likely investment would be in a full frame M-sized, internal-EVF, L-mount body, though I note UliWer's comments in the previous post. If I understand him correctly (and my understanding of optics is not up to agreeing or disagreeing with him), he is saying that L-mount full frame lenses have to be large by the nature of their essential design, making such a system less desirable (i.e. too close to the SL). I guess that's something that Leica's engineers will have to decide.

 

Edit: picking up my TL2 tomorrow, so I'll get a different perspective on the future .

 

I think Leica could make a smaller body L mount camera with relatively small AF lenses (if the made L mount summicrons they could be excellent and fairly small; look at the Zeiss Batis 25 f/2 for an example of what you could expect). No the lenses wouldn't be as small as M lenses, but much much smaller than the SL lenses. I think the problem with such a camera is that it is going to have a lot of competition. Not only from Sony, but likely from Canon and Nikon as well before too long. I think Leica does best when they offer something relatively unique and a small EVF based L mount camera sounds a lot like following Sony down the A7/A9 path rather than offering something unique. I expect Canon and Nikon to go down that path, but I would be surprised if Leica did. I know I would have very little interest in such a camera from Leica.

[Eoin]

...... Think of the thousands of opinions you can read in the web: Once the user gets used to the EVF (sony etc.) he wants nothing else any more. The M might be dead then.

 

I think not, the EVF is forced upon you. It is the only choice in all sony a mount cameras.

I literally cried when the move happened. I loved the OVF in my a900 and have been totally dis-satisfied with every EVF since.

I call it "video game photography" with lag, incorrect colour and requires focus peaking to properly judge where the actual focus point lies.

No thanks!, I'd rather my  prism/split screen or rangefinder any day.

Perhaps when they get to oled 800hz in the EVF things may improve. But for the moment, it is a technology where the technology it replaced was visually better.

[M11 for me]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think not, the EVF is forced upon you. It is the only choice in all sony a mount cameras.

I literally cried when the move happened. I loved the OVF in my a900 and have been totally dis-satisfied with every EVF since.

I call it "video game photography" with lag, incorrect colour and requires focus peaking to properly judge where the actual focus point lies.

No thanks!, I'd rather my  prism/split screen or rangefinder any day.

Perhaps when they get to oled 800hz in the EVF things may improve. But for the moment, it is a technology where the technology it replaced was visually better.

I agree. I wouldn't want an EVF at all. But coleagues here look for that EVF for their long lenses as I understand. I have only 28, 50 and 75mm for the M. That is good for almost all situations. For the rest I have 5D Mk IV with primes and zooms plus flash. I do not plan to have just the Leica. This is oposed to the strategy of many users here in the forum. I love the M10 for its precision, beauty and for the results.

[UliWer]

Well, when it comes to customers' demand for different models and concepts one might have a look on the last numbers published by Leica in their annual report for the year 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2016 (they havn't published a newer report yet).

 

Umsatz nach Produktgruppen (Turnover for different products)

 

                                                       2015/2016   2014/2015

                                                   TEUR        TEUR

 

Systemkameras (M, SL, T)            160.616         173.782

 

Kompakt-Kameras

(Q, X and Panaleicas)                      79.506           50.937

 

Sportoptik (Sport Optics)            31.252         25.447

 

Technischer Kundendienst             3.459           6.207

(Customer Care)                             

 

Sonstiges (Other)                            19.620           20.060

Gesamt (total)                        294.453       276.433

           

So their  turnover was not bad - rising by almost 20 Mio €.

But they also explained the differences:

 

"Damit konnte das geplante Umsatzwachstum von 6,1% leicht um 0,4% überschritten werden. Zu dieser sehr positiven Entwicklung haben im Wesentlichen die beiden neuen und hochinnovativen Kameramodelle Leica SL und Leica Q beigetragen. Im Vergleich zum Vorjahr verzeichnet der Produktbereich der Kompaktkameras mit 56,1% den größten Umsatzzuwachs. Dieser Zuwachs wurde durch die neue Leica Q erreicht, der Umsatz der sonstigen Kompaktkamera-Modelle lag 28,6% unter dem Vorjahr.

Wie bereits im Vorjahr, stellt das Segment der Systemkameras mit 54,6% die größte Umsatzgruppe dar. Die in 2014 eingeführte Systemkamera Leica T konnte nicht an die hohen Verkaufszahlen des Vorjahres anknüpfen und verzeichnet 74% weniger Umsatz. Die Leica T zeigt damit die größte Abweichung zum Plan auf. Die Leica M konnte im Geschäftsjahr die sehr hohen Umsätze der Vorjahre nicht halten und verlor im Vorjahresvergleich ca. 20%. Das neu eingeführte Leica SL System konnte durch seine hervorragende Performanz einen Teil des Umsatzrückgangs kompensieren.

Der Geschäftsbereich Sportoptik konnte den Umsatz des Vorjahres mit einem Wachstum von 22,8 % deutlich übertreffen und erzielt nunmehr TEUR 31.252 nach TEUR 25.447 im Vorjahr. Der Bereich Sportoptik setzte seine Produktoffensive im Geschäftsjahr 2015/16 konsequent fort."

 

To summarize it: Total turnover with +6.1% better than expected. The SL and the Q were the main factors. Compact Cameras with biggest increase of 56% - this is just the Q for other compact models (X and Panaleicas) dropped by 28.6%).

T (which is enclosed under "Systemkameras") dropped by 74% with biggest difference to what was planned of all products. M dropped by 20% - results in the previous year having been very high, the M (Typ 240) being 3 years old and M 262, M 246 only introduced for a couple of months. SL stabilized the overall results for "Systemkameras". Sports optics did well.

So it was mainly the Q which "saved" them.

We don't know the results for the last year yet - perhaps the Q dropped again. The M10 will not be in, since it was only introduced after the usual financial year which ends in March. There are rumors - which I'll believe only when I see them published - that Leica doubled their profit from around 33 Mio € to 70 Mio €. If this is true, it will again be mainly the Q.

 

The Q is an EVF only with a design similar to the M. It's lens of 28mm is not really in the center of demand.

[Tailwagger]

There should be no need for a full RF mechanism. All you need is the roller and sensor to know the lens moved. Everything else gone. Pretty damn simple. And even then its only necessary to indicate that the focus position changed so that, optionally, the evf zoom function is activated. If a roller is too much, rip the whole thing out and add a forth dedicated button. Personally I can live with initiating the zoom independently.

 

As for electrical connections for an updated M lens, IMO, orthogonal to the argument and unnecessary in any case.  This the 21st C, theres no need for a physical connection to transmit lens data. If you're not content with applying transforms in post, sprinkle in some RF id reader. Ubiquitous and cheap. More than enough data fits into something the size of a grain of rice to tell the body what lens is attached. In theory every lens in the system could be easily retrofitted, embed it in the mount or glue another red dot on the lens body. Potentially could carry its own profile data as well.  We do fine with 6 bits now, even the most minimalist RF chip has a couple of K.

 

As to a modern AF version of an OVF M... all I can say is ugh. In the sphere of man machine interface, the only more heinous development this century than steer by wire is focus by wire. Awful. No thanks. AF is available elsewhere in the Leica-sphere. The only nicety M glass truly lacks in the context of a manual focus EVF based camera is auto aperture. Be nice to have, but it certainly isn't worth replacing 50 years of Summiluxes for.

[pico]

I swear if there is any more bitching about the M10 I will buy a couple.

.

[jmahto]

I swear if there is any more bitching about the M10 I will buy a couple.

.

... and donate to keep their mouth shut !

[pico]

... and donate to keep their mouth shut !

 

If I were CEO, but then we would have to kill them.

[Tailwagger]

I swear if there is any more bitching about the M10 I will buy a couple.

.

 

Fake news, alternate facts... it torques those of lesser will in all sort of directions these days.  I'm sure you can resist. OTOH, goaded into a couple of M10s wouldn't be so bad... just be sure to budget for batteries.  

[M11 for me]

If I were CEO, but then we would have to kill them.

The moment that jou think of killing someone you will some day be able. That is not funny at all. Sorry but this has to be said

[mhicks]

The moment that jou think of killing someone you will some day be able.

Actually you would someday be Cain, but I digress.

 

I know this is an international forum so what drives humor for some is offensive to others. Not speaking for Pico, but what he said is a common form of humor based on a Sherlock Holmes quote that still draws chuckles today.

[vladik]

Putting an evf into the body isn't necessarily the problem. Keeping the mechanical rangefinder is. Having an auxiliary evf makes sense technically to me (not that I want one myself - been there not impressed). Putting one in the body raises a lot of issues. For the life of me I can see no logical reason to have both an in body evf and mechanical rangefinder - its by far the worst of both worlds - and technically I suspect that it would be a nightmare. Remove the rangefinder and you have an M mount camera which takes M lenses but hasn't got the M bit inside - the rangefinder.

 

I suppose the real question is whether an M mount, manual focus, mechanical aperture, internal EVF only camera would achieve sufficient sales to make it economic to produce and I very, very much doubt it. Anyway it wouldn't be an M - no rangefinder!

 

 

Keep your M with its rangefinder, removable bottom plate and now with frame selector for yourself, but give us an M size body with M mount and EVF. Fertig.

[jaapv]

Actually you would someday be Cain, but I digress.

I know this is an international forum so what drives humor for some is offensive to others. Not speaking for Pico, but what he said is a common form of humor based on a Sherlock Holmes quote that still draws chuckles today.

indeed, some CEOs are lawyers.

Sherlock wasn't being original

[cp995]

Keep your M with its rangefinder, removable bottom plate and now with frame selector for yourself, but give us an M size body with M mount and EVF. Fertig.

 

Maybe Leica will offer a smaller SL in the future with M Lenses via adapter - Why not...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

Maybe Leica will offer a smaller SL in the future with M Lenses via adapter - Why not...

 

Indeed but with no M mount and no auto image magnification i'm afraid but i may be wrong. The advantage over Sony would be a thinner sensor stack (not the case for modded Sony's though), 6-bit coding, "Das Wesentliche" and a red dot then. Tough competition...