Peter H Posted February 20, 2017 Share #221 Posted February 20, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Peter, surely the argument swirling around you about lighting, aperture stops, focus thrown, 24fps and all the other technical detail is the clearest example of why Leica backed out of video on the M camera? They started to develop the SL in 2012, and I'm pretty sure they learnt a lot more about video over those years than they did in the years 2009-2012 when they developed the M(240). Sure, this is the first time Leica seems to have included a new feature (video) in an M model and then dropped it in the next model. Yes, I think we can all understand those who are disappointed at something being removed; but every time I think to myself that I must explore video on my SL (which is far more video capable), I find it daunting. The M is suppose to be the pinnacle of stills photography - the very best lenses, the best coupled rangefinder (ignore the oxymoron), the best sensor (no, Leica doesn't think 50MP is a good idea in an M body under current technology), all expressed in the essence of photography. Video was a rabbit hole. I'm indifferent. It makes not the slightest difference to me personally whether the camera has video or not. Having it in the M240 has not troubled me for one second, and not having it in the M10 won't, either. But I can still see the point of view of others who are disappointed at losing it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 Hi Peter H, Take a look here M10? - Sorry, no!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted February 20, 2017 Share #222 Posted February 20, 2017 Not to flog a dead horse (I don't have an M(240) and I'm not buying an M10), I view removing video from the M10 as a very positive step. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted February 21, 2017 Share #223 Posted February 21, 2017 Not to flog a dead horse (I don't have an M(240) and I'm not buying an M10), I view removing video from the M10 as a very positive step.I don't see why... it has obviously no bearing on the use of your cameras... so why have an opinion on the use of others? I have a M240P and turned off the video the day I bought it, a couple of years ago or so... never switched it on again. Does it bother me? Not in the least... So why would I wish the M didn't have video? This all just sounds like imposing ones own views on others to me... worse, celebrating when ones own view is imposed on others... and there is enough of that around already... I also have no issue with video on the Leica M cameras... and I have no issue with the lack of video on the M10... but I don't see it as a reason to celebrate when there are clearly other users who would have used and enjoyed video capability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 21, 2017 Share #224 Posted February 21, 2017 Not to flog a dead horse (I don't have an M(240) and I'm not buying an M10), I view removing video from the M10 as a very positive step. In what direction? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 21, 2017 Share #225 Posted February 21, 2017 As soon as I typed that, this occurred to me. Do you think it is apposite? Metering, particularly with colour transparencies, had become critical. Yep, dropped with the M-A. Video? I'm not so sure it is the same thing, but I take your point. There had been colour transparacies around for ages when this dropping and reintroducing occurred. Exposure precision cannot be the reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted February 21, 2017 Share #226 Posted February 21, 2017 ....This all just sounds like imposing ones own views on others to me... worse, celebrating when ones own view is imposed on others... and there is enough of that around already... A little uncharitable, don't you think? I've been consistent in my views of the M(240). Owning a decent collection of good M lenses, I have a vested interest in where the M system is going. Or are you saying I shouldn't have an opinion? Leica makes the decisions, not me. For someone who is not shy about expressing his opinions about what Leica should or should not do, I'm surprised you would post this, Bill. I find it unnecessarily rude, to say the least ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted February 21, 2017 Share #227 Posted February 21, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) There had been colour transparacies around for ages when this dropping and reintroducing occurred. Exposure precision cannot be the reason. Really? So what was the reason? Plenty of cameras had built in meters before the M5; it clearly wasn't particularly groundbreaking. Why is video comparable, when the M is and has always been a stills camera? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted February 21, 2017 Share #228 Posted February 21, 2017 I can't film with an M, period. Perhaps I can't film at all. I don't look at little video's on the social media, I hate the noise they produce. "Battery capacity is marginal on the M(240) and really 'bad' compared to competition. " I don't know of any competition. I once stepped over to Leica in 1990 because of the lenses. It remains the last and ultimate reason to stay there. An M is not for sports photography so Continuous mode and battery life is of no importance to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 21, 2017 Share #229 Posted February 21, 2017 Really? So what was the reason? Plenty of cameras had built in meters before the M5; it clearly wasn't particularly groundbreaking. Why is video comparable, when the M is and has always been a stills camera? Well, the Canon 5D was a stills camera before, hardly an argument. I am a bit puzzled by the assertion that exposure metering suddenly became important in 1983. My father's Kodachromes from the 1950ies needed perfect exposure as well. Slide film dates back to the 1930ies. At the time the M 6 was introduced, Leica had to work together with the University of Munich to design a metering cicuit that was compact enough to fit into an M4 sized body. It was not possible before then, as per Leica's marketing at introduction. That is the reason behind the time frame. The reason that the M5 was discontinued was not the internal metering. It was because the body shape was not accepted by the customers, and because Leica thought at the time that the future was the R series. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 21, 2017 Share #230 Posted February 21, 2017 I don't see why... it has obviously no bearing on the use of your cameras... so why have an opinion on the use of others? I have a M240P and turned off the video the day I bought it, a couple of years ago or so... never switched it on again. Does it bother me? Not in the least... So why would I wish the M didn't have video? This all just sounds like imposing ones own views on others to me... worse, celebrating when ones own view is imposed on others... and there is enough of that around already... I also have no issue with video on the Leica M cameras... and I have no issue with the lack of video on the M10... but I don't see it as a reason to celebrate when there are clearly other users who would have used and enjoyed video capability. Exactly the thing that is wrong with society right now, Bill. People being intolerant of other people's view of the world. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 21, 2017 Share #231 Posted February 21, 2017 The M has become a victim of it's own success. It's user base has had decades to buy all the lenses it needs, the used market is flooded with old lenses which are better than some brands new lenses at the fraction of the cost of a new one, and there are only so many new lenses you can introduce before users eventually stop buying (they're even trying to reintroduce old lenses now too). Leica doesn't have the resources of Sony to develop bodies at the same rate. The rangefinder is never going to attract new users en masse. The M10 is marginally smaller. But it's smaller at the expense of core functionality. Leica have done this intentionally to direct sales to the SL. Instead, they are also directing sales elsewhere to other brands, because for many, like me the SL isn't of much interest. But it makes no difference to them if the user isn't buying any anyway. The M10 is both the best M yet, and for me, the worst because I will not be buying it and it seems I won't even be buying another Leica. Of all the brands in the world, I would have thought that Leica would be one of the last ones to cut off its customers, supporters and fans like this, removing functionality they have used, and relied on for years and forcing them to buy a whole other very expensive system. No thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 21, 2017 Share #232 Posted February 21, 2017 Cherish your M240 folks. It will remain the first and last video capable rangefinder. The next compact camera fitting M lenses will have video and a fast EVF but no optical RF anymore. Just a bet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted February 21, 2017 Share #233 Posted February 21, 2017 I'll take that bet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Mandeville Posted February 21, 2017 Share #234 Posted February 21, 2017 Of all the brands in the world, I would have thought that Leica would be one of the last ones to cut off its customers, supporters and fans like this, removing functionality they have used, and relied on for years and forcing them to buy a whole other very expensive system. Except that they didn't. In developing the M10, Leica actually did listen to their customers, supporters and fans, the vast majority of whom don't use video on an M camera and don't want it on there for a number of valid reasons. Leica finally delivered what the digital M should have been all along: a fully functional digital rangefinder camera dedicated to and optimized for stills photography. You can't please everybody though, and some will regret the loss of video functionality. Lucky for them that literally every other digital camera (not to mention smart phone) in existence offers this functionality. Leica have produced the only digital rangefinder camera in existence dedicated to the needs of the still photographer, and I applaud them for it. Like you refuse to buy the M10, I refused to buy the M240. I didn't want the video and I was unhappy with the direction Leica was taking the platform. But I am thrilled with the M10 and have my order in. Can't wait to get it. Leica have finally produced the M camera I have been waiting for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 21, 2017 Share #235 Posted February 21, 2017 Except that they didn't. In developing the M10, Leica actually did listen to their customers, supporters and fans, the vast majority of whom don't use video on an M camera and don't want it on there for a number of valid reasons. Leica finally delivered what the digital M should have been all along: a fully functional digital rangefinder camera dedicated to and optimized for stills photography. You can't please everybody though, and some will regret the loss of video functionality. Lucky for them that literally every other digital camera (not to mention smart phone) in existence offers this functionality. Leica have produced the only digital rangefinder camera in existence dedicated to the needs of the still photographer, and I applaud them for it. Like you refuse to buy the M10, I refused to buy the M240. I didn't want the video and I was unhappy with the direction Leica was taking the platform. But I am thrilled with the M10 and have my order in. Can't wait to get it. Leica have finally produced the M camera I have been waiting for. I'm actually taking about USB (although the loss of video is bad as well IMO). USB was on the M8, the M9, the 240 with an optional grip It didn't make it any less of a rangefinder, it didn't take away any of lit's leica-ness. If you didn't want USB you didn't have to buy the grip, that worked fine for everyone didn't it?. Now there is nothing and users who have been happily using and needing USB are stranded at a dead end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted February 21, 2017 Share #236 Posted February 21, 2017 I would love to know the percentage of M240 owners that actually used the video function, and further how frequently they actually used it. I shoot video every day (on various cameras), but I used the video on the M240 so little it offered very little value to me...mainly because of its shortcomings. If it was properly implemented I could see its value, and it has the potential to be a powerful tool. But on the M240 I only used it a handful of times beyond testing. When the M240 first came out this forum was overwhelmed with requests to disable the video button...so what is the actual percentage of M240 users that truely used this function more than out of curiosity? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 21, 2017 Share #237 Posted February 21, 2017 Oldies will remember the M5 precedent here. It had (at last) TTL metering but was too tall compared to previous M bodies so TTL has been dumped in the shorter M4-2. Now the M240 has video but is too obese compared to previous Ms so video has been dumped in the slimmer M10. Nothing new under the sun, except that M lenses can be used on modern TTL cameras now fortunately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted February 21, 2017 Share #238 Posted February 21, 2017 Cherish your M240 folks. It will remain the first and last video capable rangefinder. The next compact camera fitting M lenses will have video and a fast EVF but no optical RF anymore. Just a bet. They won't do that unless they keep producing the M10, as with M-A and MP, M7 too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Mandeville Posted February 21, 2017 Share #239 Posted February 21, 2017 But they did a silly thing too. they put the ISO control on the same level as the exposure controls ( Aperture-shutterspeed) although it is an internal processing control. You say silly. I say brilliant! So happy they did this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentShutter Posted February 21, 2017 Share #240 Posted February 21, 2017 A slimmer body, simplified controls, better rangefinder and believe it or not no video function (it was poor on the M240) were all on my wish list and I feel it is a worthwhile for me to change from my M240 to the M10. I didn't want a fancy camera that tried to be all things to everyone but something like an M of old a great camera for taking photographs with few bells and whistles. Agree on all ! Yes ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.