Next, a full frame upgrade, ML,

[meerec]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Which would make it a small SL in a traditional Barnack shape...

Yes

[Ozytripper]

I didn't see anybody on this thread arguing against an M-EVF camera as an addition to the system - just pointing out the concerns Leica might have about it cannibalizing the RF-type M - and some technical problems. We know that Leica has looked into a hybrid-viewfinder M and judged it lacking compared to the OVF-RF.

Jaapv,

 

you cannot have the cake and eat it too.

 

Look back at your posts.You mentioned many times an EVF M will have no customers.

Then you also repeatedly say that an EVF M will cannibalize  M OVF sales

No market means no cannibalization. So which side of the fence will you actually stand on?

 

Thighslapper,

please read my Porsche Analogy again. Porsche had the same long standing philosophy and the same fanatical purists supporters. Must be air cooled. Engine must be at the back. You must be an excellent drive to not kill yourself. They change their concept and achieved a model with the highest sales ever for the model that ALL THE PURIST HATED. This is the only analogy.

 

People are asking for a FULL FRAME M, preferably M mount so as not to lose the wife angle function as in APSC. Not possible to put EVF in an M body? Notice how the Q looks rather similar to the M and it is Full Frame 

 

There is a huge segment of NEW CUSTOMERS who don't really care if the M has to be no bigger than an M10. They just want an M looking body with FULL FRAME.

 

I will put my money where my mouth is. Leica scared of making an EVF M camera as there is no market for it? If Leica give me the right to distribute just the new EVF M camera in in China, Hong Kong and Macau my first order will be 1,000 units, not enough? then 5,000 units? I am serious  

Edited April 28, 2018 by Ozytripper

[Ozytripper]

Mr Tripper .....

 

Most of us here are not remotely against progress, and I'm afraid the only similarity between Porsche and Leica is that they are both German. 

 

The M is an iconic camera and form factor ...... and every change Leica has made to it has tried to keep the look and functionality as close to the original as possible. 

 

There are three basic issues for Leica:

 

1. Is it technically possible to add an EVF of the quality required to the M body without losing the look, size and spirit of the original camera ? 

         Porsche 911 must be air cooled, must drive like shit (involving to the purist) and must look like the previous generation.

         Everything was changed and it became the top selling 911 model ever. Obviously the purists did not buy. They stocked up on the previous model (type 993). So maybe more sales for Leica when the purists stock up on M10s  

 

2. Would the R&D, re-tooling and production costs be worth it in view of the potential sales ?

         Would retooling a car production facility be cheaper than retooling a camera production line?

 

3. Would the new camera increase sales ..... or just take sales away from the M, CL and SL ?

        -The EVF M is the serious photographer's camera,the CL entry level and for those who want APSC, the SL is a dead horse already.

 

I am sure Leica have looked at this and the fact that have put most of their efforts into improving the RF mechanism on the M suggests to me that an EVF will always remain a clip-on option. 

      -exactly my point about hindrance to progress. Everything is a no no no. Porsche had the guts to do it Leica does not. Nothing to do with lack of technology nor the lack of market

 

I would also point out that the Q, SL and CL were surprises...... and very few, if any, existing Leica users had voiced wishes for cameras similar to what finally appeared. An EVF M may seem a logical and desirable development but from past history Leica is probably working on something that few of us have thought about or think we want ..... 

-Leica is just dancing around the EVF M issue, Let's not upset the purist, give others something else.The TL failed (did not look like an M), CL succeeded (looked like an M). SL? Seriously......?

Q is successful - looks like an M

 

Sad to see such a large market segment to be left untouched.  

Edited April 28, 2018 by Ozytripper

[LocalHero1953]

I think you're looking at this from the wrong end.

The SL and the TL failed? I would say that the L system has succeeded. Several years down the line we have three bodies offering different things to different people, and a range of lenses which can all be used with those bodies (with cropping limitations), plus 60+ years of M and screw lenses. The lens system covers monsters and miniatures, which can all be used in one system.

I think Leica has hit a winning streak - as the boss says in his interview, the only question is where the L-mount goes next: video body? M-sized EVIL? Even mini-MF?

Edited April 28, 2018 by LocalHero1953

[thighslapper]

 

 

There is a huge segment of NEW CUSTOMERS who don't really care if the M has to be no bigger than an M10. They just want an M looking body with FULL FRAME.

 

I will put my money where my mouth is. Leica scared of making an EVF M camera as there is no market for it? If Leica give me the right to distribute just the new EVF M camera in in China, Hong Kong and Macau my first order will be 1,000 units, not enough? then 5,000 units? I am serious  

 

Please indicate where you have got the information that a 'huge segment of new customers' want an EVF version of the M. 

 

You clearly have a very poor understanding of Leica's product history and underlying philosophy.

 

Like Jaap, I have nothing at all against an EVF version of the M, or an interchangeable M mount lens version of the Q, and I am sure Leica could find a way to do it if they wanted to. 

 

However it is my considered opinion that Leica are highly unlikely to do it, particularly as L mount cameras already allow the use of almost all legacy Leica lenses. They have stated L is the way forward and that new developments will be revealed in June. 

Edited April 28, 2018 by thighslapper

[tgdinamo]

Ugh? SD card? Can you pleas elaborate on this?

 

I don't have the X1D but have read many reviews and comments in forums (I was considering buying it before I decided to go with the Q which by the way I'm thrilled with).

It seems that most of the complaints about X1D have nothing to do with design (which is usually highly praised) but rather operational speed (slow AF, takes long time to start up, burst mode could be better to make it more of generic purpose camera, etc).

Writing to storage could contribute to slower operation (these are computers after all), and if the SD card speeds and implementation of writing to them is suboptimal that will definitely impact the overall speed of operation (how many consecutive photos you can take in burt mode, etc). All of this is easily fixable with faster storage and perhaps improved underlying code writing to storage.

And this camera does have SD storage, doesn't it (according to below specs it says it uses 2 SD cards) so I'm not sure what you are asking?

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1260272-REG/hasselblad_h_3013901_x1d_50c_medium_format_mirrorless.html

Edited April 28, 2018 by tgdinamo

[tgdinamo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I really struggle to see any comparison between an APSC EVIL camera, a fixed-lens  compact, a traditional rangefinder camera and a mid-format camera, The only thing they have in common is that one can take a digital photograph with any of them, sorry.

 

The way I see this is that CL and X1D are both the modern answers to the M but coming from 2 different angles. CL being the from smaller size with cropped sensor and therefore gives up at least something to M in IQ area, and X1D from other from the other angle - slightly larger but being medium format with even better IQ (and X1D body/lens combos even though medium format still seem smaller than SL which is hugely important/interesting).

It seems to me that Leica M has never been really been threatened in this size/IQ/ergonomics space like this (Leica seemed to have monopoly in this space when these 3 parameters were all considered). DSLR's with their lenses were always too big/ugly and/or IQ was not up to par, and handling/ergonomics turned off Leica M shooters. Not sure that's the case any longer with the X1D.

[Einst_Stein]

>> Please indicate where you have got the information that a 'huge segment of new customers' want an EVF version of the M. 

 

Simple, I assume you understand the statistics and sampling. Just count the post of interests in Leica forum.

 

>> You clearly have a very poor understanding of Leica's product history and underlying philosophy.

 

I will ignore this personal attack. Try some other way to prove youtself how much you understand Leica philosophy. For example, tell us what is your Leica spirit. If your are truely knowledgrable on this topic, explain it with CL, TL, SL, or M10 as example.

 

[jaapv]

The way I see this is that CL and X1D are both the modern answers to the M but coming from 2 different angles. CL being the from smaller size with cropped sensor and therefore gives up at least something to M in IQ area, and X1D from other from the other angle - slightly larger but being medium format with even better IQ (and X1D body/lens combos even though medium format still seem smaller than SL which is hugely important/interesting).

It seems to me that Leica M has never been really been threatened in this size/IQ/ergonomics space like this (Leica seemed to have monopoly in this space when these 3 parameters were all considered). DSLR's with their lenses were always too big/ugly and/or IQ was not up to par, and handling/ergonomics turned off Leica M shooters. Not sure that's the case any longer with the X1D.

The only camera that this vaguely applicable to might be the CL. Small, small format, agile, high quality image, Barnack's idea.

The Leica Q is a high-quality large point-and-shoot with strong Panasonic influences despite the Leica feel, the X1D a bloated ugly Sony NEX. I fail to see what those two, especially the Hasselblad, have to do with a Leica M.

[ropo54]

The only camera that this vaguely applicable to might be the CL. Small, small format, agile, high quality image, Barnack's idea.

The Leica Q is a high-quality large point-and-shoot with strong Panasonic influences despite the Leica feel, the X1D a bloated ugly Sony NEX. I fail to see what those two, especially the Hasselblad, have to do with a Leica M.

 

I am not sure that I understand your X1D comparison!  

Rob

[jaapv]

I was referring to the concept: I find both cameras similarly ugly, cramming as much as possible into an as small as possible cigar box and compensating with an oversized handgrip

[LocalHero1953]

>> Please indicate where you have got the information that a 'huge segment of new customers' want an EVF version of the M. 

 

Simple, I assume you understand the statistics and sampling. Just count the post of interests in Leica forum.

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

 

Since you basing your argument on real stats, not guesswork, how many forum members, who are also new customers, did you count who want an M with an EVF? And how many new customers were in your sample?

 

Like a few others here, I have no problem with people wanting such a camera. I would have no problem with Leica making one. I just don't think it will ever happen.

[thighslapper]

>> Please indicate where you have got the information that a 'huge segment of new customers' want an EVF version of the M. 

 

Simple, I assume you understand the statistics and sampling. Just count the post of interests in Leica forum.

 

>> You clearly have a very poor understanding of Leica's product history and underlying philosophy.

 

I will ignore this personal attack. Try some other way to prove youtself how much you understand Leica philosophy. For example, tell us what is your Leica spirit. If your are truely knowledgrable on this topic, explain it with CL, TL, SL, or M10 as example.

 

 

1. I have a reasonable enough understanding of statistics to realise that a self selecting group on a small forum replying to a specific thread are hardly representative of the Leica user base, and that extrapolating anything of statistical significance from this is in the realms of fantasy.

 

2. This was a reply to Ozytripper and not to you. I am unaware of your understanding of Leica and did not comment on it. 

 

Anyway ...... this thread is going to go the way on many others ....... those who want, those who don't want, those that think it will never happen will never be reconciled and only the future will show who was closer to the truth.

 

Of course the other 95% just don't care and are using their time more productively out taking photos ...... 

 

ps. I have owned and used the M9, M9-P, M240, M-P, both Monchroms, X-Vario, T, TL2, CL, SL, almost all the current M lenses, many older M and R lenses, all the SL and TL lenses (except 90 and 60 macro) etc. and have beta tested firmware for most of them. I think I have a reasonable understanding of Leica and their underlying product philosophy .....

Edited April 28, 2018 by thighslapper

[tgdinamo]

The only camera that this vaguely applicable to might be the CL. Small, small format, agile, high quality image, Barnack's idea.

The Leica Q is a high-quality large point-and-shoot with strong Panasonic influences despite the Leica feel, the X1D a bloated ugly Sony NEX. I fail to see what those two, especially the Hasselblad, have to do with a Leica M.

 

Well if you honestly think X1D is ugly and actually bring it up in the same sentence with Sony then I'm done here and this exchange was obviously a waste of time (I think X1D looks as cool as any Leica - although the M lenses are by far nicer looking than any other lenses out there, including all other Leica lenses).

[meerec]

I don't have the X1D but have read many reviews and comments in forums (I was considering buying it before I decided to go with the Q which by the way I'm thrilled with).

It seems that most of the complaints about X1D have nothing to do with design (which is usually highly praised) but rather operational speed (slow AF, takes long time to start up, burst mode could be better to make it more of generic purpose camera, etc).

Writing to storage could contribute to slower operation (these are computers after all), and if the SD card speeds and implementation of writing to them is suboptimal that will definitely impact the overall speed of operation (how many consecutive photos you can take in burt mode, etc). All of this is easily fixable with faster storage and perhaps improved underlying code writing to storage.

And this camera does have SD storage, doesn't it (according to below specs it says it uses 2 SD cards) so I'm not sure what you are asking?

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1260272-REG/hasselblad_h_3013901_x1d_50c_medium_format_mirrorless.html

I used X1D loaner from Hasselblad for a week early on with early firmware, had many quirks but no issue writing to SD. Internet is full of fake news.

[ropo54]

I don't have the X1D but have read many reviews and comments in forums (I was considering buying it before I decided to go with the Q which by the way I'm thrilled with).

It seems that most of the complaints about X1D have nothing to do with design (which is usually highly praised) but rather operational speed (slow AF, takes long time to start up, burst mode could be better to make it more of generic purpose camera, etc).

Writing to storage could contribute to slower operation (these are computers after all), and if the SD card speeds and implementation of writing to them is suboptimal that will definitely impact the overall speed of operation (how many consecutive photos you can take in burt mode, etc). All of this is easily fixable with faster storage and perhaps improved underlying code writing to storage.

And this camera does have SD storage, doesn't it (according to below specs it says it uses 2 SD cards) so I'm not sure what you are asking?

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1260272-REG/hasselblad_h_3013901_x1d_50c_medium_format_mirrorless.html

 

Image quality is outstanding.

 

AF speed is fine, not as quick as the Q or SL, but perhaps along the lines of the TL2.

 

Shutter lag is the biggest drawback, but oh, those images (colors, tonality, contrast)!

 

(I think it will shoot a maximum of 2 frames per second).

 

One is not going to shoot action, but for landscapes, portraits, and still shots it is superb.

 

As for design, I would disagree with Jaap; I happen to like it a lot. It is very portable.

Edited April 28, 2018 by ropo54

[tgdinamo]

Image quality is outstanding.

 

AF speed is fine, not as quick as the Q or SL, but perhaps along the lines of the TL2.

 

Shutter lag is the biggest drawback, but oh, those images (colors, tonality, contrast)!

 

(I think it will shoot a maximum of 2 frames per second).

 

One is not going to shoot action, but for landscapes, portraits, and still shots it is superb.

 

As for design, I would disagree with Jaap; I happen to like it a lot. It is very portable.

 

Your report is in line with what I have read and seen in many X1D reviews - and it is kind of in line with the point I was trying to make. While X1D may not be all the way there yet it will get there soon - ti's probably one or two generations away from being a phenomental general purpose medium format camera which is smaller than SLR's, joy to handle, and best IQ. By the way, shutter lag delay is probably caused by to how long it takes to write the very large files to slow SD cards - I am a very experienced programmer, so while I admit that's a guess, I'd like to think it's an educated guess. Those types of issues are easily fixable by moving to faster storage and/or processors which is certainly going to come in the next few releases. And while internet is obviously full of fake reviews/news, there are also very reputable people (including big Leica fans like Steve Huff) who gave X1D highest marks in their reviews (and purchased them to prove it).

Edited April 28, 2018 by tgdinamo

[Guest VVJ]

Of course the other 95% just don't care and are using their time more productively out taking photos ...... 

 

+1.  About 380 images this morning, both with SL and CL.  Amen.  

[jaapv]

Well if you honestly think X1D is ugly and actually bring it up in the same sentence with Sony then I'm done here and this exchange was obviously a waste of time (I think X1D looks as cool as any Leica - although the M lenses are by far nicer looking than any other lenses out there, including all other Leica lenses).

 

 

 

 

Well, if you seriously think this is pretty...

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

De gustibus non est disputandem.

 

Whatever else - a medium format camera is rather out of place in a forum dedicated to an APS-C camera, I should think.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[tgdinamo]

Well, if you seriously think this is pretty...

 

Screen Shot 2018-04-29 at 01.17.30.png

 

De gustibus non est disputandem.

 

Whatever else - a medium format camera is rather out of place in a forum dedicated to an APS-C camera, I should think.

 

I do think it's pretty but I agree with you that normally medium format camera should not be brought up in APS-C camera forum. I actually debated whether to bring this up but decided to do it for 2 reasons:

 

1. This specific thread is debating full frame upgrade (ML) so in that sense also does not belong in APS-C forum

 

2. While X1D is medium format camera it's not much larger than APS-C cameras so why should it not be compared (especially against the best APS-C camera)?