How My M10 Could Be Even Better

[designdog]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

New M10 owner here, with a long experience as a Nikon shooter. Previous camera was a D5. Although perhaps considered sacrilegious by old Leica hands here, the following would make my enjoyment of the M10 even greater:

 

• focus confirmation - if you can put focus peaking on the rear screen, why not have the traditional focus confirmation LED in the viewfinder. This would have to be read off of the sensor, certainly. So you would still use the rangefinder to focus, but have a trusty left arrow/dot/right arrow confirmation and aid to tell you you have nailed it.
• aperture confirmation - I keep moving off of the aperture with my fingers on the lens. Would be great to turn the darn thing while looking through the rangefinder and have a readout there.
• matrix metering via the rangefinder - or at least matrix metering metering that does not alter the camera's performance, which leads to the next item:
• a change in Live View paradigm. Right now Live View is an intermittently used feature with the sole purpose of viewing through the rear screen. However, many other features could be added that don't require, or even use, rear screen viewing - but do require the sensor to be exposed. I am thinking that the exposed sensor should be the norm, and worked in as an enhancement to the rangefinder - data readout, metering, etc. Very much like the "Heads Up" systems in fighter jets and expensive (German!) automobiles.

Please note I am stopping short of placing the Q viewfinder in a Leica model sized like an M, with interchangeable lenses....

Edited May 25, 2018 by designdog

[a.noctilux]

That would not be possible for Leica M without major changes.

 ...

Maybe Sony had done that already ?

 

Leica M is something else .

 

With more practices, you would understand "less is more".

 

Maybe some day you would buy Leica M-D as me after M10 .

Edited May 25, 2018 by a.noctilux

[Whitford]

Focus confirmation would be nice, but not possible with the camera's current construction. Plus I think it would take some of the fun out of it.

 

I wouldn't mind a shutter speed readout of some kind in the viewfinder, though.

[designdog]

Shutter speed already in the viewfinder. You meant aperture, certainly.

 

Maybe I am just frustrated with the hit rate on my 75mm Summicron. Grrrr. Feel cross-eyed...

[a.noctilux]

My wife's Apo-Summicron-M 2/75 Asph. has two things that bother her:

- aperture ring very lightly (moves too easily) so when she wanted to focus, sometimes the aperture ring was moved

- the lens need to be fine-tuned in focussing when used at f/2 to be tack sharp

 

So maybe your 75mm has those not funny things, and more.

I've heard that with the floating elements, focus can be off at some settings .

 

With LV, the trouble can be verified quickly if this is the case focus at 1m, 2m, 5m, etc.

[feelssadman]

Focus confirmation through focus peaking is not possible. Focus peaking only shows where the processor detected (micro)contrast in the image coming from the sensor.

If you want to have a focus confirmation, the camera has to know what point exactly you want to have in focus through maybe moving a dot on your screen. This applies to both following situations especially; If the camera sensor is looking at a scene using a smaller aperture, thus detecting a large amount of contrast among the whole frame, "everything" could be in focus which is not the case. Even when a large aperture has been set, there is the possibility that even then the camera will detect contrast in out of focus areas.

 

Having a true focus confirmation would require the internals of the camera to be more complex, stepping away from the simplicity and philosophy of Leica cameras.

 

 

Besides, isn't your rangefinder patch enough as a focus confirmation? Isn't it more fun to be the one who decides if something is in focus and not letting the camera decide?

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For my taste the simplicity and reduced information in the viewfinder is the big plus of the M and the reason to use one.

Otherwise you would be better of with a Leica SL.

[designdog]

My wife's Apo-Summicron-M 2/75 Asph. has two things that bother her:

- aperture ring very lightly (moves too easily) so when she wanted to focus, sometimes the aperture ring was moved

- the lens need to be fine-tuned in focussing when used at f/2 to be tack sharp

 

So maybe your 75mm has those not funny things, and more.

I've heard that with the floating elements, focus can be off at some settings .

 

With LV, the trouble can be verified quickly if this is the case focus at 1m, 2m, 5m, etc.

 

So do you think the external viewfinder would help with the 75? Expensive lens for such a bad hit rate (my fault, surely.)

[a.noctilux]

So do you think the external viewfinder would help with the 75? Expensive lens for such a bad hit rate (my fault, surely.)

 

No external VF would do nothing better.

But if you mean magnifier yes it would give more confidence.

 

May I think that the magnifier for M10 not released yet.

I use sometimes old x1.25 with adapter 24001 but not really better and the big advantage M10 of more eye relief vanished.

 

I suggest that you "calibrate your focus" Apo-Cron 75 using comparison in "focus in OVF" and "focus in LV/EVF" at different distances to be certain that it's the lens

or your focus technik not to obtain most of this excellent lens.

[charles_nl]

My wife's Apo-Summicron-M 2/75 Asph. has two things that bother her:

- aperture ring very lightly (moves too easily) so when she wanted to focus, sometimes the aperture ring was moved

 

I bought my M10 with the 50mm Summicron and had the same problem.  The focus ring and aperture ring are adjacent and I found it nearly impossible to not slip the aperture ring when focussing.  The problem disappeared when I change the summicron for the summilux, where there is distance between the 2 rings.

 

Charles

[Fgcm]

Please note I am stopping short of placing the Q viewfinder in a Leica model sized like an M, with interchangeable lenses....

A Q with interchangeable lenses would be a great camera.

Ideally it should have a L flange to attach both L and M lenses.

In other words, the perfect camera is a smaller and lighter SL or, if you prefer, a slightly larger Q.

It would be simple, immediate, fast, responsive, flexible, cheaper than Ms, easier to use for those who are not trained to the rangefinder.

[jonatdonuts]

There are quite a large number of voices calling for an ILC Q with an L mount. However, Leica have already gone down the 'quality without compromise' design path for the SL lenses, which has lead to large, bulky barrels which would be difficult to handle on a Q sized body. I'm not sure if it would make much business sense for Leica to develop smaller, Q sized autofocus SL lenses in parallel to their larger counterparts. 

 

An alternative route could be to develop an ILC Q with a built in autofocus M mount. In this respect, the Q's internal body would physically shift the M lens to acquire focus, in the same way the TechArt Pro does for M lenses on Sony bodies. 

 

I think this would sell like hotcakes, at least for those of us who have a couple of M lenses. Would also be a considerate move for the older rangefinder generation whose eyesight is not what it used to be. But then again, I don't know if the tech can fit inside a compact Q shaped body, and match the Q's rapid AF benchmark. Not to mention the fact that such a contraption may be understood as undermining the manual focus philosophy behind the M lenses, which is partly why many of us go gaga over them. 

 

 

A Q with interchangeable lenses would be a great camera.
Ideally it should have a L flange to attach both L and M lenses.
In other words, the perfect camera is a smaller and lighter SL or, if you prefer, a slightly larger Q.
It would be simple, immediate, fast, responsive, flexible, cheaper than Ms, easier to use for those who are not trained to the rangefinder.

Edited May 27, 2018 by jonatdonuts

[Whitford]

Shutter speed already in the viewfinder. You meant aperture, certainly.

 

Maybe I am just frustrated with the hit rate on my 75mm Summicron. Grrrr. Feel cross-eyed...

 

No, I meant while in full manual operation I wouldn't mind a shutter speed readout next to the meter.

Edited May 27, 2018 by Whitford

[pico]

DesignDog: I think you are a victim of viewfinder overload from your Nikon years.

 

Most Leica rangefinder users are perfectly comfortable through experience with a clear view off the subject, little-to-no information that they already know interfering with the view. All they need to know is in their mind. No batteries required.

Edited May 28, 2018 by pico

[6bit]

ISO knob. What was Leica thinking. Make it easier. A pop up and down type button/knob.

[jaapv]

There are quite a large number of voices calling for an ILC Q with an L mount. However, Leica have already gone down the 'quality without compromise' design path for the SL lenses, which has lead to large, bulky barrels which would be difficult to handle on a Q sized body. I'm not sure if it would make much business sense for Leica to develop smaller, Q sized autofocus SL lenses in parallel to their larger counterparts. 

 

An alternative route could be to develop an ILC Q with a built in autofocus M mount. In this respect, the Q's internal body would physically shift the M lens to acquire focus, in the same way the TechArt Pro does for M lenses on Sony bodies. 

 

I think this would sell like hotcakes, at least for those of us who have a couple of M lenses. Would also be a considerate move for the older rangefinder generation whose eyesight is not what it used to be. But then again, I don't know if the tech can fit inside a compact Q shaped body, and match the Q's rapid AF benchmark. Not to mention the fact that such a contraption may be understood as undermining the manual focus philosophy behind the M lenses, which is partly why many of us go gaga over them. 

The real problem is that such a system would impair image quality on floating element lenses. It would be slow as well, as it has to move far more mass than native AF lenses.

[Herr Barnack]

JMHO but in my view the M10 has enough technology already.  It is an M camera, not a rangefinder version of a Nikon/Canon DSLR. 

 

The M10 is a step forward in the evolution of the digital M; the designers cleaned up the design and cast overboard the clutter that had been allowed to encroach on the M240. I am glad for the addition of the ISO knob on the top plate and the reduction of buttons on the back from six to three.  I am most grateful of all for the casting aside of the repugnant M button and video mode on the M240 series cameras. 

 

I'm not sure how or where Leica goes from here with regard to the M11 but I pray that they keep it clean and do encumber it with unneeded bells and whistles just so that Nikon and Canon users can's say "But it doesn't even have _____ or _____ or _____ or _____ or _____ or _____!!" (fill in the blanks with the hundreds of mind numbing possibilities).

 

Bottom line:  A true M camera should always be high speed/low drag.

Edited May 28, 2018 by Herr Barnack

[ramarren]

To me, the finest digital M is the Leica M-D typ 262. It has all the features I need and use, and nothing extra that I don't.

[designdog]

DesignDog: I think you are a victim of viewfinder overload from your Nikon years.

 

Most Leica rangefinder users are perfectly comfortable through experience with a clear view off the subject, little-to-no information that they already know interfering with the view. All they need to know is in their mind. No batteries required.

 

I am sure you are correct! The more I use the camera, the more I agree.

 

Getting better hit rate with the 75. I think I am fortunate that my decision to forego Nikon in favor of Leica coincided with the M10...

 

PS, FWIW: I did shoot film with Nikon, with the F3/T and the Fm3A, and, I think, an F4. (Also an F6 but it had autofocus.) So I am used to manual focus with no focus aid. However, I never could get confident with the split prism focusing - the Leica rangefinder is much brighter and much easier...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Fgcm]

There are quite a large number of voices calling for an ILC Q with an L mount.

 

Leica Rumors says that in June will be released a C-M full frame with a L mount.

I’m really curious to see the new camera.