Really “Is it the end of M road”?

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I didn’t mention adding 8000 shutter speed, which would be a welcome addition/advancement.

 

Why 1/8000th - to shoot wide open in daylight, a fading, silly aesthetic?

Edited August 14, 2018 by pico

[jaapv]

Why if video is the dealbreaker did you decide to keep your M9 instead of 240?

Because I found the CL a much better camera than the M240 for my use, but I did not want to lose the rangefinder entirely -  and I need a full-frame camera for my Super-Elmar 18 and CV 15 lenses.

Besides, I like the images the M9 produces, and it is a nice companion to my Monochrom1.

The M240 was completely redundant, as I only bought it for its versatility to use long lenses and do macro with modern, non-Visoflex lenses, do video notes, etc. A modern mirrorless beats it hands-down.

[dkmoore]

Why 1/8000th - to shoot wide open in daylight, a fading, silly aesthetic?

 

 

More tongue and cheek then anything. However, I do shoot the 50APO mostly wide open but rarely use my 28 or 90 wide open.

 

Just joining in on the fun : )

[IkarusJohn]

... A modern mirrorless beats it hands-down.

 

 

So, maybe an EVF based M camera has it's place after all?  Now, recite after me "M means ... "

[dkmoore]

Maybe Leica will create the Mr. Potato head of M cameras that allows us the ability to detach whatever parts of the camera we don't feel like using. 

[jaapv]

So, maybe an EVF based M camera has it's place after all?  Now, recite after me "M means ... "

Not if it is handicapped by the M mount... No RF, L mount, in that case you could name the SL an M camera.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maybe Leica will create the Mr. Potato head of M cameras that allows us the ability to detach whatever parts of the camera we don't feel like using. 

Too right! Only you will have to send it in for half a year to have them removed for a "modest" financial consideration

[IkarusJohn]

Not if it is handicapped by the M mount... No RF, L mount, in that case you could name the SL an M camera.

 

 

Agreed.  I think that ship sailed some time ago.

[Kwesi]

Very interesting thread. My small contribution is that its NOT the end of the road for the M. Rather the M10 is the beginning of the M7 sized digital M. Currently technologically hampered by its size. Small battery, Heat Issues probably limiting processing capability that would provide higher res rear screen and EVF,  ommision  of digital level etc. All of this will get worked out in Leica's historically glacial fashion.

The M my friends, is just beginning.

[jaapv]

Quite possible, however it depends on the resources Leica is willing to assign to a system that is at the end of its technical development cycle, as opposed to a future-oriented L system. In any case, it would make it a VERY expensive camera. The M lenses are setting the trend: the cost of the last few releases can only be described as stratospheric.

[pgk]

Quite possible, however it depends on the resources Leica is willing to assign to a system that is at the end of its technical development cycle, .....

 

As sensors progress so will the M. It is a mature product but one which can be upgraded as suitable improvements in technology allow this to happen. My whole point has been that tinkering with a great design does not improve it. Some aspects of digital technology will make the M better but, because of the limitations imposed by its design and legacy lenses, many will not. Using those that will makes photographic sense. Potentially using those that won't fools some into thinking that it will be a better camera than it actually can be.

[lct]

Why 1/8000th - to shoot wide open in daylight, a fading, silly aesthetic?

 

Or too much wind (or arthrosis ) for handheld macro photos at slower shutter speeds.

Sony A7s mod, Elmar 90/4 macro, Leica macro-adapter, f/4, 1/8000s, 12800 iso

 

[Jon Warwick]

Quite possible, however it depends on the resources Leica is willing to assign to a system that is at the end of its technical development cycle, as opposed to a future-oriented L system. In any case, it would make it a VERY expensive camera. The M lenses are setting the trend: the cost of the last few releases can only be described as stratospheric.

I own a M 50 APO, and i personally think its price is stratospheric now that I can compare it to the superior lens quality that is being cranked out by the new SL Summicrons.

[pgk]

You are not comparing like with like. The 50 Apo is an optically superb lens. The SL lenses are optically and digitally integrated so their performance id a hybridisation of optics and software. A lens designer friend tells me that it costs a lot to produce pure optical quality in terms of quality control ....

 

On the subject of mature technologies, does anyone still use a pencil (as I do)? Mature, yes. Redundant, no.

[jaapv]

As sensors progress so will the M. It is a mature product but one which can be upgraded as suitable improvements in technology allow this to happen. My whole point has been that tinkering with a great design does not improve it. Some aspects of digital technology will make the M better but, because of the limitations imposed by its design and legacy lenses, many will not. Using those that will makes photographic sense. Potentially using those that won't fools some into thinking that it will be a better camera than it actually can be.

That is so, tweaks like better sensor etc, will always be possible. I was thinking more of essential improvements, like integrating the EVF, focus confirmation, etc. That  would drive the price up considerably, with R&D costs, price and sales numbers chasing one another. A 12.000 € M12 with APO-Summilux 35, APO Noctilux 50  and APO-Summilux 90  @ 50.000 € total anybody?

[LocalHero1953]

I own a M 50 APO, and i personally think its price is stratospheric now that I can compare it to the superior lens quality that is being cranked out by the new SL Summicrons.

If you were able to fit the 50SL Summilux of the Summicrons to the M10, I think you might see how they are different in more ways than optically.

I'm not an optical designer, but I can see that squeezing high quality optics into a small package might require costs (manufacturing precision, special glasses) that you don't have for a large SL lens.

I just remain in awe and wonder at the output from the jewel-like, tiny 50 Summicron-M.

[jaapv]

That is so, tweaks like better sensor etc, will always be possible. I was thinking more of essential improvements, like integrating the EVF, focus confirmation, etc. That  would drive the price up considerably, with R&D costs, price and sales numbers chasing one another. A 12.000 € M12 with APO-Summilux 35, APO Noctilux 50  and APO-Summilux 90  @ 50.000 € total anybody?

I guess at least one member (N) is pre-ordering right now..

[01af]

... but I can see that squeezing high-quality optics into a small package might require costs [...] that you don't have for a large SL lens.

Yes, definitely. It is expensive to make a lens that's good. It is much more expensive to make a lens (with same angle-of-view, same speed, and same image circle diameter) that's good and small. That's why all those Zeiss Otus and Sigma Art lenses as well as the new HD Pentax-D FA* 50 mm 1:1.4  are so huge.

[Mr Fjeld]

I use a fountain pen - does that qualify

You are not comparing like with like. The 50 Apo is an optically superb lens. The SL lenses are optically and digitally integrated so their performance id a hybridisation of optics and software. A lens designer friend tells me that it costs a lot to produce pure optical quality in terms of quality control ....

 

On the subject of mature technologies, does anyone still use a pencil (as I do)? Mature, yes. Redundant, no.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[IkarusJohn]

I use a fountain pen - does that qualify

Me too.

 

As the L Mount lenses can only be used with L cameras (which are digital), what’s the problem with digital corrections baked into the DNG file in camera? It’s a digital file, which will be adjusted and corrected in post processing anyway. As for the lenses, they can only be used on cameras which apply the correction. Who cares? It’s the final image that counts, right?

 

The 50 Summilux-SL is the best 50 Leica makes. I put it on the camera, bring it to my eye, relying on the EVF (a digitised approximation of the image) take the picture, which is stored in bits and bytes on an SD card, which I then load onto my computer for further adjustment. And I should worry that the camera also makes adjustments to the digital file, rather than the image being perfect when it hits the sensor because the lens is flawless?

 

Not really.