Have we reached a turning point?

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A turning point need not be a profound regression to previous technology. It also does not mean ceasing further development. When we consider such it is helpful to understand that aesthetic and technical changes are not binary but evolutionary. A development for example in digital cameras does not annul all previous history. A deep dive into digital will reveal technology that has not yet become applicable for interesting reasons.

More later

Edited October 27, 2018 by pico

[IkarusJohn]

I agree Pico.  

Just because people here cannot easily foresee further development in cameras and lenses which are either needed or likely to improve photography per se, doesn't mean that the M is dead or at the end of the road.  Even if Leica continues to make what is effectively the M10, stubbornly refusing to up MP (because it's not really needed) or to dispose of the coupled rangefinder (because M means messucher, and if you want an EVF, the SL is the better option), with changes in colour or removing the frame lever (again), adding then removing video (extremely unlikely), putting a USB connection in, removing then reinstating the baseplate, improving the dynamic range and whatever else the market demands, the M will still sell for the reasons it's selling now.

The form and function of this camera is largely unchanged since 1954, and it's the camera which has kept the company going through thick and thin.  Why will people buy it?  For the same reasons they bought it in 1954 and they buy it now - it has been mature and well conceived for decades.  All that Leica has done is keep up with technology.  Even the M3 was the same - it wasn't actually that innovative - what they took was existing technology and put it together really well.

The M10 isn't that different from the M3 - proven sensor with MP which is plenty for most photographers, fabulous lenses, rangefinder coupled, electronic visoflex, making the camera compact and easy to use.  What they have done is refine what is available, and given it that touch of Leica magic which people apparently will pay for.

There will be new technologies, and Leica will continue to adopt those which they think are appropriate.  They will chase the mass market with the L mount, but the M camera will continue to sell - since the M9 was released, Leica's main problem has been meeting demand for the M camera and lenses, and managing quality issues which is a problem for a small company in a global market.

Turning point?  End of the road?  Nowhere for the M to go?  I don't think so.

[Advertisement]

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

[jeff_m]

The OM10 M-D signifies more than just a new model IMO. Its design is clearly intended to appeal to a specific marketplace and as such it lies between the 'standard' models and the 'special editions'.

Sorry but I don’t see the M10-D as a new model. It is an update to previous model. We had already had the M-D based on the previous model. The “P” models have been between regular and special editions for a while now. 

It will appeal to those who can afford a quirky design redolent of film cameras (lack of display and fake wind-on lever) but adopts new 'consumer' technologies (apps).

The M-app was very similar to Fotos app. Sorry I don’t see this as a ‘consumer’ technology. A consumer technology is usually defined as something pros don’t want. They definitely want more options to acquire images.

Now don't get me wrong about this, but I feel that this is actually a model designed to absolutely appeal directly to an 'amateur' market and with no real pretence of being a 'professional tool'. If Leica have got their marketing right then this is perhaps the strategy that they need to adopt - 'professional' photography has changed hugely after digital became mainstream with a much reduced marketplace and many photographers simply moving on.

What is amateur about this camera. It is a modified current model M10. I don’t see a reduced marketplace, what I see is a massive increase in the number of photographers trying to get the available work. The photographers that may have moved on have been replaced by many more. 

Many traditional skills are no longer needed and (in my view) we see much poorer imagery being used because it is cheap but also because the users no longer recognise imagery as flawed as they would have done in the past.

True, old skills replaced by new skills. This has happened in many fields. Not necessarily a bad thing. A blanket statement that photographers today aren’t as good as yesterday’s photographers might be seen as kind of offensive. 

In the past Leica have (and still do to an extent) played on their connection with the 'great' photographers. That is no longer viable in the digital age because fewer of us are recognising their images.

Advertising changes.

So perhaps Leica have reached a turning point with the M. Trying to keep it updated is becoming harder because it has been a 'mature' design for a very long time. Both its odd mix of innovation and its quirks of design mean that it has to now appeal to a different market?

The turning point for Leica was the M9 (the M8 was a failure). The Leica market has always been the same. Photographers who want the best never mind the price.

 In the dim and distant past (Victorian times) most innovation in photography was actually driven by wealthy amateurs (those who could afford to experiment). Perhaps we are coming full circle?

It has always been driven by amateurs. They buy over ten times the cameras that pros buy. I have been told this repeatedly by all the photography equipment manufacturers that I have spoken with over the years.

[6bit]

10 hours ago, magixaxeman said:

That wouldn't be an "M" then that would be an SL.

An M without a rangefinder isn't an M at all.

It would be whatever Leica called it. I’m not being a jerk but tell me Leica wouldn’t make an EVF M and call it such if they thought it meant $$$$.

The range finder makes an M special but so does the M mount. 

 

10 hours ago, magixaxeman said:

 

To back up my point: What is unique about the Leica M camera's? What sets them apart from every other digital camera on the market?  yes, the rangefinder focusing, without it they're just another high end mirrorless camera.

 

 

Same here plus the fact that I want to know for sure that if I miss a shot it was down to me not one of the auto functions of a camera.

 

[jonoslack]

On 10/26/2018 at 9:04 AM, pgk said:

The OM10 M-D signifies more than just a new model IMO. Its design is clearly intended to appeal to a specific marketplace and as such it lies between the 'standard' models and the 'special editions'.It will appeal to those who can afford a quirky design redolent of film cameras (lack of display and fake wind-on lever) but adopts new 'consumer' technologies (apps). Now don't get me wrong about this, but I feel that this is actually a model designed to absolutely appeal directly to an 'amateur' market and with no real pretence of being a 'professional tool'. If Leica have got their marketing right then this is perhaps the strategy that they need to adopt - 'professional' photography has changed hugely after digital became mainstream with a much reduced marketplace and many photographers simply moving on. Many traditional skills are no longer needed and (in my view) we see much poorer imagery being used because it is cheap but also because the users no longer recognise imagery as flawed as they would have done in the past.

In the past Leica have (and still do to an extent) played on their connection with the 'great' photographers. That is no longer viable in the digital age because fewer of us are recognising their images. So perhaps Leica have reached a turning point with the M. Trying to keep it updated is becoming harder because it has been a 'mature' design for a very long time. Both its odd mix of innovation and its quirks of design mean that it has to now appeal to a different market?

In the dim and distant past (Victorian times) most innovation in photography was actually driven by wealthy amateurs (those who could afford to experiment). Perhaps we are coming full circle?

Hi There

I've read this and read it, and I think that whilst your observation of the role of the M10-D (up to "of being a 'professional tool'") is spot on, I think that I disagree with everything you say after that. 

I'm sure that there are more professionals using Leica M cameras now than there have been since the seventies - more to the point, although not so many of them turn up here, I think the average age of the M shooter is going down, people are arriving in droves (not 'simply moving on'), and whilst I agree that for professionals 'traditional skills' are no longer needed, other skills certainly are . . . and I fundamentally disagree that we see 'poorer imagery being used '. I think that the imagery available today is wonderful and varied (although the role of photo-journalism has of coursed changed and lots of media outlets are using phone snaps rather than sending out professionals). The changing skill set required for getting technically good pictures has freed lots of amateurs to take really good images - the only problem I can see is finding the 'great' images in amongst the noise of the simply 'good' images.

In the past few years Leica have gone beyond just playing on their connection with the 'great' photographers, they are still doing this though (The Leica Hall of Fame, connection with Magnum) etc. but they are also really actively supporting younger photographers, the Oskar Barnack awards have grown in stature and there are galleries all around the world which are showing images from photographers young and old, amateur and professional. In Leitz Park they have a really fabulous gallery space as well as a museum and burgeoning archives. Andreas Kaufmann was talking about using the remaining space at Leitz Park for opening a University Department.

As far as development of the M camera, I would suggest that it's developed more in the last 6 years than in the previous 50 - the rangefinder is larger, brighter and less liable to be knocked out, the shutter is quieter than it's ever been, it's now substantially weather sealed . . . and that is without referring to it being digital!

You can be grumpy if you like, but it seems to me that the Leica M is safer than it's been for decades, with a new young user base, take up again by professionals, and that Leica itself is healthy and vibrant, completely focused on providing " The Essence " whilst supporting serious photography and photographers in a way that no other camera company even approaches.

All the best

Jono Slack

Edited October 28, 2018 by jonoslack
typos

[a.noctilux]

Jono,

That is my thinking also concerning Leica approches of their "philosophy to take part of now-photography" new way of managing and offerings of different systems for different users.

What Leica Camera offer to users can not be found in other manufacturers offering, anywhere.

But when users happend to believe in Universality of M System (in no way it is and never will be), normal that the M system disappoints these users.

Other users appreciate other makers gear's offering to complement M System.

 

[bocaburger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Every new Leica M release is met with a percentage of criticism and negativity, yet I can’t think of one since the M5 that really tanked in sales.  So I have to conclude that they do their research well, not merely release new models haphazardly on whim and speculation.  

Personally I never used the wind-on lever as a thumb grip, so would not use the fake one.  Of much more significance to me, I would not buy a digital camera without a screen.  I have auto-review set permanently off.  It is not a distraction or a temptation to me.  But when I do want to check a shot (a distinct and unique advantage of digital) it’s right there at the push of a button.  Having to pull my phone out and run its battery down is, to me, absolutely absurd.

But like I said, Leica seems to sell whatever M models they make, so I really can’t scoff at their decisions. 

 

[ramarren]

It's obvious to me that Leica is much better at understanding Leicas and their users than any of the armchair Leica management gurus posting to internet forums. Myself included. 

My reassessment of the M10-D ... it's not the next revision of the M-D minimalist concept, it's an M10-P with LCD and configuration controls/functions off-loaded to an external device for the sake of better ergonomics and less distraction ... has changed my view of it. I still think the "thumb rest" is a crappy design (never liked or used a wind lever for that purpose), but it's also easily removed. For those that want/like it, well, it's there. 

The mistake was mine (and I think many others too) in considering the M10-D an M-D follow-on. I'm convinced now, from reading the instruction manual, that it not at all: it's a full featured M10-P with better ergonomics. Details still escape me as to their logic ... I'd have put the on/off/wireless where the ISO control is, the ISO control where the M-D has it, and instead of a useless lever, i'd have surrounded the shutter release with a finger dial for EV compensation ... but all of those oddities I can train my hands to work with easily enough. The plus of not having all the buttons and LCD in the way on the back wins big time for my ability to handle the camera easily, and the versatility of having an EVF and lens codes for my R lenses makes it a more versatile camera. The updated, improved optical viewfinder and lower-noise sensor are always welcome. 

[jonoslack]

6 minutes ago, ramarren said:

Details still escape me as to their logic ... I'd have put the on/off/wireless where the ISO control is, the ISO control where the M-D has it, and instead of a useless lever, i'd have surrounded the shutter release with a finger dial for EV compensation ... but all of those oddities I can train my hands to work with easily enough.

HI Godfrey - glad you see the point. 

as for moving the controls - I think the first point about your positions is that it would have meant substantial internal design changes (too expensive). Also, for better or for worse, most of us have become accustomed to the position of the ISO dial on the M10 - but the on/off switch (IMHO) would have better stayed put!

best

Jono

[NigelG]

31 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

HI Godfrey - glad you see the point. 

as for moving the controls - I think the first point about your positions is that it would have meant substantial internal design changes (too expensive). Also, for better or for worse, most of us have become accustomed to the position of the ISO dial on the M10 - but the on/off switch (IMHO) would have better stayed put!

best

Jono

Hi Jono

Firstly (and OT for this thread -sorry) thanks for your in depth review and follow up thoughts on the M10-D which are very valuable - and which tell me this is absolutely not a successor to the original M-D.

My (snarky) comments re this model are based on the regression from the idea of “Das Wesentliche” which Leica trumpeted as being the ultimate for creativity (quote)

Without the temptation to view the captured image immediately after exposure or share it with the person or subjects featured in the picture. The Leica M-D directs attention entirely on the composition. It consistently shifts the focus to the creative aspects of each subject – less technology for more creativity

Re the controls - with the on/off switch left where it was with WiFi added as a second stage, and the  iso dial already in place, then exposure compensation could have used the thumbwheel/top button combination like the M-D (which is already used like the M-D for the date/time. This would have meant that the camera wouldn’t have needed a rear dial AT ALL....

[ramarren]

52 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

HI Godfrey - glad you see the point. 

as for moving the controls - I think the first point about your positions is that it would have meant substantial internal design changes (too expensive). Also, for better or for worse, most of us have become accustomed to the position of the ISO dial on the M10 - but the on/off switch (IMHO) would have better stayed put!

 

1 minute ago, NigelG said:

Hi Jono

Firstly (and OT for this thread -sorry) thanks for your in depth review and follow up thoughts on the M10-D which are very valuable - and which tell me this is absolutely not a successor to the original M-D.

My (snarky) comments re this model are based on the regression from the idea of “Das Wesentliche” which Leica trumpeted as being the ultimate for creativity (quote)

Without the temptation to view the captured image immediately after exposure or share it with the person or subjects featured in the picture. The Leica M-D directs attention entirely on the composition. It consistently shifts the focus to the creative aspects of each subject – less technology for more creativity

Re the controls - with the on/off switch left where it was with WiFi added as a second stage, and the  iso dial already in place, then exposure compensation could have used the thumbwheel/top button combination like the M-D (which is already used like the M-D for the date/time. This would have meant that the camera wouldn’t have needed a rear dial AT ALL....

 

WE can all discuss the details of the design and control logic ad nauseam, but the fact is that the engineers and marketing folks have to stop and do something to put the camera into production. I'm sure not all of them agree on every detail, no collection of engineers ever do. 

And I'm sure you're right, Jono: there would have to be a large number of internal changes to move the ISO setting, power on/off, and EV comp as I would prefer, or even as you would prefer. And even in what I'd think makes more sense, well, having the power on-off-wifi (and self timer, dang it!) concentric to the shutter release does work very nicely if you tend to shut the camera off between exposure sessions to save battery. I tend not to a good bit of the time... 

Per the thread subject: "Have we reached a turning point?" my feeling is "No." It's just another new model introduction with some newly controversial features, advantage and flaws per each of our perceptions. I like some aspects, find some puzzling, dislike others. Same as for nearly every camera intro I've seen since 1970. I do think Leica is making the digital M a much more refined camera than its first couple of incarnations, but then I think back to as late as 2004 (feels like yesterday to me, but that's fourteen years ago!) and the overwhelming sense at that time was that M-mount and digital sensors were surely forever incompatible. Look how far the M has come now.

The turning point, if there was one, in the digital Ms to me will always be the typ 240. The M8 and M9 felt sluggish and clumsy to me, despite that they made good photos, the antithesis of the way a Leica M film camera always felt. The M typ 240 restored the responsiveness that I missed, which was even more important to me than the control details  of the M10 or even the ergonomics of the sans-LCD ME60 and M-D 262. Without the responsiveness, the M9 felt like a medium format camera: slow and leisurely in use despite what it could actually do if you persevered and worked at it. 

[kwsmith45]

Hi Juno,

I appreciate your reviews. You have the right balance between enthusiasm and objectivity. Given the cost, one should be enthusiastic about Leica.

I agree that Leica has continually improved the M cameras. Arguably, Leica is one of the most innovative camera companies (S, SL, Q, CL/TL, M, Smart Phones, L System, etc.) and the M-D is not perfect but brilliant. Smart phones changed photography. The new Fotos app combined with the M-D maybe the future of traditional photography. Why carry two screens, especially when smart phone screen resolutions are improving rapidly along with storage capacity. Leica just expanded the M product line and will likely sell all the M-D they make plus they get to test the future with their most iconic camera.

[pgk]

8 hours ago, jonoslack said:

You can be grumpy if you like, but it seems to me that the Leica M is safer than it's been for decades, with a new young user base, take up again by professionals, and that Leica itself is healthy and vibrant, completely focused on providing " The Essence " whilst supporting serious photography and photographers in a way that no other camera company even approaches.

All the best

Jono Slack

Jono

Yes I could be grumpy but my point is that once a company starts relying on style over substance then it at the whim of the marketplace.

I talk to other professionals that I know (from all over the place) and the general feeling is that for stills photography, standards have fallen (I can absolutely vouch for seeing some dreadful images being used in national campaigns which simply would not have been considered 20 years ago). But the real skillset required by many aspiring young professionals is the ability to live on much lower incomes than in the past. There are areas where fees are still high (London) for the fortunate few (but again people I know have moved into video as being the lucrative area). Perhaps this is what Leica have realised that very few full-time professional photographers can actually afford to consider Leicas, and have shifted their marketing emphasis in another direction.

Leica has a legacy and moving away from that is in my view a shift in direction and thus a turning point. Safer, perhaps. But as what? A toy for the wealthier amateur or part-timer?  I have no problem with this but it is an acknowledgement of how things have changed.

[jonoslack]

21 minutes ago, pgk said:

Jono

Yes I could be grumpy but my point is that once a company starts relying on style over substance then it at the whim of the marketplace.

I talk to other professionals that I know (from all over the place) and the general feeling is that for stills photography, standards have fallen (I can absolutely vouch for seeing some dreadful images being used in national campaigns which simply would not have been considered 20 years ago). But the real skillset required by many aspiring young professionals is the ability to live on much lower incomes than in the past. There are areas where fees are still high (London) for the fortunate few (but again people I know have moved into video as being the lucrative area). Perhaps this is what Leica have realised that very few full-time professional photographers can actually afford to consider Leicas, and have shifted their marketing emphasis in another direction.

Leica has a legacy and moving away from that is in my view a shift in direction and thus a turning point. Safer, perhaps. But as what? A toy for the wealthier amateur or part-timer?  I have no problem with this but it is an acknowledgement of how things have changed.

But I just don't believe they are relying on style over substance; this camera perhaps, but I simply don't consider this camera as any kind of watershed (and I don't believe Leica do either) It's a sidetrack, an excursion into the possible (and possibly a little tongue in cheek). 

I quite agree that only a few professionals are earning the fees that they were 20 years ago = and also that there are some terrible images used in national campaigns . . how can one argue with that? But then you say

"Perhaps this is what Leica have realised that very few full-time professional photographers can actually afford to consider Leicas, and have shifted their marketing emphasis in another direction."

I just don't think it's true that's what Leica have done, or that it's what they've realised. Let's face it, very very few professionals have used Leica cameras for decades (certainly since the 70's) so there isn't a sudden haemorrhage of professionals leaving Leica - I'd say it's quite the contrary - there are more professionals using Leica now.

I don't see any evidence of them moving away from their legacy - they aren't abandoning the M line, and as far as I can see their cameras are less "A toy for the wealthier amateur or part-timer?" than they've been for years. 

On a personal level, the difference between visiting Solms 10 years ago, and visiting Wetzlar today - their legacy and heritage is emphasised at every point. They aren't turning anywhere, and their recent success has been built on their legacy.

Best

Jono

[pgh]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

Jono

Yes I could be grumpy but my point is that once a company starts relying on style over substance then it at the whim of the marketplace.

I talk to other professionals that I know (from all over the place) and the general feeling is that for stills photography, standards have fallen (I can absolutely vouch for seeing some dreadful images being used in national campaigns which simply would not have been considered 20 years ago). But the real skillset required by many aspiring young professionals is the ability to live on much lower incomes than in the past. There are areas where fees are still high (London) for the fortunate few (but again people I know have moved into video as being the lucrative area). Perhaps this is what Leica have realised that very few full-time professional photographers can actually afford to consider Leicas, and have shifted their marketing emphasis in another direction.

Leica has a legacy and moving away from that is in my view a shift in direction and thus a turning point. Safer, perhaps. But as what? A toy for the wealthier amateur or part-timer?  I have no problem with this but it is an acknowledgement of how things have changed.

Who are these professionals you talk to? Changing trends in imagery absolutely does not mean standards have fallen. There is more good, mind-blowing, photography now then ever, it's mostly from young photographers too. Just because there's also a lot more mediocrity (there are a lot more images - period) does not mean standards have fallen. You could argue that the standards of the gatekeepers has shifted in some ways, but if you think overall photography was better before then I would kindly make the argument that you're not looking in the right places, or that you're really only looking at a very specific type of picture making that's probably past it's expiration date anyways. I would argue that finally we are breaking out of the stodgy ways of thinking that dominated for a good while too long. 

Photography as a profession has generally been one for the privileged. It's a less viable profession now, but also a lower barrier to entry. There are a lot of killer young photographers now who wouldn't have gotten a shot 40 years ago. Overall, this is a win. It has cut in to my business and essentially made my whole career tenuous, but that just means I need to be better. 

I know plenty of professionals who can afford Leica, they just choose to spend that income on different equipment. Not all of them of course, but if you're still making pictures after 5-10 years professionally you can probably afford a Leica, or it's time to do some real soul searching about what it is that you're doing. 

I think the M10-D is silly and Leica marketing needs work but it hardly represents the state of photography generally. 

[IkarusJohn]

For those who say they don’t see the point in having an extra screen (iPhone or Android), I have a question - what do you use the screen for?  If you head out to take photos and decide you don’t want the distraction so you leave your phone behind.  What are you missing?

If you like to chimp, confirm focus and check histogram as you go, change white balance suddenly decide to use flash or set a timer, then perhaps the M10-P is a better choice.

But having decided the camera is not for you, perhaps the camera might work for others.  Many others.  If you use the optical rangefinder by preference, you’re starting with a camera which is best handheld, with available light, using manual focus lenses in the range 28-90mm.  Leica’s concept of The Essentials remains valid.  Without the EVF, and if you caan leave your phone in your pocket, exactly what controls do you have on the M10-D which weren’t on the M-D and which also take away from the clarity of purpose?

I can’t get too excited about the ISO dial, EC copensation dial, on/off switch or thumb rest lever - that is just re-purposing which I’m sure I could adjust to.  But then I have never got excited about the size of the shutter speed dial and a lot of the other minor changes whcih have exercised long term users here.

Surely, if you can cope with these changes, the M10-D is as pure in conception as the M-D?  Certainly, the M-D lacked the clarity of purpose of the M60, but that is another issue, I guess.

[jonoslack]

7 minutes ago, pgh said:

Who are these professionals you talk to? Changing trends in imagery absolutely does not mean standards have fallen. There is more good, mind-blowing, photography now then ever, it's mostly from young photographers too. Just because there's also a lot more mediocrity (there are a lot more images - period) does not mean standards have fallen. You could argue that the standards of the gatekeepers has shifted in some ways, but if you think overall photography was better before then I would kindly make the argument that you're not looking in the right places, or that you're really only looking at a very specific type of picture making that's probably past it's expiration date anyways. I would argue that finally we are breaking out of the stodgy ways of thinking that dominated for a good while too long. 

Photography as a profession has generally been one for the privileged. It's a less viable profession now, but also a lower barrier to entry. There are a lot of killer young photographers now who wouldn't have gotten a shot 40 years ago. Overall, this is a win. It has cut in to my business and essentially made my whole career tenuous, but that just means I need to be better. 

I know plenty of professionals who can afford Leica, they just choose to spend that income on different equipment. Not all of them of course, but if you're still making pictures after 5-10 years professionally you can probably afford a Leica, or it's time to do some real soul searching about what it is that you're doing. 

 

Excellent

[scott kirkpatrick]

5 hours ago, jonoslack said:

as for moving the controls - I think the first point about your positions is that it would have meant substantial internal design changes (too expensive). Also, for better or for worse, most of us have become accustomed to the position of the ISO dial on the M10 - but the on/off switch (IMHO) would have better stayed put!

 

Given that -D cameras are either for a committed few, or an experiment in offloading that will pay off in the future, I think Leica showed good engineering sense in not touching anything that didn't have to be changed.  Actually, I find the ON-OFF-WIFI switch easy to use without looking, while the EV Comp setting requires looking at it (or checking through the viewfinder).  ON/OFF switches on the left side like the SL or Olympus cameras, would be much worse.  Although I use the fold-out thumb grip, the biggest improvement in holding the M-D is just the use of the whole back of the camera  without having to worry about wandering focus points, or greasy gorilla glass.

[ramarren]

9 minutes ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

Given that -D cameras are either for a committed few, or an experiment in offloading that will pay off in the future, I think Leica showed good engineering sense in not touching anything that didn't have to be changed.  Actually, I find the ON-OFF-WIFI switch easy to use without looking, while the EV Comp setting requires looking at it (or checking through the viewfinder).  ON/OFF switches on the left side like the SL or Olympus cameras, would be much worse.  Although I use the fold-out thumb grip, the biggest improvement in holding the M-D is just the use of the whole back of the camera  without having to worry about wandering focus points, or greasy gorilla glass.

One of the biggest joys in holding the SL is simply the large areas of empty space where my hands can fit without banging into one control or the other. The position of the on/off lever never made the first difference to me, since I just switched it on and left it that way until I was done shooting. 

The M-D gets to that on the smaller M body by not having the LCD and the buttons. The CL gets there by having an easily available control lock toggle button (which doesn't save the greasy finger prints on the LCD issue, but I rarely mind that anyway...). 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Agent M10]

30 minutes ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

Although I use the fold-out thumb grip, the biggest improvement in holding the M-D is just the use of the whole back of the camera  without having to worry about wandering focus points, or greasy gorilla glass.

I had the original M-D and the “whole back of the camera” was the best thing about it, just the feel of it. I’m considering trading in my M10 just for that. The lever would be an added bonus since I photograph vertically 80% of the time.