Dismayed by the M10-D

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

...

edit:  And pace, Godfrey, Mark shares a different itch that some of us have to scratch at times.  Wondering why Leica's very capable engineers have come up with the sometimes strange solutions that they bring to market.  I wonder about that, too.

I prefer not to play either armchair engineer or corporate analyst; I'm primarily interested in using the equipment and secondarily in understanding the history of the company's engineering. I leave the "why" out of scope because there's no way to evaluate whether such conjectures are credible. 

Such it is.

[Jeff S]

5 hours ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

  Roger Cicala also does teardowns and puts his victims back together without any pieces left over, but only on lenses and rarely on Leica lenses since his outfit rents only a few of them.

 

No, Roger also does camera tear downs,  including most recent Canon, Sony and Nikons....like the Z7...

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/10/teardown-of-the-nikon-z7-mirrorless-camera/

I’ve found these particularly helpful regarding weather sealing, including a glowing assessment (for him, as a skeptic on sealing) of the sealing in the Canon 7DII.

He also disassembled an SL 24-90 lens a few years ago...

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/02/a-peak-inside-the-leica-vario-elmarit-sl-24-90mm-f2-8-4-asph/

I think the S system is the only major Leica  product he doesn’t stock, but as with the general population, it’s not commonly sought.

Even without a formal tear down, Roger and his staff can provide great insight on request into camera and lens service issues and build quality, as they routinely check and repair all gear before and after rental.  

Jeff

[jdlaing]

1 hour ago, easy_action said:

That article doesn't mention the sensor in the SL, just the sensors in M system cameras and the CMOS sensor of the M240 specifically.

If I mount a wide or ultra wide M mount lens on an SL, can I expect the same performance in the corners of the image as I would get with an M10 or an M240?

I adore using my MD and it's optical rangefinder, but for certain applications (and lenses) the same camera with an EVF would be attractive - I could see myself owning both.

 

 

That article refers to ALL Leica CMOS Sensors. That would include the SL.

[Simon]

The trend I see more broadly in the industry is maximising the sensor size-to-body ratio, which typically means shrinking the body; like laptops have been doing for a while—to the point of ridiculous excess (thanks Apple!).

It’s happening more slowly in the camera industry because ergonomics are important, and it likely won’t happen to the M-system any more other than extremely subtle changes, but it’s definitely happening elsewhere.  I think they’ll stick with the M10 size and layout for at least a few more generations.  No need to change what is basically perfect physically with the M10.

With the L mount Leica are basically saying a rangefinderless M-mount camera is out of the question.  Maybe we’ll see a more compact full-frame L-mount camera than the SL at some point: an interchangeable Q if you will; (or slightly smaller even).  The Q is about the same size as the M after all.

The EVIL M-mount camera is commonly requested, but I can only see a third-party doing that, if at all at this point.

Edited December 15, 2018 by Simon

[Stuart Richardson]

I think an M mount EVIL camera is also largely pointless...the L mount was developed so that you could use M lenses as well as more modern AF lenses in the same camera with a simple adapter. Making an M mount EVF camera would be counterproductive because it would prevent them from selling lenses developed for SL and TL cameras, in order to sell M lenses which would work exactly the same using a simple adapter. The only reason the M mount has not changed is that there are so many users still interested in using both film and digital M cameras. With a camera like the SL you can have your cake and eat it too...use M lenses natively and also have access to modern AF lenses if you want them.  I understand the argument for wanting a smaller SL camera, but then what you would really want is a smaller SL camera, not an M without a rangefinder... Again, I know everyone's taste's are different, I am just having a hard time parsing the practicality of this idea. 

Edited December 15, 2018 by Stuart Richardson

[Tragg]

You want an M series camera without the rangefinder? I wouldn't hold your breath. While there is a market for rangefinder digital cameras Leica will continue making them. Pointless discussion let's move on...

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

• I agree with other - the SL seems to do what the OP requests.
•  

[adan]

Bottom line - an EVF uses up battery power faster than a glass viewfinder. And battery capacity is still linked to battery size, assuming the same tech is used. More mA/h equates to more ccs of lithium.

Therefore, an EVF, in addition to whatever size it adds itself (and compact ones require high eyepiece magnification, with associated distortion or color fringing - there's a reason the SL's (and the A7's, and the Z7's, and the top-end Fuji XT's) finder(s) require(s) a big 'ol hump on the camera) will also either: require a bigger battery than the M10's, or require more battery swapping per hour of use.

But enough about EVFs (for me, they fall in the same category as "rattlesnake bites" or "root canal" - even the best are painful. )

I'm not "dismayed" by the M10-D because - I don't have to buy one. My plain-vanilla M10s are doing the job just fine. Whatever else Leica does, there will eventually be a seamless (coupled-optical-RF, compact, strictly manual, M3-10 form factor) M10 replacement, once my M10s are "out of service life."

[Chaemono]

I think it can easily be shown that the SL has the same corner performance with wide M lenses (I don’t have access to ultra wide ones) as the M240 or the M10. With the α7R III and the Z7, corner performance starts to deteriorate at 35 mm and wider (except the M240, I have the other four cameras, waiting for the SL2 to compare before I’ll get rid of the Sony and the Nikon). The issue that I have is that the adapter affects the OOF areas slightly. This applies to all adapted lenses IMO but it’s hardly visible to most people or the difference is immaterial. The big question to me is will the S1/S1R work as well as the SL2 with wide M lenses.

BTW, I just posted some pictures and a link to a gallery in the image section of this board. I had the Z7 with an adapter with me and often took duplicate pictures of the same frame with the Z7. The only Z7 picture in the gallery is the one of the Lamborghini Miura. One advantage of modern BSI high MPx sensors is nice tonal gradation in the Highlights as long as one makes sure that they are not clipped when exposing. It shows in the golden yellow Miura hood IMO. But I liked more how the M10-P exposed most of the time for Highlights while preserving more shadow details “out of the box” (DNG files) in the ISO range 200 to 800. The S1R and SL2 sensors are likely to show similar performance as the Z7 in this respect. 

Edit - the post I was responding to got deleted. 

Edited December 15, 2018 by Chaemono

[cp995]

vor 45 Minuten schrieb tom0511:

• I agree with other - the SL seems to do what the OP requests.
•  

I think we will never see a Leica M without RF, that's not ralistic.

But, what's wrong with the Nikon Z?
It's a great and compact alternative to the SL System an the results with M-Lense are really good!

[scott kirkpatrick]

4 hours ago, ramarren said:

I prefer not to play either armchair engineer or corporate analyst; I'm primarily interested in using the equipment and secondarily in understanding the history of the company's engineering. I leave the "why" out of scope because there's no way to evaluate whether such conjectures are credible. 

Such it is.

I should have said "how" Leica has ended up with their set of solutions, rather than "why."   Speculating on Leica's business strategy and issues like the sourcing of their components does seem like a waste of time.  But "how" can be addressed by making experiments and even, in extreme cases, taking things apart.  And the last has been a source of enjoyment ever since I was about 8 years old.

[mdemeyer]

5 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I think an M mount EVIL camera is also largely pointless...the L mount was developed so that you could use M lenses as well as more modern AF lenses in the same camera with a simple adapter. Making an M mount EVF camera would be counterproductive because it would prevent them from selling lenses developed for SL and TL cameras, in order to sell M lenses which would work exactly the same using a simple adapter. The only reason the M mount has not changed is that there are so many users still interested in using both film and digital M cameras. With a camera like the SL you can have your cake and eat it too...use M lenses natively and also have access to modern AF lenses if you want them.  I understand the argument for wanting a smaller SL camera, but then what you would really want is a smaller SL camera, not an M without a rangefinder... Again, I know everyone's taste's are different, I am just having a hard time parsing the practicality of this idea. 

I would like to see the M-mount adapter for the L-Mount camera(s) have something that senses focus movement and sends an electrical signal to the body to (optionally) activate EVF magnification. Could be done with either a mechanical sensor or perhaps some kind of non-contacting sensor.   Completely doable. 

[Stuart Richardson]

Does it not do this already? I know it does so with the EVF on the M10. The only other camera I have used M lenses on was the T, but I do not remember if it automatically brought up the magnification when you move the focus.

[ramarren]

59 minutes ago, mdemeyer said:

I would like to see the M-mount adapter for the L-Mount camera(s) have something that senses focus movement and sends an electrical signal to the body to (optionally) activate EVF magnification. Could be done with either a mechanical sensor or perhaps some kind of non-contacting sensor.   Completely doable. 

 

21 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Does it not do this already? I know it does so with the EVF on the M10. The only other camera I have used M lenses on was the T, but I do not remember if it automatically brought up the magnification when you move the focus.

It's completely doable but requires that you incorporate a cam follower for the RF cam in an M-mount lens into the M Adapter L. The RF cam follower is how an M senses that the focusing helicoid of a lens is moving, and the digital Ms use this to trigger the focus magnification feature. 

Any additional mechanical and/or electronic sensor pieces incorporated into the M Adapter L will raise the price of the adapter by quite a lot, I'm sure. It's already quite pricey, with its six-bit lens code reader, etc. 

[tom0511]

WHat I really like is to look through an optical M viewfinder and to see the subject during I take the image.

What I have always disliked is all the focus problems (front focus/backfocus at certain f-stop, or at certain distance, or due to wrong calibration). Therefore I have moved to AF cameras (or EVF) mostly for everything longer than 50mm lenses.

Now I could use the M90 on the SL, but then I rather use the 75 SL AF and have AF.

A digital M with a sensor to start focus magnification when focusing (like the M10 with evf does) would not be such a hard idea for hardcore fans of M lenses and a M sized camera. It could be cheaper to build and sell, avoid focus problems and still allow the formfactor of the M. (Probably even a little lighter) 

Edited December 16, 2018 by tom0511

[lct]

No need to dump anything. There is some room for what Leica calls a "second M" with an EVF in place of the RF. It's not been ruled out according to Leica so all hope is not lost for some of us. 

[pgk]

1 hour ago, lct said:

There is some room for what Leica calls a "second M" with an EVF in place of the RF. It's not been ruled out according to Leica so all hope is not lost for some of us. 

I'm sure that Leica is trying to decide whether such a camera would make them some money, despite being a dead end due to the lack of lens/camera information transfer which is the Achilles' heel of the M. If they can then so be it.

[lct]

48 minutes ago, pgk said:

I'm sure that Leica is trying to decide whether such a camera would make them some money, despite being a dead end due to the lack of lens/camera information transfer which is the Achilles' heel of the M. If they can then so be it.

Achilles' heel or unique strength? Such a transfer could not work with M lenses and the "second M" could retain both the current coding and roller cam allowing for auto image magnification. 

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

I'm sure that Leica is trying to decide whether such a camera would make them some money, despite being a dead end due to the lack of lens/camera information transfer which is the Achilles' heel of the M. If they can then so be it.

Make money in the context of: will the number sold balance the R&D plus potential loss of sales of real M cameras.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ramarren]

The "digital M with an EVF" is a CL. 🙄 

Buy the L mount lenses, use a CL body, and you get everything you'd want out of an M with an EVF except for the use of much more expensive M lenses that don't perform any better. The only thing lacking at this point in time is faster CL lenses and a bit more choice in prime lens focal lengths. If at some point Leica stuffs an FF sensor into a CL body (the previously rumored CM), and adds a cam follower to the M Adapter L, you'll have everything you want. Of course, then you'll pay $1000 for the M Adapter L and the price of the body will double too.

I'm content with the CL as it is, and the M Adapter L as it is. One 24Mpixel body that can use all my M, R, and L mount lenses, and produce excellent results with all of them. About the same size as my M-D too, but lighter. And half the price. What's not to like?

And when I feel like using a traditional M rangefinder camera, I just grab the M-D and use it.

Edited December 16, 2018 by ramarren