Dismayed by the M10-D

[dau]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 5 Stunden schrieb adan:

The Q has 53 cc/ml of volume that can be devoted to EVF quality or other electronics

The space between the lens and the sensor (or the shutter in the case of the M) is about 36ml. You can not use all of this space for electronics. The light has to pass from the rear of the lens to the sensor without any obstructions and the lens has to be at an exactly defined distance from the sensor. In a fixed lens design, you certainly can reduce that volume, but you can not eliminate it.

[earleygallery]

There's no reason why Leica couldn't make a new body with an M lens mount and the SL's EVF. It would be relatively easy, just a case of designing the outer body.

The question is, would it sell in large enough numbers to be profitable for them? Maybe, maybe not.........

[jaapv]

And: what size would it be? It would need to be considerably more compact than the SL. 

[evikne]

A camera with M-lens mount and a huge EVF sounds very tempting to me.

I prefer the look of the M body, but I doubt Leica will make such a modern camera with retro look even if they could.

[easy_action]

2 minutes ago, evikne said:

A camera with M-lens mount and a huge EVF sounds very tempting to me.

I prefer the look of the M body, but I doubt Leica will make such a modern camera with retro look even if they could.

Yes, perhaps with a tilting LCD?  I have an a7iii which I use with both adapted Canon and Leica lenses, and I use this feature all the time.

Invaluable for waist level shooting etc.  But every time I use the Sony, I wish there was a Leica equivalent! (haptics, build quality, menu simplicity - just no comparison)

[lct]

Why should the EVF be huge? There is the SL for big things like that. An EVF a la CL with less lag in low light would be perfect for me.

[mmradman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If small size full frame body with EVF for use with M lenses only is marketable proposition optioneering development could explore two configurations:-

1) CL style body fitted with L mount and full frame sensor.  A new M-L adpator may be required fitted with contact to detect lens focusing cam - to activate EVF magnification, unless less mechanical solution could be found like contrast detection off the sensor.

2) M style body fitted with M mount and full frame sensor. Focus roller cam would be replaced with electrical contact to pick up lens focus cam being moved.  Substitute Optical RF with EVF, add CL style hump if required.  

Latest Fuji GFX-50R is RF style camera fitted with EVF like a Leica Q, it has 44x33mm sensor (8mm longer and 9mm taller than 36x24mm in Leica) and massive diameter lens mount flange.  Granted, it is bigger than M camera in all three dimension but if you consider sensor size difference one prepared to take the challenge could see smaller RF/EVF style body.     

As stated above Leica is already making RF cameras in multiple variants to suit mainstream and more traditionally inclined users - notable example M240/M246 and M10/M10D. So having EVF and OVF variants would not be against such strategy.

[Keith (M)]

One item not mentioned that the market will expect to become a standard feature is IBIS - which (AIUI) adds to the space requirements.  I use my M & R lenses on a A6500 and IBIS makes it a breeze to capture hand-held sharp images with (for example) 60mm Macro Elmarit-R + Macro-Adaptor.  

[evikne]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Why should the EVF be huge? There is the SL for big things like that. An EVF a la CL with less lag in low light would be perfect for me.

I hate the small "keyhole" viewfinders in most APS-C and mirrorless cameras. They give me a "claustrophobic" feeling. When it comes to viewfinders – whether they are OVF or EVF – I really think "bigger is better"! 😁

[lct]

 

11 minutes ago, evikne said:

I hate the small "keyhole" viewfinders in most APS-C and mirrorless cameras.

So do i but have you tried the CL's? 

[lct]

1 hour ago, mmradman said:

[...] M style body fitted with M mount and full frame sensor. Focus roller cam would be replaced with electrical contact to pick up lens focus cam being moved. [...]

The roller cam takes little room per se. I would keep it to fit every M (or LTM) Leica and non Leica lens, be it coded or not but i'm no techie at all. 

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!

Edited December 18, 2018 by lct

[earleygallery]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

And: what size would it be? It would need to be considerably more compact than the SL. 

If you remove the optical finder from an M body there should be enough space to fit the electronics for an EVF I would imagine. So I would suggest something similar in size to a M10.

The SL was designed around the SL lenses which are huge. No point in having a tiny body and huge lenses IMHO.

I did say when I first held the SL that it wasn't a very ergonomic design and wondered about using it for a prolonged period of time. Whilst most said I was silly for saying such things at the time I've seen several users since abandon the SL for exactly that reason and even Leica are talking about a new form for the replacement.

[evikne]

29 minutes ago, lct said:

So do i but have you tried the CL's? 

No, I haven't. But I don't like EVF's in general. So if I one day should begin to use an EVF, a huge "panorama" view is the only thing that could make it tempting to me.

Edited December 18, 2018 by evikne

[lct]

28 minutes ago, evikne said:

No, I haven't. But I don't like EVF's in general. So if I one day should begin to use an EVF, a huge "panorama" view is the only thing that could make it tempting to me.

Hard to get this with a compact camera.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, earleygallery said:

If you remove the optical finder from an M body there should be enough space to fit the electronics for an EVF I would imagine. So I would suggest something similar in size to a M10.

The SL was designed around the SL lenses which are huge. No point in having a tiny body and huge lenses IMHO.

I did say when I first held the SL that it wasn't a very ergonomic design and wondered about using it for a prolonged period of time. Whilst most said I was silly for saying such things at the time I've seen several users since abandon the SL for exactly that reason and even Leica are talking about a new form for the replacement.

That EVF of the SL has quite a bit of height and undoubtedly goes down into the body as well. I'm sure it would make an impressive hump. Furthermore the M lenses have a longer register distance than the SL lenses, hence the thickness of the adapter, making such a hypothetical body quite a bit thicker. Don't forget that it took Leica an extra year of development to be able to shrink the M10 as they did. Electronically there is zero spare space in there. Maybe Leica could do it, but it would be quite a job...

[jankap]

vor 51 Minuten schrieb lct:

Hard to get this with a compact camera.

What about an external monitor?

In the SL there is a small monitor with a very high resolution. Pixels need a certain surface. So high resolution means more surface than the evf with smaller resolution in another camera. Perhaps the SL is so large, because of this aspect. This is my suggestion, I have not checked the data.

As Jaap writes, the M10 is full. But I wouldn't need a rangefinder too.

Jan

[ramarren]

18 hours ago, mmradman said:

Good try, try harder.

How about this for consideration. 

Take one digital M as a starting point, either fatter M9/M240 or slimmer M10.

Strip away optical RF, fit EVF electronics and display chip and optics instead.  If necessary include CL style lump.

Metric note; when calculating volumes use of cubic meters is more common than cubic millimetres. Numerical value of result is obviously less impressive numbers.

If inspiration needed look at recent EVF compact camera work by Fuji and Sony.

(bolded) If experience with the Sony A7 is any clue, they don't know how to build a shutter that doesn't vibrate and requires EFCS to not jolt the camera all over the map. Truly awful shutters in the Sony boxes ... it's what I disliked most about the cameras. Fuji shutters are slightly better, but no one builds shutters as well as Leica. 

Leica's shutters are works of art: quiet, nearly vibrationless, reliable. It's one of the hidden secrets that explain why Leica lenses perform so well on Leica bodies...

"My finest lens is a sturdy tripod."

[jaapv]

Errr... The shutter is built by Copal-Seiko. Just like the Sony one...🙄 But - Leica orders bespoke shutters and does not buy the cheapest variant.  

Btw, some Panasonic cameras have a setting to use the electronic shutter at 1/125, to avoid vibration at that shutter speed.

[LocalHero1953]

2 hours ago, earleygallery said:

If you remove the optical finder from an M body there should be enough space to fit the electronics for an EVF I would imagine. So I would suggest something similar in size to a M10.

The SL was designed around the SL lenses which are huge. No point in having a tiny body and huge lenses IMHO.

I did say when I first held the SL that it wasn't a very ergonomic design and wondered about using it for a prolonged period of time. Whilst most said I was silly for saying such things at the time I've seen several users since abandon the SL for exactly that reason and even Leica are talking about a new form for the replacement.

OT, I know, but I often use the SL for long periods (with 24-90 and 90-280 zooms), and find its design just fine. When not at the eye, I hold it one handed at my side with a hand strap and my fingers around the grip - secure and comfortable. Comfort in holding depends a lot on your hand size and strength; I'm 6ft, with average sized hands, and I'm reasonably strong, but not in my first youth. OTOH, I also use the CL and TL2, and I don't find them too small for my hands either. I will look at the SL2 (and Panasonic S1/S1R) when they come out. If I switch, size/weight may play a part, but at the moment I don't give it much thought in use, and my hands are not tired at the end of a long shooting session. 

I've also seen comments from those who have given up the SL on weight grounds, though many of them have also commented on their own age and strength (advancing and declining respectively).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ramarren]

31 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Errr... The shutter is built by Copal-Seiko. Just like the Sony one...🙄 But - Leica orders bespoke shutters and does not buy the cheapest variant.  

Btw, some Panasonic cameras have a setting to use the electronic shutter at 1/125, to avoid vibration at that shutter speed.

I didn't say who manufactured the shutter bits... very few manufacturers make shutters in-house these days. 

But no one else gets the design and integration with the camera as right as Leica does. That alone is worth the price premium for the Leica bodies IMO.