A New Year Wish for the M System

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, MrFriendly said:

An EVF sees what the sensor sees, whereas the OVF sees more

... or (much) less . No macro, long teles and so on. Old story since the sixties. Furthermore EVFs allow for WYSIWYG framing and composition. Also what we could not dream about 50 years ago i.e. using our M lenses on reflex cameras. End of the rangefinder then? Of course not. There will always be room for the RF experience fortunately.

[Advertisement]

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

[mmradman]

5 minutes ago, MrFriendly said:

Well, I don't know how deep you want me to go, but I'll give a brief overview without getting into too much details (And no, I didn't get these ideas from using my Fuji).

The interchangeable sensor would be like a cartridge; remove the bottom plate and just slide in the sensor cartridge.  It's quiet simple actually.

The crank-powered system is a bit tricky because there isn't enough room in an M body.  By replacing the mechanical shutter with an electric shutter, and using solid state battery instead of the current bulky ones, we can open up enough room for a capacitor and some kind of dynamo mechanism.

An EVF in an M body is actually a lot more problematic than the above two.  An EVF sees what the sensor sees, whereas the OVF sees more, and that's the first problem.  For the EVF to see outside of the field-of-view of the lens and outside the framelines, you would need a secondary sensor just for the rangefinder mechanism, and that idea has its own problems.  The alternative to implement a hybrid system, and that's what Fuji has done and it's gimmicky.

 

Good to have spirited argument.

The digital sensor is not film cartridge, it requires all supporting electronics to go with it so replacing overall back board would be required, something like Leica DMR and we all know it’s sorry saga despite being brave attempt o digitise film camera. For mirrorless camera sensor output needs to be mated with either LCD or EVF. Nearest to this description exists in medium format where entire sensor backs can be attached to common camera base fitted with lens mount and shutter mechanism.

Using rewind crank equivalent to charge camera electronics would probably leave you with a very sore thumb.  Overall power budget to take the picture and write it to memory card would require some level of minimal charge with stable voltage over wide temperature range, storage battery is your best option.

M camera remains to be (a) Optical RF but if optional EVF is offered make it top class not some afterthought from the part bin used by pass sell-by date cameras. The EVF for M10 series is transplanted from TL cameras (I think), in need of refresh, no pun. Option (b) make compact full frame camera with M mount and EVF or make compact FF L mount camera with EVF, something like CL but full frame.

[sutlore]

I wish that the view finder patch in the next M can be moved inside the frame for more precise focusing when shooting at wide open.

I may be a guy in a modern era that does not like to focus and set composition but that feature woult be useful in some situations, who knows.

[84bravo]

I like the M to stay as similar to the M film cameras as possible with a traditional rangefinder and optical VF, but that's just my opinion. The M10 seems to do that nicely and I do like the option to use the external EVF if wanted. The M system is a niche camera and that is it's strength. The reality is that there are a lot of more affordable and more capable camera systems that provide all of those features. I don't think that Leica could realistically compete in that field.

It seems to me that the CL, or perhaps the new CL2, will provide most of the features on the list if that's what one wants from Leica.

[pippy]

On 12/28/2020 at 1:32 PM, Dr No said:

...Happy New Year to the irascible, intractable, pontifical and thoroughly entertaining 'purists'; the Mormons, the Wetlzarian Wizards and Luddites of photography  😂

May our coming year be filled with pictures not cameras!

Having given the matter a tiny bit more consideration I've realised that Dr. No is correct (as, it has to be said, he usually is) and, subsequently, have changed my mind. The upcoming M11 base model can, after all, boast all those wonderful technological innovations on one condition and it is that Leica also release the following;

An updated version of the M-D Typ-262 camera with new slim-line bodyshell and almost every other 'general' carry-over from the M10-R.

In its essentials, however, it would ditch much of the useless crap fundamentally neccessary technological innovations which marked a shift in attitudes from the M-D 262 to the M10-D and go back to, well, pretty much nothingness. The on-off (etc) switch would be as per the older model and, since the ISO knob has replaced the 262's 'dial on the back' there would be NOTHING on the back of the camera whatsoever; we will have arrived - nay; returned - to that idyllic place first discovered in 1932 where, FoV lever apart, the whole of the surface of the body, from one side of the lens-mount going 'round backwards to the other side of the lens-mount, is unbroken. As a Standard Offering it would come in Black Paint with the usual Leitz scipt etc. on the top-plate but a Satin-Chrome version would be available from the start of production. The much-missed (by me) 'Shark-Skin' covering would also be brought back as an option. The circular 'aperture guess-o-meter' window on the front-plate would simply have to go. Seriously; who needs it? It's not even accurate so what purpose does it serve? Lastly the battery percentage and 'frames left' information would be displayed in Roman Numerals.

OK; on reflection perhaps that last feature-change isn't absolutely essential.

May I second Dr. No's sentiments regarding the New Year to Come for everyone and thanks for all the fun we've had considering the difficulties we've had to experience during this last, very trying year!

Philip.

Edited December 29, 2020 by pippy

[Kwesi]

On 12/28/2020 at 10:05 AM, Herr Barnack said:

As for the M11, I would be greatly pleased if it turns out to be an M10R but with a 47+ megapixel backside illuminates sensor.  Seriously:  Other than that, what else does an M camera actually need??

Let me join Erato in post #28 and say a built in diopter setting wheel.

[cboy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

At least have a hybrid viewfinder like fujifilm...not everyone has near perfect eyesight. Cant focusing aids such as rangefinder patch can be innovated. Its to aid the consumer driven focus towards faster lenses. Anyway i yap on deaf ears hahaha

Edited December 30, 2020 by cboy

[adan]

As usual, the only thing (painfully) funnier than watching non-engineers talk about camera engineering is watching youtube videos of dogs trying to chew toffee.

[pgk]

On that note can we revisit the DMR for an M4 please - haven't things moved on? Surely engineers can sort this out by now🤨.

[Kwesi]

1 hour ago, adan said:

As usual, the only thing (painfully) funnier than watching non-engineers talk about camera engineering is watching youtube videos of dogs trying to chew toffee.

Adan,

I always depend on your wisdom so here's a question, Do you think  built -in diopter correction is possible without making the M any thicker?

 

[adan]

It is probably possible to add built-in diopter adjustment while making only the eyepiece thicker or deeper. Maybe. (I wouldn't swear to it without some experimentation and prototypes.)

But then you have a tube or tunnel sticking out of the eyepiece area (because you need room for two glass elements to "zoom" and produce different diopter powers).

Leaving one with a "tunnel-vision" view of the viewfinder and framelines. Probably hard to see the 50 and 35 framelines, let alone the 28 framelines.

Or perhaps one borrows the idea of variable-diopter "adaptive eyewear." Use two plastic membranes (or one membrane and one glass surface) and pump fluid in or out of the space between them, to change the curvature and "power." That would probably require less thickness overall.

https://www.college-optometrists.org/the-college/museum/online-exhibitions/virtual-spectacles-gallery/adaptive-eyewear.html

Of course, then one has to have a reservoir to store the fluid to be pumped into or removed from the actual eyepiece diopter. Where does that go? Who here wants an electronic device with fluid sloshing around inside, available to freeze in cold temperatures, or expand and burst in hot temperatures, and leak all over the Maestro III?

_______________________

(Not directed at Kwesi!)

Thomas Edison famously said that "Invention is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration."

A "brilliant idea" is not just a two-year-old saying "I want, I want, I want" - it is a grownup putting in a lot of time figuring out everything else that would have to change, and accounting for it, and diagramming it, and testing it. And then deciding if it is worth it.

These forums see an awful lot of the first, and very little of the second.

At a bare minimum, anyone with a worthwhile idea can at least sketch all the parts, and where they will go in an M body - and what they must replace in an M body (which does not have a lot of empty space).

Here's a cutaway of the M rangefinder/viewfinder (pretty much identical from the M2 through the M10-R, except for the yellow arrow (frameline illumination), which has been replaced by an LED) - go ahead and show me where all these brilliant ideas for diopters or hybrid finder parts will fit.

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!

[Rob L]

Hi Andy,

 As always, thanks for your replies! Always great info. Seems to me that Leica's devotion to the very expensive and somewhat unreliable rangefinder mechanism creates numerous roadblocks! Not the least of which is the increasing lack of skill available in the areas of service ( Don Goldberg, YYe,  Sherry Krauter etc. are a dying breed ) and assembly ( I've had to adjust at least 50% of my rangefinders on brand new cameras ( I'm picky about vertical )). As I'm a glutton for punishment, I would love to see your response to my post in another of these "Wishes" threads, re posted below.

"I agree with the last half dozen or so posts. I like the M10 the way it is and see no need for an M11. The M10 could go on for a very long time with just minor tweaks ( like M6 ) with various appendages to the name to distinguish the difference ( like P, D, R & M ).

Most of the desires expressed here create something that is no longer a "M" camera, but an "M mount" camera, like an M mount Q or similar. So while I'm here I'll articulate my wish: I think a larger view finder ( large as possible within the current body ) with a high quality adjustable diopter, top of the line optics, projected LED frame lines, critical info and a movable focus area square that gives off the sensor focus confirmation, would be great. This would be helpful for those with less than perfect vision, would replace the very expensive hand assembled rangefinder mechanism, while retaining the Leica M experience. A full frame Fuji X100 with no electronic viewfinder that takes M lenses. Fuji does it for $1400, not that I would want cheap, it needs to retain all of the Leica mojo!"

[mmradman]

On 12/30/2020 at 3:31 PM, pgk said:

On that note can we revisit the DMR for an M4 please - haven't things moved on? Surely engineers can sort this out by now🤨.

It’s been sorted since launch of M8.

[Knipsknecht]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Rob L:

[...] A full frame Fuji X100 with no electronic viewfinder that takes M lenses. Fuji does it for $1400, not that I would want cheap, it needs to retain all of the Leica mojo!"

Sorry, but you already described the dilemma: that would be a Fuji X-Pro4 with a full frame sensor. Fuji builds something very similar (but with an APS-C sensor) for 1/4th of the price of a Leica M10. I fear a lot of people buy into the Leica M system not despite but because of the rangefinder. If Leica would abandon this very special piece of technology (as outdated as it might be), I think those people would leave for the much cheaper but still pretty good Fuji cameras.

So, if Leica would turn to a finder similar to the Fuji X-Pro or X100 lineup (if this is possible!), there must be an additional benefit that would keep people paying the luxury fee for a “real” Leica. And the red dot and the “made in Germany” definitely doesn’t do the trick.

[mmradman]

Main attraction to many buyers are compact high quality M lenses.

Many posts here on LUF and other web forums are testament to this, it is only minority that primarily choose M camera for the RF. Popularity of M lenses away from M camera is reinforced by third party adapters that try to make them auto focus on Sony mirrorless cameras, also of lately on Nikon Z.

Also for some, probably many, full frame is important consideration, what is the point of having 21mm lens if the FOV is of >30mm. 

Edited December 31, 2020 by mmradman

[nicci78]

So to sum up. Please bring us an M11, but don’t you dare changing anything at all.

I don’t know. Some changes should be ok.

Leica could release another kind of body : compact M mount body with EVF, video, IBIS and weathersealing. It won’t be called M11 or M at all. But can be a nice member of Leica cameras

[Triumph]

Well I have and like the M10 and I prefer the shtter sound to the almost silent M10P ...it sounds like a real Leica! What is missing is a flash socket that is separate from the hot shoe as the  EVF cannot be used with flash ...for what is supposed to be a system camera that is a real miss for those of us who do macro, and I would imagine wedding photographers ....I know Leica very fast lenses like the Noctilux may not require a flash and I have Noctilux 50mm plus Sumilux 75mm but there are still occssions where a flash would be good to use with the EVF. OK I accept I could buy an SL@ and the M adapter but i have 15   Leica lenses and do not wish to keep swapping adapters around.... I also appreciate the compact size of the M. 

[setuporg]

2 hours ago, mmradman said:

Main attraction to many buyers are compact high quality M lenses.

Many posts here on LUF and other web forums are testament to this, it is only minority that primarily choose M camera for the RF. Popularity of M lenses away from M camera is reinforced by third party adapters that try to make them auto focus on Sony mirrorless cameras, also of lately on Nikon Z.

Also for some, probably many, full frame is important consideration, what is the point of having 21mm lens if the FOV is of >30mm. 

I respectfully and vehemently disagree, which is the whole point of the original post and wish.  I believe the RF is the heart of the M, as Leica had repeatedly confirmed.  A gazillion M adapters is available for other systems.  You can also get a Pixii with the M mount sending the image right to the iPhone immediately!

A rangefinder was my first camera as a child, and I keep coming back to it.  The discovery of the year was the Xpan, which was a tremendous experience.  I was an early adopter of Pixii for the same reason.  The RF never gets old!  AF is a complexity leading one down the rabbit hole of hubris.  The RF simplifies photography and life with photography in it.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mmradman]

1 hour ago, Triumph said:

Well I have and like the M10 and I prefer the shtter sound to the almost silent M10P ...it sounds like a real Leica! What is missing is a flash socket that is separate from the hot shoe as the  EVF cannot be used with flash ...for what is supposed to be a system camera that is a real miss for those of us who do macro, and I would imagine wedding photographers ....I know Leica very fast lenses like the Noctilux may not require a flash and I have Noctilux 50mm plus Sumilux 75mm but there are still occssions where a flash would be good to use with the EVF. OK I accept I could buy an SL@ and the M adapter but i have 15   Leica lenses and do not wish to keep swapping adapters around.... I also appreciate the compact size of the M. 

Flash socket and hot/cold shoe side by side is almost as old as RF camera itself, my film MP has hot shoe and flash socket on the back plate next to viewfinder. M240 were provided with optional function grips to allow flesh synch, that was before M10 essentials thing. 

So yes if essentials is way forward for digital M than ability to focus and frame  outside 28-90 (ok 135mm)MM range plus use flash should be essentials,...hang on, Leica doesn't understand flash.

[mmradman]

1 hour ago, setuporg said:

I respectfully and vehemently disagree, which is the whole point of the original post and wish.  I believe the RF is the heart of the M, as Leica had repeatedly confirmed.  A gazillion M adapters is available for other systems.  You can also get a Pixii with the M mount sending the image right to the iPhone immediately!

A rangefinder was my first camera as a child, and I keep coming back to it.  The discovery of the year was the Xpan, which was a tremendous experience.  I was an early adopter of Pixii for the same reason.  The RF never gets old!  AF is a complexity leading one down the rabbit hole of hubris.  The RF simplifies photography and life with photography in it.

Why would I even consider Pixi?? Is that some APS-c sensored novelty with M mount and direct access to Facebook?

I don’t want my M lenses to be auto focused, I want them to be focused and my RF skills are passable only my hands are shakey at times.

Nice to know you grew up with RF, so did I, from RF to SLR to DSLR to RF &Mirrorless,  individual histories are neither here or there, technology of things we use change.

Edited December 31, 2020 by mmradman