mole73 Posted January 5, 2021 Share #141 Posted January 5, 2021 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm very pleased about this (sometimes controversial) conversation for a new cheaper film M-body. I really hope it will happen, because it would be a strong statement for the worldwide increasing demand for film. My personal thoughts for this body: - change of the brass top plate for an aluminium one (same as the digital M type 262) - change of the historically very important but also very expensive cloth shutter for the more modern metal blade shutter of digital M (for cost reduction perhaps with slower shutter speeds of say 1/2000 of a second) - built-in-meter (see used prices of the M6...) - cost cutting finish, here black anodized (same as the digital M type 262) - discontinue the M-A and continue the small production of the MP Edited January 5, 2021 by mole73 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 5, 2021 Posted January 5, 2021 Hi mole73, Take a look here Really, new cheap(er) film M in 2021 ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
a.noctilux Posted January 5, 2021 Author Share #142 Posted January 5, 2021 Mole73, what is benefit of zinc top plate ? maybe aluminium top would be better choice. Side note, I don't care whatever metal or plastic top if less pricey but tough. I use M6 ( zinc top not yet with corrosion 😉) and appreciate the light M (typ 262) with aluminium top black anodized (maybe a bit too light with heavy lens ). More, I do use also SLR with "plastic top and all", "ABS lenses", nothing to complain regarding the material choice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 5, 2021 Share #143 Posted January 5, 2021 55 minutes ago, pippy said: Not quite, Paul. A Shepherd's Pie is always made with lamb. If the same pie is made with beef instead it would be a Cottage Pie. Philip. D'oh! Of course! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mole73 Posted January 5, 2021 Share #144 Posted January 5, 2021 vor 13 Minuten schrieb a.noctilux: Mole73, what is benefit of zinc top plate ? maybe aluminium top would be better choice. Side note, I don't care whatever metal or plastic top if less pricey but tough. I use M6 ( zinc top not yet with corrosion 😉) and appreciate the light M (typ 262) with aluminium top black anodized (maybe a bit too light with heavy lens ). More, I do use also SLR with "plastic top and all", "ABS lenses", nothing to complain regarding the material choice. You're right. I corrected my message. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 5, 2021 Share #145 Posted January 5, 2021 3 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said: D'oh! Of course! I only know because Delia told me.... Philip. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndreasG Posted January 5, 2021 Share #146 Posted January 5, 2021 vor 19 Minuten schrieb a.noctilux: what is benefit of zinc top plate ? Cost advantages in tooling and production. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 5, 2021 Share #147 Posted January 5, 2021 Advertisement (gone after registration) 4 minutes ago, pippy said: I only know because Delia told me.... Philip. I realised because the clue is in the name Shepherd's Pie 🙄 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham (G4FUJ) Posted January 5, 2021 Share #148 Posted January 5, 2021 Going back to the original idea (cameras not pies or pasties!) it's a nice thought, but I really don't see it happening. Be nice to be proven wrong though 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted January 5, 2021 Share #149 Posted January 5, 2021 Finally, a thread that covers my two favorite things: film cameras and shepherd's pie! It could only be better if it turned out that Leica's new analog camera was a 6x7 to 6x9 film camera with a dedicated line of f2 lenses. I will be flexible...it can either be based on the SL Summicrons as an AF model, or as M's with a rangefinder. Surprise me! 3 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 5, 2021 Share #150 Posted January 5, 2021 2 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said: it can either be based on the SL Summicrons as an AF model, A film camera using SL (or S) lenses wouldn't be all that. You'd end up with loads of uncorrected barrel distortion and vignetting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted January 5, 2021 Share #151 Posted January 5, 2021 36 minutes ago, wattsy said: A film camera using SL (or S) lenses wouldn't be all that. You'd end up with loads of uncorrected barrel distortion and vignetting. Perhaps for the SL, but not for the S lenses...they would be great. They do not need much optical correction, other than the zoom and 24mm. Even they are better than most similar lenses for MF film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 5, 2021 Share #152 Posted January 5, 2021 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said: Perhaps for the SL, but not for the S lenses...they would be great. They do not need much optical correction, other than the zoom and 24mm. Have you ever tried them on film, Stuart? I've used the 120 CS and the 70 many times and they are indeed fanastically good but I've long been intrigued how much internal correction is going on in the S camera before the DNG is created. It would be interesting if someone could adapt them to a film body. Edited January 5, 2021 by wattsy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted January 5, 2021 Share #153 Posted January 5, 2021 (edited) 11 minutes ago, wattsy said: Have you ever tried them on film, Stuart? I've used the 120 CS and the 70 many times and they are indeed fanastically good but I've long been intrigued how much internal correction is going on in the S camera before the DNG is created. It would be interesting if someone could adapt them to a film body. Hi Ian, I have not, but I do know that Peter Karbe has talked about how Leica's goal was to avoid digital corrections in the S lenses because of the optical viewfinder and their idea at the time that digital corrections were sub-optimal. They clearly changed their minds with the SL lenses, where everything is done in camera, in that they do not even give you the option of turning off a lens profile in Lightroom. You can turn off the lens corrections in Lightroom (and more often than not, especially with the 120mm, the corrections cause more harm than good). But certainly there is almost no distortion visible in the OVF when using most of the S lenses, other than the zoom and 24mm. Edited January 5, 2021 by Stuart Richardson 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 5, 2021 Share #154 Posted January 5, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Stuart Richardson said: But certainly there is almost no distortion visible in the OVF Yes, that's a fair point and something I'd not really thought about (my excuse is that I have used the 120 and 70 lenses quite a lot but almost entirely with the camera tethered to a computer). 😀 Edited January 5, 2021 by wattsy 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew01 Posted January 5, 2021 Share #155 Posted January 5, 2021 7 hours ago, mole73 said: I'm very pleased about this (sometimes controversial) conversation for a new cheaper film M-body. I really hope it will happen, because it would be a strong statement for the worldwide increasing demand for film. My personal thoughts for this body: - change of the brass top plate for an aluminium one (same as the digital M type 262) - change of the historically very important but also very expensive cloth shutter for the more modern metal blade shutter of digital M (for cost reduction perhaps with slower shutter speeds of say 1/2000 of a second) - built-in-meter (see used prices of the M6...) - cost cutting finish, here black anodized (same as the digital M type 262) - discontinue the M-A and continue the small production of the MP I agree with everything you suggest except the last point about discontinuing the MA. MA and MP are 99% the same camera and I suspect there would be negligible cost saving to discontinue the MA. The only effect would be to make the MA a collectible item and therefore less accessible for people who like the simplicity of a meter-less camera. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew01 Posted January 5, 2021 Share #156 Posted January 5, 2021 (edited) 7 hours ago, AndreasG said: Cost advantages in tooling and production. I think the best lower cost but still durable option for the camera body/ top plate is cast magnesium as used by Nikon and Canon for the last 25 years (I think Nikon F5 was the first). These seem to have aged very well. Edited January 5, 2021 by andrew01 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BradS Posted January 5, 2021 Share #157 Posted January 5, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, andrew01 said: I think the best lower cost but still durable option for the camera body/ top plate is cast magnesium as used by Nikon and Canon for the last 25 years (I think Nikon F5 was the first). These seem to have aged very well. Are these made of an alloy ? or pure magnesium? Edited January 5, 2021 by BradS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted January 5, 2021 Share #158 Posted January 5, 2021 It has to be an alloy. Pure magnesium is flammable and oxidizes rapidly. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BradS Posted January 5, 2021 Share #159 Posted January 5, 2021 That's what I was thinking too. I also often wonder about the leica zinc top plate...surely, this is also an alloy, not pure zinc ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted January 5, 2021 Share #160 Posted January 5, 2021 (edited) I think basically every metal used in camera body construction is an alloy. Typically the pure metals are either more reactive or have undesirable characteristics when unalloyed. Steel, brass etc, all alloys. I guess maybe only the super rare Titanium M's might be a pure metal...but even then, they might be a Ti alloy. Perhaps someone who knows more will chime in. I studied chemistry, but a million years ago, and not metallurgy. Edited January 5, 2021 by Stuart Richardson 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now