Any chance of adding the video back!?

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Tailwagger said:

Hope this helps. 

Yes, it helped tremendously.  I was using the Visoflex, so without really thinking about it, I was able to use spot metering, as you described.  Fascinating, and Thank You!!  

I hardly ever walk around with the Visoflex, and I found Live View very difficult to use, as I had trouble seeing the rear screen.  I also needed reading glasses, but that's no big deal.  How big is the "spot" in spot metering?  

Knowing what I knew from before, and knowing now what you just explained, I ought to try another sunset photo if I get a beautiful sky in the next few days.  It will be interesting if I can match the image quality from my D750 for that kind of photo.  Thanks again!

[LocalHero1953]

8 hours ago, Brancbūth said:

Adding video wouldn’t necessarily be bad, but— again— how does it make sense? I’m sounding like a broken record at this point, but answers seem to be limited to “because it’s expected” or “because it might be convenient…sometimes.” 

So if your first premise is true*, what is actually wrong with the last answer? If it is convenient to shoot with video sometimes, why does that not make sense?

It is also be convenient, sometimes, to shoot at a wider angle or longer FL than the OVF allows, to shoot macro, with tilt-shift lenses. Liveview allows you to do all these, but only a small proportion of the M community have voted with their wallets and bought a M10-D.

 

* I can see the strongest arguments for not implementing video being the problems of heat dissipation, power consumption and battery size. Oddly, though, IMO, the reasons most often given here for opposing video in the M are philosophical and not practical.

[jaapv]

9 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding... are you using spot metering?  Regardless with an M10 intentionally over-exposing is generally ill advised, but with a scene that has wide DR you are courting total disaster... unless the aim was to purposefully blow highlights.  The 10-R is better, not infallible, in this regard, but the M10 and 240 have to be used with more care.  Most folks, certainly I did, set the M10 EV to -.3 by default and worked down from there. Not that there aren't legit scenarios, but I honestly can't recall ever dialing in a positive EV value when I had the M10.  M raw files are traditionally pretty good when it comes to pulling shadows, but nowhere near as flexible with the highs.  In my experience, even with the 10-R, you are generally better off leaning left rather than right. 

As you seem to be having trouble, I'd point out that the M10 has a histogram function on playback.  I'm assuming you not using an EVF or LCD to frame (if so you can have the histo live), so I'd suggest if you're having difficulty assessing the proper exposure for a given scene, while you develop your feel for things do a little chimping with the histo on to check your results before moving on. The histo, being JPG, isn't 100% accurate... assuming you're shooting raw... but its close enough to given you an idea whether or not you've blown well past the camera's capabilities. 

-3. Is that a typo?  I use the histogram in EVF cameras and find that correct exposure varies between -2 and + 1 ½. 

[pgk]

9 hours ago, Brancbūth said:

.....the question remains— Why add it to the M?

To me, adding video is like adding an off-road, low ratio gearbox to a sportswear. Technically feasible - yes. Relevant, useful, well-implemented? Well you have to decide for yourself, but I don't see so many sleek, iconic sports cars with low ratio boxes fitted because their base design excludes them being effective. There are technical, philosophical and marketing arguments about whether video is relevant but to my mind the ergonomics are equally important. There are numerous after market accessories available for many 'stills' cameras which shoot good video. These make their handling and usability far more suited for good video production. Without them the cameras are often difficult to hold and use ad I would say that the form factor of the Leica M is decidedly less than ideal for video. And video shooting often requires a tripod which from other threads is often seen as going against the ethos of the hand held M.

There are plenty of real improvements which Leica can make to the M - better sensor sensitivity, greater dynamic range, electronic shutter - they could even be really radical and add an Arca style dovetail into the baseplate and do away with the traditional tripod thread .....

[LocalHero1953]

I see the M as more like a LandRover than a sports car - simple, mechanical, does its job superbly within a limited, but very practical band of use, and has a passionate following.

And it's no longer made. 😉

[jaapv]

AF with video is only an essential if one assumes incompetence with focusing by the user. In many cases MF is preferable over AF (except maybe for handheld Vlogging)  However. the function of video on a  M camera is basically not to make full-length cinema productions which seems to be the assumption here. The camera is primarily a reportage and travel camera - and the thing one needs is video vignettes of scenes one encounters, etc. talking heads when doing a portrait session.Having said that, I have seen a few impressive documentary productions using the M240.

[KFo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wait.  You mean video on the MP or M-A?  

This sounds awesome!  

Leica could sell large capacity film mags, a whole new line of cine lenses. 

[MikeMyers]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

AF with video is only an essential if one assumes incompetence with focusing by the user.

I mostly use video for two purposes, recording "orbit" eye surgery, and making various videos at the hospital in India I volunteer at.  The scenes are never static, and I started using my Fuji X100f with auto-focus following whatever I was tracking at the time.  I guess I'm "guilty" of incompetence at creating videos, as I don't do it much, but the autofocus is a huge help as it keeps whatever is in the center of the frame sharp.  As for manual focusing - ever try it on a Fuji?  It's fine for stills, but I never really used it because the autofocus on the Fuji is so fast and accurate.  For documentaries, I think I agree with you - no need for autofocus.  I guess not too many of you are recording orbit eye surgery.  .....and as for me, I can watch with no problems if I stare at the viewfinder, but if my eye wanders to where I can watch the actual surgery, live, perhaps a foot away fro me - my stomach starts to feel very queasy, especially an eye evisceration (the result of getting something in your eye, and not going to an eye doctor very soon afterwards).  Anyway, my job is regardless of what is happening, to keep it centered on the screen, and in focus, and as close as I can get to the patient.  I've used my Canon G7 Pro Mk II (I think that's the proper name) but found my Fuji X100f to work better at getting good results, along with sound.  Oh, and it helps A LOT to have a lens that can zoom....

The doctor was very pleased with the results, but wanted me to get even closer.  I did this anyway, but the closer I got, the more queasy I felt.  Next time, if there is a next time, I may try my Nikon D750.  

[jaapv]

As I said, specific use has specific demands. Choosing a tool to fit the job is good practice, but sweeping statements like “video is impossible  without AF “ are widely beside  the facts. 

[Tailwagger]

6 hours ago, jaapv said:

-3. Is that a typo?  I use the histogram in EVF cameras and find that correct exposure varies between -2 and + 1 ½. 

No, just a further indicator that you should sell all your RF gear  (to me on the cheap) due to failing eyesight.  Here, let me help you out.. 

15 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

Most folks, certainly I did, set the M10 EV to -.3

Next time I'll use  -0.3 out of respect for the more august, but ocularly challenged, members of the community.  😃

[Tailwagger]

5 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I see the M as more like a LandRover than a sports car - simple, mechanical, does its job superbly within a limited, but very practical band of use, and has a passionate following.

And it's no longer made. 😉

23 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

If you pay a few million for a Bugatti Chiron, you don't expect to take your extended family on an off road tour up to your backwood's retreat.

To clarify, the point of the analogy was not to compare Leica's position in the camera market to that of Bugatti's in the automobile world. If there is such a thing it would be closer to a P1 or the Hubble.  Rather, the point was to spotlight the absurdity of asking a product designed to achieve excellence in a specific area to excel in others unrelated to reason it was built in the first place, regardless of the absurdity of the price tag.

Land Rovers and Morgans, last I checked, aren't German.  The M, IMO, is somewhere between a Messerschmitt bubble car and Singer 911, depending on whether you're talking M3 through 10-R. 

[LocalHero1953]

10 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

To clarify, the point of the analogy was not to compare Leica's position in the camera market to that of Bugatti's in the automobile world. If there is such a thing it would be closer to a P1 or the Hubble.  Rather, the point was to spotlight the absurdity of asking a product designed to achieve excellence in a specific area to excel in others unrelated to reason it was built in the first place, regardless of the absurdity of the price tag.

Land Rovers and Morgans, last I checked, aren't German.  The M, IMO, is somewhere between a Messerschmitt bubble car and Singer 911, depending on whether you're talking M3 through 10-R. 

Fair points, but I was responding to @pgk's analogy of sports cars rather than yours with Bugatti.

I think we need a new thread: "If the M was a car, which model would it be?"

[NigelG]

12 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

I hardly ever walk around with the Visoflex, and I found Live View very difficult to use, as I had trouble seeing the rear screen.  I also needed reading glasses, but that's no big deal.  How big is the "spot" in spot metering?  

Just a reminder that you don’t have to use the rear screen if you need to activate Live View to switch to a different metering method. I’ll turn it on sometimes to get spot or multi but will still be focussing / framing with the rangefinder. You can visualise the “spot” as a slightly larger area than the RF patch…

[setuporg]

The only feature distinguishing M 246 inimical to it now is its rangefinder B+W vide.o.  Works fine.  With kids, I'm forced to carry an SL2 with a series of lenses or a Q2 to shoot family movies, in addition to the M or without the M but then I miss it.  Surely video would not hurt and would actually allow one to use just M.

The problem is with the rest -- IBIS really helps to make home videos on SL2.  So you need that.  And so on.

[rclompus]

I've had every digital M camera body.  I sold my M240 and moved to an M10 when it was available.  It has a better sensor and a slimmer body that reminded me of the lovable M6.  But I do miss the video function on the M240.  Being able to make a short video with the 50mm Noctilux was special.  I have a number of M lenses that have unique imaging characteristics.  I use them with an adapter on a Canon R5.

I use a Q that shoots 1080p video. I wish it shot 4K in the Q2. If Leica engineers can find a way to offer 4K video with an M body, it would enhance the value. Eventually, manual shutters will be eliminated (aka Nikon Z9) leaving room for other goodies in our camera bodies. It took many years for Leica to develop expertise in digitizing their cameras. Hopefully, they can source improved sensors, processors and batteries to keep their M bodies relevant.  Their lenses are unique in the industry.

Here's something I learned about Leica gear many years ago and it has worked for me:  "You marry Leica lenses but you date Leica cameras."  The camera is a box that captures the image. The box will be improved to reveal even more character of the lens.     

Stay healthy & be well. 

[adan]

An interesting point is that, back about the time of the M10 intro, this forum put up a poll on who was buying one, and how many listed video as such a critical function that it was their reason for NOT having any interest in the M10.

A total of six (6) responders (now about 0.75% of the total of ~800 responders) said they needed video.

0.75% is not a market - it is a rounding error.

Maybe those who want video should ask Andreas for a new poll, 5 years on.

 

[MikeMyers]

On 11/10/2021 at 10:42 AM, NigelG said:

Just a reminder that you don’t have to use the rear screen if you need to activate Live View to switch to a different metering method. I’ll turn it on sometimes to get spot or multi but will still be focussing / framing with the rangefinder. You can visualise the “spot” as a slightly larger area than the RF patch…

Thank you - sounds very logical, but I never thought of it that way before.  I'll keep that in mind for the future.

[NigelG]

I think the issue is that a lot of people automatically think that using “LiveView” on an M always implies “I must now use the rear screen or EVF to frame the image” rather than considering the alternative view that “using LiveView on the M gives me the option of other more sophisticated metering modes, metered directly off the sensor rather than the shutter curtain, while still using the rangefinder”…

(albeit with an accompanying close-open-close shutter delay)