Is the M10 the last “Real” Leica ?

[jakontil]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

yeah probably they really should leave the M alone, or at least make the iteration of M11 variant with the bells and whistles with lowered price to be more competitive wth sony and fuji 

seeing an M11 despite being the state to the art for some, i think i lust for another M analog instead and happy with my m10 blackpaint, i said the blackpaint because even paired with the 24mpx i wouldnt mind at all, the only reason was only the black paint

dont tell me the image quality difference, i even cant tell apart between m240 and m10  

[IkarusJohn]

4 hours ago, evikne said:

Has the M survived because of or despite its simplicity and "shortcomings"?  🤔

Das Wesentliche

[Advertisement]

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

[Knipsknecht]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb evikne:

Has the M survived because of or despite its simplicity and "shortcomings"?  🤔

Good question! Probably a little bit of both😅. Or maybe one could say that the M survived because of its famous lineage and (!) despite its cumbersome usability (compared to technically more modern cameras). We have to keep in mind that for quite some years Leica wasn’t the only camera company producing rangefinder cameras. But all others went out of market although some non-Leica (analog) rangefinder cameras were technically better than their Leica counterparts.

[Kwesi]

9 hours ago, Mike Hawley said:

I wonder whether Leica enthusiasts will ponder why Leica are trying to compete with Sony, Fujifilm et al in producing high-tech, automated, electronic M  cameras

Im afraid you've missed the point of the M entirely.

When it comes to the M, Leica has NO intention of competing with anyone, period. They don't have to. They do however enjoy competing with themselves to continuously improve the M technologically.

[Knipsknecht]

vor 10 Minuten schrieb Kwesi:

Im afraid you've missed the point of the M entirely.

When it comes to the M, Leica has NO intention of competing with anyone, period. They don't have to. They do however enjoy competing with themselves to continuously improve the M technologically.

I would like to politely disagree😉. Every company on earth that wants to earn money is competing with others for the attention of potential customers. And the latest iteration of their M series shows this fundamental law of economics much clearer than any other M before.

And we have to keep in mind that it’s not so long ago that Leica went almost bankrupt and out of the camera market because (!) they didn’t payed attention to the market and thought they were just “competing with themselves”. Any company that thinks so is doomed!

[otto.f]

13 minutes ago, Knipsknecht said:

some non-Leica (analog) rangefinder cameras were technically better than their Leica counterparts

never heard of

[Kwesi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

34 minutes ago, Knipsknecht said:

I would like to politely disagree😉. Every company on earth that wants to earn money is competing with others for the attention of potential customers. And the latest iteration of their M series shows this fundamental law of economics much clearer than any other M before.

And we have to keep in mind that it’s not so long ago that Leica went almost bankrupt and out of the camera market because (!) they didn’t payed attention to the market and thought they were just “competing with themselves”. Any company that thinks so is doomed!

 

1 - Leica is very fortunate in that the M doesn't have to compete on price. - Creating a technologically competent and relevant product doesn't mean that its afraid of the mass market producers. 

2 - Leica almost went bankrupt because they believed they couldn't bring a viable digital M camera to market - not because they were so full of hubris that they thought the world would come to its senses and figure out film is the future.

 

Edited February 1, 2022 by Kwesi
typo

[pgk]

Does it not strike anyone as odd that Leica still make an M film camera which is only as capable as it has ever been and no more. And yet the M digital has to be far more capable and fitted with lots of gizmos. 

[jaapv]

The point is that Leica needs to have reviewers and bloggers like the camera to make the customer interested in the shop. Even if they will never use or need the features once they start using the camera properly, it will be of influence on the buying decision.

[SrMi]

11 hours ago, Mike Hawley said:

Now the dust on the M11 launch is starting to settle and the marketing hype is analysed I wonder whether Leica enthusiasts will ponder why Leica are trying to compete with Sony, Fujifilm et al in producing high-tech, automated, electronic M  cameras. The charm and challenge of the M series is surely rooted in its minimalist reliance on automation and its finely engineered mechanical excellence. The combination of a finely crafted product and the need to use your own skill and experience is the USP of the Leica M series.
Leica already produce a range of cameras that compete directly with the Japanese products (SL. Q. etc) why has the M series been sacrificed on the altar of high tech automation and mega megapixels? The M11 would appear to replicate Fujifilms excellent X-pro3  without the EVF option and with the unwanted additional file size.

The concept of metering off the sensor is utilised in all mirror less cameras and is undoubtedly more accurate than having to use your own knowledge and experience but the input of the photographer is surely central to the M series experience. As to the increased sensor size 24 megapixels is more than adequate to produce 80cm prints so unless I’m going into billboard production why would I need 60mp ?
I understand the marketing imperative of newer, bigger, better, easier to use but surely the Leica M series is the last bastion of traditional, thought based photography and shouldn’t be subject to the commercial pressures of a misguided marketing department. 

I do not see any difference in automation and simplicity between M10 and M11. The fact that M11 meters with the sensor is not intruding, as the metering options are the same, except that it adds one more option when using RF.
IMO, the M11 is a true Leica as much as any previous digital M was.

[BennyWat]

I'm a casual Leica fan with having owned the M262 and various Leica lenses in the past and currently with an M10 and just a couple Voigtlander lenses. I can definitely understand both sides of the coin with some people saying the demand for upgrading tech, even in a heritage line is important to keep up with the newer generations entering the customer base and being used to different advancements and specs. What I, as a mild Leica history fan don't see as a "good" thing is removing specific aspects of the heritage that the past iterations held true for a more manual and robust feel. To me, the most important change is the baseplate since it completely changes the aesthetic of what Leica has held in every previous M, digital or film, since the beginning. The new battery lever that's on the other lines of cameras was never a part of the heritage brought with it into the digital world, it was a convenient aspect that seems helpful and I'm sure as its place as an important part of the form. With the M11 it seems they even tried streamlining the front by moving the button to the less distracting video spot from the M240 while still retaining function so I just don't understand why. An uncovered port on the bottom of the camera just seems odd to me as well unless they're expecting people to never put the camera down on a damp surface or always keep it in a half case or on a tripod.

Edited February 2, 2022 by BennyWat

[Foxtwo]

14 hours ago, otto.f said:

They cannot go on with relying on a shrinking group of grumpy old men who are grown together with the M(anual) way of handling a camera. The way of dealing and the speed of working with digital gear, not only camera's, is much more embedded in the younger generations. I think Leica tries with the M11 to stand on both sides of the canyon for its survival. 

The “grumpy old men” market might be a better place to be than the ever shrinking ILC consumer camera segment  at the moment. The kids seem to be quite happy using their phones.

I still don’t understand the pragmatic aspect of the charge to mirrorless for things like sports or wildlife even. Marketing yes, actual performance? I’m not convinced.

Perhaps the Rangefinder will always have a place because of it’s simple elegance.

[archive_all]

New here but I've been reading for a little while. Having handled both the M11 and owning an M10 and other M's film and digital, I think the M11 is still an M and a real Leica. I think what comes next may actually depart from that, which I fear. For now though I agree with what @SrMisaid above and in practical use there doesn't have to be much difference in simplicity between the M11 and M10. The M11 is just less attractive from the front 😂

Despite Leica utilizing more available mirrorless tech, I actually think it's the older crowd asking for that. I'm probably on the younger side here and I see my generation and even younger people driving the resurgence in film photography so at least some in the younger crowd wants less tech.

[otto.f]

5 hours ago, archive_all said:

I think what comes next may actually depart from that, which I fear.

What has to be feared may be rather relative, at least it should be. I used my M9 without any problems, except the general one, which was taken care of within warranty, for 10+ years. A Leica becomes old by context, not so soon in itself.

5 hours ago, archive_all said:

Despite Leica utilizing more available mirrorless tech, I actually think it's the older crowd asking for that. I'm probably on the younger side here and I see my generation and even younger people driving the resurgence in film photography so at least some in the younger crowd wants less tech.

That's hopefull then for the classic timeless M

[WvE]

It would be interesting to know if Leica could make a profit with a re-issue of the successful M9 in a M10 body. Just 18 MP, black paint or chrome, no frills and somewhat less expensive. 

[ynp]

27 minutes ago, WvE said:

It would be interesting to know if Leica could make a profit with a re-issue of the successful M9 in a M10 body. Just 18 MP, black paint or chrome, no frills and somewhat less expensive. 

I doubt that the M9 sensor is still available. Anything custom will make the proposed re-issued camera much more  expensive. 
 

[Mike Hawley]

I thought my original mail might be contentious and to be honest expected far more vituperative responses from people who have shelled out £7500 and proudly wear the latest and greatest. I have been pleasantly surprised by the number of responses that broadly agree with my viewpoint. 
For me using an M10 is about nostalgia and being able to satisfy a childhood ambition. When I started taking photographs with my Ensign folding camera, that was back in the late 1950s, I looked at the adverts in the photo mags for the recently introduced M3 and dreamt about owning one. The fact that every “famous” photographer in the world used one also inflamed my desire. Unfortunately it could only be a dream as the cost was way beyond my means. I then went on a journey through SLR’’s then mirrorless and finally in my dotage managed to buy into Leica (Q and M). I now enjoy my photography with the M10 more than any other camera, and I own a few. But I do have a concern that the M series will wander off track and become a clone of all those excellent mirrorless cameras that improve technologically every week. If that were to happen then the original authenticity of the product would disappear and due to the relative expense the camera would only be purchased as a status symbol by rich guys with no respect for the history and tradition of a well respected institution. 

[pgk]

39 minutes ago, WvE said:

It would be interesting to know if Leica could make a profit with a re-issue of the successful M9 in a M10 body. Just 18 MP, black paint or chrome, no frills and somewhat less expensive. 

I think that there may well be a market for a mid-20s MPixel, manual only M camera in an M10 body - a 'classic' re-iteration (Leica seems to be happy to make 'specials'). Pitched at a lower price point such a camera could be a pofitable entry into Leica cameras in general. It would need to be minimalist though.

[bandrews]

6 hours ago, archive_all said:

Despite Leica utilizing more available mirrorless tech, I actually think it's the older crowd asking for that. I'm probably on the younger side here and I see my generation and even younger people driving the resurgence in film photography so at least some in the younger crowd wants less tech.

I totally agree and probably fall into that bracket too. The SL line is a great platform for Leica to develop all kinds of wonderful photography tech but the M will never be able to compete nor should it. It is why I enjoy taking photos with my M10 more than the SL2-S yet the SL2-S gets way more use.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pippy]

2 minutes ago, pgk said:

I think that there may well be a market for a mid-20s MPixel, manual only M camera in an M10 body......Pitched at a lower price point such a camera could be a pofitable entry into Leica cameras in general. It would need to be minimalist though.

The minimalism of the M-D Typ-262 with the body-thickness of the M10? I'm sure I've mentioned this before....

Philip.