M12 wishlist

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica would not stop making the RF-based M, even if an EVF-based M (or whatever it would be called) were produced. 
 

Maybe an EVF-based M would be a blessing for the traditionalists, as maybe then, the RF-based M could return to “just the essentials.”

Jeff

[ksrhee]

30 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Leica would not stop making the RF-based M, even if an EVF-based M (or whatever it would be called) were produced. 
 

Maybe an EVF-based M would be a blessing for the traditionalists, as maybe then, the RF-based M could return to “just the essentials.”

Jeff

My take on this is that if that happens, the traditional RF camera will suffer the same fate as the DSLR cameras, given the niche and small market for M.  Leica will just become another camera company producing mirrorless cameras. I, for one, do not like to see that happen. I know some people are labeling me and others as obstructionists for progress, but if that progress kills the current incarnation of M cameras, what good is the progress? 

Edited April 13, 2024 by ksrhee

[lct]

The Visoflex makes part of the M system since the fifties if memory serves. It is here to remain and improve with the progress. 

[LocalHero1953]

2 hours ago, lct said:

EIS seems to work fine on the Sigma FPL (link) , another 61mp digital camera even smaller than the M11. So why not implementing it in the M12 if there is no room enough for IBIS?

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!

 

 

The M-mount (since it was born) has a registration/flange focal distance of 27.8mm (from the mount to the sensor). The L-mount has a registration distance of 20mm; this allows a wide range of non-L-mount lenses to be used with the L bodies with adapters - this was a big marketing point when the SL was launched.

The shallow registration distance of the L-mount also creates space behind and around the sensor for IBIS (etc). The M cannot use the same trick: the sensor has to be further back in the body, leaving no space behind for IBIS. As a geologist, I do not have a clue whether Leica can get round this conundrum within the already cramped space of the M body - in principle, technology and engineering should be able to deal with this in time. But if Leica is the only camera maker with demand for such an IBIS, will it happen???

The blindingly obvious solution for this, at limited development cost for Leica, would be to make the M body fatter. If the heritage lobby says no, then there will be no IBIS. QED.
😉.

[lct]

My question was not about IBIS but EIS (Electronic Image Stabilization). Not sure it is related with registration but i may be wrong.

[thrid]

41 minutes ago, lct said:

The Visoflex makes part of the M system since the fifties if memory serves. It is here to remain and improve with the progress. 

Don't get me wrong. I like the Viso2 and plan on buying one myself.

It is a very useful accessory, but just like the original Visoflex system it was designed to augment the capabilities of the M in areas where its RF design made it unsuitable. But in the long run you'd probably be better off with a dedicated DSLR / EVF camera for certain kind of work. 

 

Edited April 13, 2024 by thrid

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The USP of the Leica Barnacks, inherited by the M, was not a rangefinder, nor bayonet mount, nor a focal plane shutter, although they were all part of it. The USP was a small, simple camera that could be used initially by technically competent photographers, and later by the less skilled to produce images of a 'good enough' quality (not 10x8 or 4x5 quality). This was at a time when there was little competition. Leica created a complete ecosystem of well-made tools and functions that, in the right hands, could produce good images and was fun, quick and easy to use. The Barnack probably beat its competitors by being the first out of the block, perhaps by better manufacturing quality, and in part by better design. The M introduced a quick-change mount and a better rangefinder, and the valuable ecosystem remained. Competition came along from Japan which dented Leica's market. Fortunately, they went the SLR route, eventually leaving the rangefinder/not-TTL market to Leica. 

My point is (and it's just my opinion) is that rangefinder, M-mount, non-TTL OVF (etc) are not in themselves Leica's USP. I would hazard a guess that if Leica did not appear on the scene until today, even if they could afford to develop the bodies and lenses from scratch, they would fail. Leica's M market is kept afloat by those who bought a M (or Barnack) years ago, passed on the love to their children and grandchildren*, and helped create the marketing spiel that Leica uses so well - especially when priced in the luxury bracket. As a new camera on the block, it has none of its original Unique Selling Points: too many others now make cameras that are also small (smaller), simple (simpler to use), create excellent images etc. (and they repair them quicker).

 

*This includes me. I'm just waiting for Leica to make a digital M that I want.

[250swb]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

Leica would not stop making the RF-based M, even if an EVF-based M (or whatever it would be called) were produced. 
 

Maybe an EVF-based M would be a blessing for the traditionalists, as maybe then, the RF-based M could return to “just the essentials.”

Jeff

I think we can be sure that Leica already know the specification they are looking at for the M13 never mind the M12. As such they will deliver just enough to make people buy an M12 without spoiling the cash cow of doing incrementally small improvements. If ever there was a time to jump a generation (or two) of Leica cameras before upgrading this is it.

[lct]

7 minutes ago, thrid said:

Don't get me wrong. I like the Viso2 and plan on buying one myself.

It is a very useful accessory, but just like the original Visoflex system it was designed to augment the capabilities of the M in areas where its RF design made it unsuitable. But in the long run you'd probably be better off with a dedicated DSLR / EVF camera for certain kind of work.

It's been like that since the beginning. When i had an M4 in the seventies, i used to use a Canon FtB as well. Got an AE1 afterwards and various Nikon bodies. But the M system was still the M system, including rangefinders of course but also Visoflex housings. We had even special lenses for it. Now the Visoflex is electronic and woks perfectly with M lenses fortunately.

[LocalHero1953]

19 minutes ago, lct said:

My question was not about IBIS but EIS (Electronic Image Stabilization). Not sure it is related with registration but i may be wrong.

How does it work? I'm familiar with it from video editing.
Does it handle just camera motion? Or subject motion? Or both?

[lct]

1 minute ago, LocalHero1953 said:

How does it work? I'm familiar with it from video editing.
Does it handle just camera motion? Or subject motion? Or both?

 I just know that it works but i don't know how sorry. Reason why i asked my question. Given that  EIS works fine on the Sigma FPL (link) , another 61mp digital camera even smaller than the M11, why not implementing it in the M12 if there is no room enough for IBIS?

[IkarusJohn]

29 minutes ago, ksrhee said:

My take on this is that if that happens, the traditional RF camera will suffer the same fate as the DSLR cameras, given the niche and small market for M.  Leica will just become another camera company producing mirrorless cameras. I, for one, do not like to see that happen. I know some people are labeling me and others as obstructionists for progress, but if that progress kills the current incarnation of M cameras, what good is the progress? 

It is an interesting challenge. 

Without the EVF, framing is marginal across all focal lengths, difficult with ultra-wides and focusing longer than 75mm hit and miss. 

On the plus side, within the 28-75 range, the OVF focusing is incredibly accurate with M lenses at all focal lengths. 

I’ve been using M lenses with EVF cameras since the M9 (a couple of Sonys, the TL, TL2, SL, X1D II and X2D, and the EVF on my M10-D). There are clear advantages, like accurate framing and exposure simulation, but there are significant focusing challenges:

(1) focus peaking is poor at best (too thin wide open and too thick stopped down). I would like to turn it off permanently 

(2) with no auto-stop down (as developed with the Nikon F and subsequent SLR cameras in the 1960s & 70s), if you want the best plane of focus, focusing wide open and stopping down just isn’t practical as you’re also changing the exposure (with exposure compensation on, both aperture and shutter need to be adjusted before firing the shutter)

(3) magnification is helpful (particularly auto-magnification with the M10 & Visoflex), but moving the magnification point is also a challenge.  The joystick on the SL and LCD on the X2D do help with this 

(4) achieving the best plane of focus with wides is difficult, leaving you to rely on depth of field, which may be fine, but not as reassuring as with the OVF

The EVFs in the SL, TL2 and X2D are different implementations with their own lenses. With M cameras , I’m coming to the conclusion that the Visoflex, clunky as it is, might be the best solution. 

[LocalHero1953]

27 minutes ago, lct said:

My question was not about IBIS but EIS (Electronic Image Stabilization). Not sure it is related with registration but i may be wrong.

I have just checked. It's not related to registration distance.

According to a screenshot of the user manual I saw, EIS takes multiple images and combines them. I wonder how that works with moving subjects, or leaves in the wind. Have you tried such subjects? I guess Sigma can do this only because it uses an electronic shutter.

[lct]

18 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I have just checked. It's not related to registration distance.

According to a screenshot of the user manual I saw, EIS takes multiple images and combines them. I wonder how that works with moving subjects, or leaves in the wind. Have you tried such subjects? I guess Sigma can do this only because it uses an electronic shutter.

I guess so too, thank you for sharing 🙂

[Jeff S]

29 minutes ago, 250swb said:

I think we can be sure that Leica already know the specification they are looking at for the M13 never mind the M12. As such they will deliver just enough to make people buy an M12 without spoiling the cash cow of doing incrementally small improvements. If ever there was a time to jump a generation (or two) of Leica cameras before upgrading this is it.

The M10-R and M10M are really all I need or want, and the latter gets 95% of my attention.  The M10 was fine enough, really.   A spectator sport for me at this point in life.

Jeff

[LocalHero1953]

3 minutes ago, lct said:

I guess so too, thank you for sharing 🙂

It's the 3rd or 4th post on this page:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4605782

Edited April 13, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[jaapv]

4 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I have just checked. It's not related to registration distance.

According to a screenshot of the user manual I saw, EIS takes multiple images and combines them. I wonder how that works with moving subjects, or leaves in the wind. Have you tried such subjects? I guess Sigma can do this only because it uses an electronic shutter.

The TL has this as well, It works after a fashion and can occasionally create artefacts, but is no substitute for real IBIS.

[cookedart]

6 hours ago, thrid said:

Essentially, you are suggesting to change the ONLY true optomechanical rangefinder on the market into another EVF camera and eliminate the very reason why people buy this camera in the first place and what makes it unique in the marketplace.  

That makes about as much sense as a handbrake on a canoe.

The optomechanical rangefinder is the heart and soul of the M series. The ORF and the simplicity of the M design is the entire essence of the camera. If you eliminate either, it will no longer be the same camera. And that would be doubly tragic since the M is the last of its kind and that option would cease to exist in the marketplace.
 

I would not be surprised if IBIS appeared, if they can eliminate the mechanical shutter with a global shutter etc. Otherwise there is not enough space and nobody wants to change the size of the camera. Same for the tilt out screen, but regardless that will probably never happen, because it would change the character of the camera. 
 

I did not suggest removing the optical rangefinder, i suggested the OLED could replace the LED projected frameline assembly, and your response is a knee jerk reaction.

If you think about it, if implemented well, this would even enhance the actual optical viewfinder itself. You would be able to set your own preference for what distance the frame lines are optimized for. You would be able to customize what frame line pairs appear, as well as whatever color and shape you would want for them. You would also be able to customize what other information (such as wb or iso) would display. Of course, if implemented similar to fuji, a shutter could rise and it would allow it to switch fully to evf when needed (such as for ultra wide lenses).

People suggested for years as well that Leica would never add a tilt screen to their digital cameras, except now we have it on both the Q and SL..to me thing holding it back is finding a form factor that honors the M's design. 

Edited April 14, 2024 by cookedart

[lct]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

[...] It works after a fashion and can occasionally create artefacts, but is no substitute for real IBIS.

Interesting thank you. I'm using LEDs in my office actually. What kind of artefact should i expect from a camera with EIS and electronic shutter like the Sigma FPL? Just curious.
FPL, Elmar-M 50/2.8, 1/30s:

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!

 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[LocalHero1953]

2 hours ago, lct said:

Interesting thank you. I'm using LEDs in my office actually. What kind of artefact should i expect from a camera with EIS and electronic shutter like the Sigma FPL? Just curious.
FPL, Elmar-M 50/2.8, 1/30s:

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!

 

 

Depending on the LEDs, banding. But that's nothing to do with EIS, just the electronic shutter. I saw it on my fp, when I had it.

As I wrote earlier, you might see artefacts with moving people or blowing leaves - the artefacts one occasionally gets with multishot images. I am also curious about the performance of EIS and whether it can control these artefacts.