M12 wishlist

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Strmbrg said:

Not more of anything, i would say. Rather much less of everything.
I don't like choices, I prefer well-thought functions so i don't have to chose. A little like it once was. When it was really good i.e.

One light-metering method, no multi-shot-options at all, just single. No live view. Re-introduce the opto-mechanical original Visoflex for macro. 🙂

No, I don't want to go so far as back to film. Film is expensive, it restricts my shooting to "safe" shots. Both because of cost and because of a much more limited number of frames to get. At least if I don't carry a large bag with film with me. 

Why did you get M10-R instead of M10-D?

[Advertisement]

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

[Strmbrg]

4 hours ago, SrMi said:

Why did you get M10-R instead of M10-D?

Firstly there is some irony in my reply, secondly when I wanted to buy my first Leica-M there was only this and one monochrome-something in the shop.
Maybe thirdly: It is nice to have a display for some purposes. The challenge (for me) is not to check it all the time.

[adan]

SInce I have now intruded on the thread, here's my wishlist for the M12.

Basically - M10-P or M10-R replicated exactly, except for:

 

- Base megapixel count irrelevant if at least 18-24.

- No touchscreen function, or at least a way to disable it in the EVF/LV menu, as with Live View overall.

- ISO performance, in color, of 50000 - that matches those M10s' existing performance at ISO 10000 (overall noise level, no shadow banding, color consistency).

- Managing to "open up" the film chamber a little more as in the M11 (or to match the M9), to reduce flare off the inside of the shutter chamber, while retaining the off-the-shutter metering this time around.

- highly optional - reduced-size .DNG capability.

 

The last three will definitely be engineering challenges, separately or combined, and perhaps truly not possible at all. Maybe we have reached a ceiling for sensor/pixel efficiency, or electronics miniaturization. But there is a difference between "impossible" and "difficult."

"The difficult we can do immediately - the impossible takes a little longer."

However, engineering improvement is exactly what I expect from Leica (and/or its suppliers), rather than "features."

And the only thing to which I would upgrade, or I will just stick with M10s until there are no functioning units left on Earth. 😉

And as a carrot 🥕 for Leica - I would grit my teeth and pay somewhat more for such an M12 than the current M11 prices. If properly executed.

 

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, adan said:

- No touchscreen function, or at least a way to disable it in the EVF/LV menu, as with Live View overall.

You can turn the LV and the LCD off in the current M11.

2 hours ago, adan said:

ISO performance, in color, of 50000 - that matches those M10s' existing performance at ISO 10000 (overall noise level, no shadow banding, color consistency).

That would be more than a two-stop improvement in DR, not something that can happen with the current state of technology. Maybe once photon counting sensors are available, maybe in 10 years from now, if at all. Currently, M11 has unmatched or equaled high ISO performance.

The only feature I wish for is IBIS so that I can shoot with 3/f instead of 1/4f when subject motion allows it. 

 

[evikne]

I don't have an M12 wish list, because I only want a camera without a screen, so then it will have to be an M12-D.

But first I should see how the M11-D turns out.

[adan]

Quote

You can turn the LV and the LCD off in the current M11

Certainly - what I want to do is disable the touch-function only. Not the display overall.

Particularly when reviewing pictures, when the touch-screen is constantly turning the photo info ON/OFF all by itself, or even trying to move the displayed picture around. And even with my finger brushing past a mm above the surface, or simply pressing the nearby "Play" button.

3 hours ago, SrMi said:

That would be more than a two-stop improvement in DR, not something that can happen with the current state of technology.

Which is exactly why I included the following caveat:

Quote

The last three will definitely be engineering challenges, separately or combined, and perhaps truly not possible at all. Maybe we have reached a ceiling for sensor/pixel efficiency, or electronics miniaturization.

Since this thread is about an M12 wishlist, I won't get into a debate M10 vs. M11. The M11 ship sailed long ago, and I stayed happily (and productively) on the shore. 😉

[Vip]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

• Hybrid display ( rangefinder and EVF as in Fuji) to enhance the optics range  ( 16/21; 135)
• IBIS
• Better visibility in the viewfinder of information: exposure time and +/- exposure
• a function switch as in the SL2 or SL3 to fast access of most frequent options

[Edax]

7 hours ago, adan said:

Certainly - what I want to do is disable the touch-function only. Not the display overall.

Particularly when reviewing pictures, when the touch-screen is constantly turning the photo info ON/OFF all by itself, or even trying to move the displayed picture around. And even with my finger brushing past a mm above the surface, or simply pressing the nearby "Play" button.

The M11 has three touch mode settings: "On", "Off" and "Off (LV mode)" (mine is set of "Off" to prevent shutter lock). I Wouldn't be surprised if the M12 takes over these options...

[IkarusJohn]

10 hours ago, Edax said:

The M11 has three touch mode settings: "On", "Off" and "Off (LV mode)" (mine is set of "Off" to prevent shutter lock). I Wouldn't be surprised if the M12 takes over these options...

How does setting live view mode set to “Off” avoid shutter shock?  Isn’t the shutter action the same whatever the mode with the M11?  If live view is off, isn’t the sensor still live (for metering), so the shutter action is still open-close-open (expose)-close-open?

[IkarusJohn]

On 5/5/2024 at 8:47 AM, adan said:

SInce I have now intruded on the thread, here's my wishlist for the M12.

Basically - M10-P or M10-R replicated exactly, except for:

 

- Base megapixel count irrelevant if at least 18-24.

- No touchscreen function, or at least a way to disable it in the EVF/LV menu, as with Live View overall.

- ISO performance, in color, of 50000 - that matches those M10s' existing performance at ISO 10000 (overall noise level, no shadow banding, color consistency).

- Managing to "open up" the film chamber a little more as in the M11 (or to match the M9), to reduce flare off the inside of the shutter chamber, while retaining the off-the-shutter metering this time around.

- highly optional - reduced-size .DNG capability.

 

The last three will definitely be engineering challenges, separately or combined, and perhaps truly not possible at all. Maybe we have reached a ceiling for sensor/pixel efficiency, or electronics miniaturization. But there is a difference between "impossible" and "difficult."

"The difficult we can do immediately - the impossible takes a little longer."

However, engineering improvement is exactly what I expect from Leica (and/or its suppliers), rather than "features."

And the only thing to which I would upgrade, or I will just stick with M10s until there are no functioning units left on Earth. 😉

And as a carrot 🥕 for Leica - I would grit my teeth and pay somewhat more for such an M12 than the current M11 prices. If properly executed.

 

I agree with all of this, save that I have never had a problem with “flare inside the shutter chamber” with either my M9 or M10.  And, like @evikne, I’d really only be interested in a D version.  Quite like the idea of losing the base plate (serves no purpose on a digital camera), but it seems to have been problematic with the M11.

I like the “engineering improvement … rather than features” comment.  Exactly my thoughts, but I suspect at 65 I’m not seen as the future deomgraphic for a Leica buyer, and I guess those in the R&D department are also a different generation.

Edited May 5, 2024 by IkarusJohn

[Edax]

5 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

How does setting live view mode set to “Off” avoid shutter shock?  Isn’t the shutter action the same whatever the mode with the M11?  If live view is off, isn’t the sensor still live (for metering), so the shutter action is still open-close-open (expose)-close-open?

 

5 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

How does setting live view mode set to “Off” avoid shutter shock?  Isn’t the shutter action the same whatever the mode with the M11?  If live view is off, isn’t the sensor still live (for metering), so the shutter action is still open-close-open (expose)-close-open?

Shutter lock. Not shutter shock.

[IkarusJohn]

3 minutes ago, Edax said:

 

Shutter lock. Not shutter shock.

Ah, sorry.

Still none the wiser.  What’s shutter lock, and how does turning live view off affect it?  Not a feature on the M10 …

[adan]

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

I agree with all of this, save that I have never had a problem with “flare inside the shutter chamber” with either my M9 or M10.

Possible - since I believe you don't use lenses longer than 75mm on your Ms.

But with 90s especially, the raised floor/metering cell of the M10 shutter chamber reflects a lot of the unused image-circle up onto the sensor, as veiling  or other flare.

Just something about the "glancing angle" of the light from 90s, when it hits the inside of the camera.....see diagram of general problem below.

We all know about the "thin" 90 TE with regard to internal flare in backlighting - but I've been getting it with just about every 90 I have tried on the M10 (Elmarit-M, APO-Summicron, Summarits). With the exception of the old Elmar-C for the film-CL - which vignettes so tightly that there is very little image-circle "spill" to reflect. 🤪

(BTW - fast 75s are also mostly immune, because they also have fairly heavy vignetting, as well as slightly different light/glass geometry than 90s. My Nokton 75 f/1.5 has no problems on the M10)

And yes, it was not a problem with the M9 (or other pre-M10 cameras). Recall that Leica completely reorganized the "innards" of the M10, to squeeze all the parts into a smaller (film-M-sized) body volume. Including changing the shape of the meter-cell-housing in the floor of the shutter chamber. 

It needed a revision - I just wish the revision had not involved removing the OTS metering altogether. Baby/bath-water. 😰

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!

[SrMi]

Another, realistic, wish: add EFCS or a stacked sensor without the mechanical shutter.

[henning]

My main wish for the M12 (or for that matter, the M11) is for stable, solid, reasonable firmware. Especially firmware that doesn't let the camera go changing settings on its own that it has no right to.

Edited May 6, 2024 by henning
typoos, typos, tps, typos.

[IkarusJohn]

34 minutes ago, adan said:

Possible - since I believe you don't use lenses longer than 75mm on your Ms.

But with 90s especially, the raised floor/metering cell of the M10 shutter chamber reflects a lot of the unused image-circle up onto the sensor, as veiling  or other flare.

Just something about the "glancing angle" of the light from 90s, when it hits the inside of the camera.....see diagram of general problem below.

We all know about the "thin" 90 TE with regard to internal flare in backlighting - but I've been getting it with just about every 90 I have tried on the M10 (Elmarit-M, APO-Summicron, Summarits). With the exception of the old Elmar-C for the film-CL - which vignettes so tightly that there is very little image-circle "spill" to reflect. 🤪

(BTW - fast 75s are also mostly immune, because they also have fairly heavy vignetting, as well as slightly different light/glass geometry than 90s. My Nokton 75 f/1.5 has no problems on the M10)

And yes, it was not a problem with the M9 (or other pre-M10 cameras). Recall that Leica completely reorganized the "innards" of the M10, to squeeze all the parts into a smaller (film-M-sized) body volume. Including changing the shape of the meter-cell-housing in the floor of the shutter chamber. 

It needed a revision - I just wish the revision had not involved removing the OTS metering altogether. Baby/bath-water. 😰

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!

Thanks for the explanation, Andy.

So, if I understand correctly, the meter, which sits just inside the lens mount, facing towards the shutter, causes reflections (veiling flare) back onto the sensor during exposure, particularly when using telecentric lenses?  Not something I’ve struck, or heard of elsewhere.

I don’t have my M10-D at the moment (still on holiday in Wetzlar), nor do I have the details of the changes to the mount between the M9 & M10.  However, the interior of all my lenses and the surfaces inside the camera are all coated with a matt black coating to avoid reflection.  As the little lens in the meter faces back to the shutter, how do the reflections out of the sensor frame (unusaed image circle), coming from behind the sensor, end up on the sensor?  And why are longer lenses more prone?

There might not be any simple answers to this (simple enough for me).  I had assumed that Leica was just simplifying the mount …

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, adan said:

 

It needed a revision - I just wish the revision had not involved removing the OTS metering altogether. Baby/bath-water. 😰

 

 

It's all your fault, Andy, after regularly writing about this issue for years.  😉

 

 

Jeff

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

So, if I understand correctly, the meter, which sits just inside the lens mount, facing towards the shutter, causes reflections (veiling flare) back onto the sensor during exposure, particularly when using telecentric lenses?  Not something I’ve struck, or heard of elsewhere.

Leica said in one of their M11 videos that there is better flare resistance because there is more room inside and little where the light can reflect. Situations where M10 would show reflections and ghost effects may be eliminated with M11.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[adan]

Yes, I am trying to track down that comment "from the horse's mouth."

It may have been in the live-streamed M11 introduction event - and I'm not sure where a video of that is (if any).

I don't think little old Adan's comments were enough to pursuade Leica on that issue, however.

I can only assume they must have received quite a bit of feedback about flare with the M10 from other sources.

If it was just my comments, I feel quite guilty about that.

Both because I would have put Leica to a lot of trouble - and then not bought into the results of their efforts.

And because of the lost OTS metering, and what else it entailed (full-time double-acting "stapler-sound" shutter sequence, etc.).

As to IkarusJohn's most recent questions, I am working on some "show and tell" answers for those.

In the meantime, my previous comments linked by Jeff S may help.

..................

And there is this "logical/circumstantial-evidence" argument - although as a confirmed empiricist, I don't generally like that approach.

Here is an image of the M11's shutter chamber:

https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/5995781784/Leica_M11_shutter_blades.jpeg

We can see that the entire space (about 1cm deep) below the shutter is now simply - empty.

Leica took out the M10 meter, but did not use that space for anything else - and this in a camera short on internal space, and with a big new battery to accomodate. Why not put some other electronics there, and increase the battery size/capacity even more?

Why would Leica think it useful to put - nothing - close to the sensor edge, in that position between the sensor and the lens?

Edited May 6, 2024 by adan

[lct]

Never seen that kind of flare with the M11 so far. Same for the M240 but a lens like the "thin" Tele-Elmarit does flare with both bodies when strong light sources like the sun stand just outside the frame. No significant flare with Tele-Tessar 90/4 or Rokkor 90/4 though so it is  lens rather than body issue apparently. Chances that the M12 behaves like the M10 more so than the M11 sound rather academical though.