Why I love and hate the Leica M

[otto.f]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 12/1/2024 at 5:54 AM, Altair said:

the X2D is the best camera in the world today.

From what I've seen I can only agree. The most important thing you forgot to mention are the neutral, though full colors Hasselblad has been able to present with the successor of the X1D. That's a thing Leica still hasn't been able to deliver since the M9.

[setuporg]

35 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

You don’t, but many huge major companies do.

We really need a sad emoji reaction.

[emlokto]

Admittedly, I'm coming at this from the other side of it. Autofocus is a scam. Imagine shooting at F4 and celebrating that they managed to draw a little box around the eyes and you can click and get a focused picture within that range. Or did you? You'll have no idea until you look at the back of the screen. All through the 2000s and 2010s, camera companies have been selling crappy autofocus, meanwhile Leica has been selling a camera that has predictable focus results and with techniques like zone focusing, you can basically take any family shot you want within perfect focus. We had Instagram, for crying out loud, simulating vignetting and tilt shift and film photography to make pictures 'more interesting' when iPhone cameras were crap. Now, we have much better cellphone cameras that simulate bokeh, smooth the skin for us (without asking), and manipulate the image around the eyes. Some older iPhones even came with a 'glow-like' picture quality. All this, to repeat what Leica has been doing successfully in the digital space for a long time (at significant cost, of course). 

Now, granted, today's autofocus is far more legit but now we have high-end photography software manipulating images to be more this or that or the other thing.

Who's really been committing fraud the last twenty years? Sony and Nikon and Canon that kept forcing us to buy the latest and greatest because the autofocus 'wasn't quite right' and sold us on tilt screens and whatever else, or is it Leica, that continued to talk about zone focusing and the range finder experience?

Autofocus is critical in many key professional areas, I'm not debating that, but for a casual photographer... learn to take a photo. Or use your iPhone. Unless you really want a big zoom lens, then well, Nikon, Sony, and Canon are awesome! 

[Tseg]

23 minutes ago, emlokto said:

Autofocus is critical in many key professional areas, I'm not debating that, but for a casual photographer... learn to take a photo. Or use your iPhone. Unless you really want a big zoom lens, then well, Nikon, Sony, and Canon are awesome! 

With the advent of AI there is the generation of an image to commemorate an occurrence or even hypothesize an occurrence... and then there is photography (as a legacy, historical tool).   Like it or not, we have slide-rules hanging around our necks in the form of a rangefinder.   With that said, slide rules remain collectable/usable more than a half century after they were replaced by the scientific calculator.

[pgk]

20 hours ago, emlokto said:

Autofocus is critical in many key professional areas, I'm not debating that.....

Well I do. It may be 'critical' for a very few in very specific areas, but in general its potentially counterproductive, by which I mean that it takes over a key decision which is precise point of focus, and leads to sloppy workmanship. I remember the first AF systems appearing from Canon and Nikon and many wondering what use they would be. Just because AF is now commonplace does not mean that it is essential much of the time. I started my photographic carrer using MF equipment and will probably still use MF until it ends. Sure I will have an use AF but I don't regard it as a critical feature for much of the time.

[Leicastheniker]

Am 4.12.2024 um 21:50 schrieb newtoleica:

Frankly I don't care a damn about TikTokers and influencers.... 

I hate to break it you, but they don't care about you either...So it's a tie.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And what about pre-burst? The camera runs a permanent 4K or 6K video loop and when you hit the shutter button it records from a few seconds before. Pick your decisive moment in the computer at home, even when you missed it completely. 

[Viv]

On 12/3/2024 at 11:41 AM, evikne said:

I think the M line has already gone too far in its technical evolution. One possibility could be to split it into two opposite directions: An EVF-M with everything that can be put inside by modern stuff, and an M Classic, which is as close to a film-M as possible, and can also be merged with the screenless D-line.

Yes. 

To simplify even further, an M without a screen and with a FIXED 35mm lens.

[Viv]

On 12/4/2024 at 9:50 PM, newtoleica said:

Frankly I don't care a damn about TikTokers and influencers.... 

I'm glad you said "make", not "earn".

[Viv]

On 12/5/2024 at 7:43 AM, otto.f said:

From what I've seen I can only agree. The most important thing you forgot to mention are the neutral, though full colors Hasselblad has been able to present with the successor of the X1D. That's a thing Leica still hasn't been able to deliver since the M9.

I agree.

[Velo-city]

On 12/5/2024 at 6:43 AM, otto.f said:

On 12/1/2024 at 4:54 AM, Altair said:

the X2D is the best camera in the world today.

From what I've seen I can only agree. The most important thing you forgot to mention are the neutral, though full colors Hasselblad has been able to present with the successor of the X1D. That's a thing Leica still hasn't been able to deliver since the M9.

If Hasselblad made a FF version of the  X2D that was the same size as the M11, I'd grab it in a heartbeat. But MF digital with those file sizes is just way beyond what I need, and the thing is pretty big.  There are so many options if you want something that size.  

Perhaps Leica should do a collaboration and make a special 'Hasselblad colours' edition M - a camera that would actually capture images with realistic colours.  That would be a far more useful camera to most people than painting the outside in a new colour. 

[otto.f]

On 12/3/2024 at 11:41 AM, evikne said:

I think the M line has already gone too far in its technical evolution. One possibility could be to split it into two opposite directions: An EVF-M with everything that can be put inside by modern stuff, and an M Classic, which is as close to a film-M as possible, and can also be merged with the screenless D-line.

But that was the M9, no? Very close to the max ISO you can get with film, but more realistic than the Portra's

 

Edited December 6, 2024 by otto.f

[pgh]

X2d colors are much better than the M9's were. More subtle, more true to life, still full but not overly cooked like M9's could be. You'd have to crank the saturation slider some on the X2d to get to m9 territory. 

That said, much as I enjoy my x2d it is not the best camera in the world - there's just no such thing - but if there were it would probably be more strongly argued in traditionalist terms that it's a phase one.

It is quite capable but marginal upgrade on everything and still makes a ton of boring stuff in most hands. OP's description about keepers just indicates a lack of familiarity with the M system - I get more keepers with an M than I ever will with an X2d because I'm better at using it and manual skill still matters - though less in a more automated machine like the X2d. 

Have to say, size of X2d compared to digital M is pretty negligible in practice unless you're one of those camera in your coat people. It's quite light and slightly bigger footprint sure but really not enough to change usage from my perspective. 

If I had to give up my M10M or X2d I would give up my X2d. Doesn't align with product values or features but doesn't matter. 

Edited December 6, 2024 by pgh

[3D-Kraft.com]

Am 5.12.2024 um 07:43 schrieb otto.f:

From what I've seen I can only agree. The most important thing you forgot to mention are the neutral, though full colors Hasselblad has been able to present with the successor of the X1D. That's a thing Leica still hasn't been able to deliver since the M9.

Although I like the colors out of the M9 (one of the reasons, I bought it again in 2024), I would call them everthing else than "neutral".

Am 6.12.2024 um 10:22 schrieb pgk:

Well I do. It may be 'critical' for a very few in very specific areas, but in general its potentially counterproductive, by which I mean that it takes over a key decision which is precise point of focus, and leads to sloppy workmanship. I remember the first AF systems appearing from Canon and Nikon and many wondering what use they would be. Just because AF is now commonplace does not mean that it is essential much of the time. I started my photographic carrer using MF equipment and will probably still use MF until it ends. Sure I will have an use AF but I don't regard it as a critical feature for much of the time.

Eye-AF works very reliable these days, and if you have a good reason to fokus something else, you can choose the desired point pretty easy either on the display or by (joystick-)botton movement. Your opinion, the camera takes a decision which is not under your control sounds like it's based on pretty outdated or inferior gear.

If you have a rangefinder patch only in the center, which forces you to focus and recompose, this is a guarantee for poorly focused photos when you use fast lenses with unfavourable field curvature (like many Leica and Voigtlander lenses suffer from). That's what I call unpredictable focus.

[pgk]

46 minutes ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

Eye-AF works very reliable these days, and if you have a good reason to fokus something else, you can choose the desired point pretty easy either on the display or by (joystick-)botton movement. Your opinion, the camera takes a decision which is not under your control sounds like it's based on pretty outdated or inferior gear.

If you have a rangefinder patch only in the center, which forces you to focus and recompose, this is a guarantee for poorly focused photos when you use fast lenses with unfavourable field curvature (like many Leica and Voigtlander lenses suffer from). That's what I call unpredictable focus.

It all depends on what you find acceptable in terms of precise focus. Having owned and used the Canon 85/1.2 I can honestly say thatthe only way of absolutely nailing precise focus is by zooming in (EVF) and doing so slows you down, so no system is going to work perfectly. And so it all depends on what you are doing, what sort of photos you are taking and what your desired output is. Many expect the M rangefinder to work well outside its operating parameters and of course it doesn't. What you term to be 'unpredictable focus' is usually as a result of being on the edge of the rangefinder's operating envelope. This includes with fast lenses such as the 75/1.4 which is difficult to nail focus with if conditions are even marginally unfavourable. I coul go on but no, I do not think that current AF is obviously better than manual focus depending of course, on what you are doing. I have met old school sports photographers who could floow focus manually, a skill which took years of practice. AF makes it a lot easier, most of the time.

[anonymoose]

1 hour ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

Eye-AF works very reliable these days, and if you have a good reason to fokus something else, you can choose the desired point pretty easy either on the display or by (joystick-)botton movement. Your opinion, the camera takes a decision which is not under your control sounds like it's based on pretty outdated or inferior gear.

The eye AF (human, animal, and bird) on my A1 (and previously A7S III with human/animal) is scary good. At least 90% of the time it snaps onto the right subject and the correct eye (the one closer to the camera) and sticks to it as long as it's visible. I mentioned it in another post, but it's so good it makes taking a good picture quite boring.

[lct]

57 minutes ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

If you have a rangefinder patch only in the center, which forces you to focus and recompose, this is a guarantee for poorly focused photos when you use fast lenses with unfavourable field curvature (like many Leica and Voigtlander lenses suffer from). That's what I call unpredictable focus.

Sure but modern M cameras can work in both RF and LV modes so one can choose either OVF or EVF to focus manually. With a good EVF there is nothing unpredictable and no focus shift can get in the way when focusing at working aperture. Not to say that AF is useless but it is hardly relevant for M lens users. 

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 41 Minuten schrieb pgk:

What you term to be 'unpredictable focus' is usually as a result of being on the edge of the rangefinder's operating envelope. This includes with fast lenses such as the 75/1.4 which is difficult to nail focus with if conditions are even marginally unfavourable. I coul go on but no, I do not think that current AF is obviously better than manual focus depending of course, on what you are doing. I have met old school sports photographers who could floow focus manually, a skill which took years of practice. AF makes it a lot easier, most of the time.

I do not expect an "M" rangefinder to work outside of it's "operating envelope" but in my example I described a weakness that is caused by the lenses and many users do not even know about that (they just wonder, why the were'nt able to nail focus).

The 75/1.4 is another example. Problems to get nailed focus with it are usually not caused by the rangefinder. It simply seems to be impossible to get a calibration that works over the whole focus range of that lens, whereas the Noctilux 75/1.25, which should be even more difficult to nail properly due to the even shallower DOF, causes less problems.

I think you should try a Sony A1 in order to adjust your perception regarding today's AF quality and predictability.

vor 32 Minuten schrieb anonymoose:

The eye AF (human, animal, and bird) on my A1 (and previously A7S III with human/animal) is scary good. At least 90% of the time it snaps onto the right subject and the correct eye (the one closer to the camera) and sticks to it as long as it's visible. I mentioned it in another post, but it's so good it makes taking a good picture quite boring.

Yes, this is the reason, why I bought an M9 beside the A1 to overcome this boredom 😉

Edited December 7, 2024 by 3D-Kraft.com

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 11 Minuten schrieb lct:

Sure but modern M cameras can work in both RF and LV modes so one can choose either OVF or EVF to focus manually. With a good EVF there is nothing unpredictable and no focus shift can get in the way when focusing at working aperture. Not to say that AF is useless but it is hardly relevant for M lens users. 

This is true - but only for static subjects where you can take any time you want. With the M240 even this was impossible because in live view you could only zoom into the center.

Edited December 7, 2024 by 3D-Kraft.com

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

14 minutes ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

but only for static subjects where you can take any time you want.

Do you really mean that an M rangefinder cannot capture dynamic subjects?  Not my experience... Where do you think the concept "decisive moment" comes from? Both M8 and Summicron 90 AA

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!