How about a line of M Autofocus Lenses for the EV line of M cameras?

[Pieter12]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

45 minutes ago, JNK100 said:

It is not made any more ....

It certainly is. Now in its third generation.

[mujk]

I agree that trying to make AF versions of M lenses is most likely a bad idea. Still, as an engineer I've been intrigued by the possibility from a purely theoretical perspective.

Some of the early AF SLRs in the 80s had a the AF motor in the camera body with a mechanical coupling to the focusing helicoid of the lens. The M mount actually has this coupling, the focusing cam, but it is used in the opposite direction conveying focus position to the rangefinder. At least on some lenses it is actually possible to turn the focus ring by turning the cam. The problem is that the cam is very smooth without anything to grab. But maybe a small modification would make this possible while still retaining backward compatibility. I don't claim that this would work reliably or be fast and easy to use and it would not solve the problem of missing auto-aperture in M lenses.

[zlatkob]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

Its the 'small' bit that is the problem. If any maker could make smaller AF lenses then it would have been done already. The M is totally unsuited to such a move anyway because the M mount lens throat is too constricted. Basically AF lenses using an M mount may not be impossible but it has so many disadvantages that its extremely unlikely that it will ever happen.

I agree that the M mount is totally unsuited to such a move. However, there are many smaller AF lenses currently being made, though not for the M mount. Here is a list of some: Sony 20/1.8, 28/2, 35/1.8, 35/2.8, 55/1.8. Samyang 24/1.8, 35/1.8, 45/1.8, 75/1.8, 85/1.8. Sigma 17/4, 20/2, 24/2, 24/3.5, 35/2, 45/2.8, 50/2, 65/2, 90/2.8. Viltrox 50/2 Air, 85/2 EVO. Small AF lenses can be made.

[JNK100]

1 hour ago, Pieter12 said:

It certainly is. Now in its third generation.

I think it was discontinued late '22. Nice camera though.

[Pieter12]

I see now it has been discontinued. But it is still on the Fujifilm website...

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!

[Tailwagger]

3 hours ago, zlatkob said:

You realize that a new autofocus camera can co-exist with the M mount camera, which would continue to support the 70+ years of existing glass. One does not replace the other. Just as the SL, S, Q, TL did not replace the M.

I cant believe I didn't realize that given I own/have owned multiples Ms, SLs and the Q over the past 10 years or more.  But then you didn't seem to realize that I nothing I wrote ever suggested that such systems couldn't coexist.

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, zlatkob said:

I agree that the M mount is totally unsuited to such a move. However, there are many smaller AF lenses currently being made, though not for the M mount. Here is a list of some: Sony 20/1.8, 28/2, 35/1.8, 35/2.8, 55/1.8. Samyang 24/1.8, 35/1.8, 45/1.8, 75/1.8, 85/1.8. Sigma 17/4, 20/2, 24/2, 24/3.5, 35/2, 45/2.8, 50/2, 65/2, 90/2.8. Viltrox 50/2 Air, 85/2 EVO. Small AF lenses can be made.

I have both the Sony 20/1.8 and 35/1.8 and whilst reasonably light, they are massive in comparison to the Leica 21/3.4 and even 35/1.4. The Sony 90/2.8 is monstrous relative to even a 90/2 (ok its a macro but similar in base spec to the 90/2.8 Elmarit). Bulk is not easy to reduce when electronis communication is required between lens and camera and the M mount is far too small to make this easily achievable I suspect. If Leica really wanted to so so the tech probably would enable it but at a cost way beyond existing lens costs I would image.

Edited 11 hours ago by pgk

[luigi bertolotti]

Autofocus is out of the M concept, moreover, as already noted, is contrary to the spirit of backward compatibility, which imho is the basis of classic Leica story. In marketing terms, they have done a right move with the SL line (that indeed maintains it in a new concept); would be a costly move with no practical interest for customers.

Edited 9 hours ago by luigi bertolotti

[lct]

56 minutes ago, luigi bertolotti said:

Autofocus is out of the M concept, moreover, as already noted, is contrary to the spirit of backward compatibility, which imho is the basis of classic Leica story.

+1

[adan]

7 hours ago, zlatkob said:

You realize that a new autofocus camera can co-exist with the M mount camera, which would continue to support the 70+ years of existing glass. One does not replace the other. Just as the SL, S, Q, TL did not replace the M.

But three of those (S, Q, TL) failed the ultimate test, and are now kaput as currently-made products. Not really a sign of successful product ideas, long-term.

And the fourth is being offered with "incentive deals."  https://leica-camera.com/sites/default/files/2025-09/Press-Release_New-Leica-SL3-S-Kits_July-2025-enGB.pdf

 

4 hours ago, Pieter12 said:

I see now it has been discontinued. But it is still on the Fujifilm website...

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!

Promoting a discontinued product on one's website is common practice. And also an indicator of weak sales.

Either FujiFilm is still stuck with a warehouse-full, and needs to get rid of them.

Or Fuji is helping out their dealers - who are still stuck with shelf-fulls, and need to get rid of them.

[zlatkob]

@adan I mention those products (SL, S, Q, TL) because they show that Leica can and does make new systems, contrary to the view that Leica is too small and doesn't have the resources to develop a new lens or camera line. Moreover, the Q is Leica's biggest seller, according to a recent Leica press release, so sometimes building something new can be a good business move.

[zlatkob]

2 hours ago, luigi bertolotti said:

Autofocus is out of the M concept, moreover, as already noted, is contrary to the spirit of backward compatibility, which imho is the basis of classic Leica story. In marketing terms, they have done a right move with the SL line (that indeed maintains it in a new concept); would be a costly move with no practical interest for customers.

I agree that autofocus is out of the M concept. But that doesn't mean Leica can't make an M-styled autofocus camera. They already do: the Q series. It would simply be a logical evolution of the Q series to make a line of interchangeable autofocus lenses for a future Q. It would not have to be backwards compatible with the M. While backward compatibility is the spirit of the M, not everything Leica makes is backward compatible with the M. 

The practical interest for customers is obvious: many customers appreciate autofocus (making the Q so popular), but don't want a big SL body with big SL lenses.

Edited 7 hours ago by zlatkob

[IkarusJohn]

21 minutes ago, zlatkob said:

I agree that autofocus is out of the M concept. But that doesn't mean Leica can't make an M-styled autofocus camera. They already do: the Q series. It would simply be a logical evolution of the Q series to make a line of interchangeable autofocus lenses for a future Q. It would not have to be backwards compatible with the M. While backward compatibility is the spirit of the M, not everything Leica makes is backward compatible with the M. 

The practical interest for customers is obvious: many customers appreciate autofocus (making the Q so popular), but don't want a big SL body with big SL lenses.

I assume you refer to the Q series only by reference to size and style, based as it was on an M body.  Otherwise, it has very limited relevance, having a fixed leaf shutter lens.  That would mean that a Q interchangeable lens camera would be designed from the ground up - sensor, mount, processor and body, albeit made to look like an M camera?  Then there would be a completely new line of lenses, ultimately for no other reasons to have a Q camera with interchangeable lenses, or a smaller SL camera; take your pick.

I guess you should just make your case to Leica.  It seems to have nothing to do with the M EV1. 

[zlatkob]

4 hours ago, pgk said:

I have both the Sony 20/1.8 and 35/1.8 and whilst reasonably light, they are massive in comparison to the Leica 21/3.4 and even 35/1.4. The Sony 90/2.8 is monstrous relative to even a 90/2 (ok its a macro but similar in base spec to the 90/2.8 Elmarit). Bulk is not easy to reduce when electronis communication is required between lens and camera and the M mount is far too small to make this easily achievable I suspect. If Leica really wanted to so so the tech probably would enable it but at a cost way beyond existing lens costs I would image.

My point is that full frame autofocus lenses can be reasonably compact. They don't have to as small as M lenses in order to qualify as small or compact.

There is a belief among some in the Leica community that compact autofocus lenses don't exist, that they "aren't a thing". Some say that if compact autofocus full frame lenses were possible, some manufacturer would have already made them. But in fact, some manufacturers already make compact autofocus full frame lenses, and they are widely sold and used. I've listed more than 20 such lenses.

Even the Sigma 28-70/2.8, an autofocus zoom (rehoused as the Leica SL 28-70/2.8) is reasonably compact and would fit nicely on a M-styled body, like a future Q. The Sigma version weighs 470g, — less than a Leica APO-Summicron-M 90mm F/2.

You can find countless giant autofocus lenses, and you've picked the Sony 90/2.8 to highlight as monstrous. Buy why not compare the autofocus Sigma 90/2.8 (295g in current L mount) to the Elmarit 90/2.8 (395g for 1990's version, 333g for 1960s version)?

 

[zlatkob]

19 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I assume you refer to the Q series only by reference to size and style, based as it was on an M body.  Otherwise, it has very limited relevance, having a fixed leaf shutter lens.  That would mean that a Q interchangeable lens camera would be designed from the ground up - sensor, mount, processor and body, albeit made to look like an M camera?  Then there would be a completely new line of lenses, ultimately for no other reasons to have a Q camera with interchangeable lenses, or a smaller SL camera; take your pick.

I guess you should just make your case to Leica.  It seems to have nothing to do with the M EV1. 

Yes, the Q is M-styled though not an M body. A big part of the Q's appeal is that it is M-styled. Its relevance in this thread is that it provides a way to get autofocus lenses on an M-styled body, albeit not on an M EV1.

I'm not suggesting autofocus should be made for the M EV1. Rather, I'm suggesting a way to achieve a similar result: create autofocus lenses for a future interchangeable lens Q. It would have the appeal of M-styling, with the practicality of interchangeable AF lenses.

Yes, a Q interchangeable lens camera would be designed from the ground up, but that is what camera makers do, and what Leica has done from time to time. In the case of the Q series, designing a new camera was a great success and well worth the investment.

I'm not going to make a case to Leica. I will be long-retired by the time such a camera is made.

[beewee]

I’m quite curious what it is about the M system that draws people to it. I think it is likely a combination attributes but that combination differs between individuals.

These attributes probably include:

• Compact body
• Small lenses
• Lighter weight
• High image quality for its size/weight
• Prestige or heritage of the brand
• Exclusivity
• Challenge of manual focusing and the satisfaction of mastering something difficult
• Uniqueness of the camera as there’s nothing else like it being made
• Nostalgia and fond memories of past experiences where someone shot with an M body
• Trendiness
• One of the very few new cameras that can be purchased with an optical viewfinder

There are probably many more attributes. The bottom line is that one should ask, in adding AF to the M system (with a naive assumption that it’s technically possible), in doing so, how might that fundamentally change the desirability of the M system? If compromises need to be made to make it technically feasible, how would those compromises affect the M system’s desirability? If it’s technically feasible, what would the cost be to develop and manufacture such a camera and how might that change the values proposition to new and existing customers if the price needs to go up?

Leica cameras are priced high relative to most other cameras on the market and although value is ultimately determined by the customer, Leica would need to make a bet on whether there are sufficient number of customers that would value such a product enough to buy it in order to even break even, let alone make a profit to grow their business and bottom line. Given finite resources, as a for-profit business, it needs to invest in areas that would maximize its profit, if not in the short term, then definitely in the medium and long term. It would be very foolish to dump money into a great idea that not enough people will pay for, if there’s another great idea they can make more money while doing less.

 

Edited 6 hours ago by beewee

[adan]

3 hours ago, adan said:

But three of those (S, Q, CL,TL) failed the ultimate test, and are now kaput as currently-made products.

BTW I made a mistake there  - meant the CL.

[Stuart Richardson]

That is not a particularly charitable reading...the S was a niche product, but even then, it lasted from 2008-2023 in its current form. Leica has said they are working on replacement and suggested it would be released around 2026.  Whether or not they do it is another story. The CL and TL are no longer made, but the lens mount is still fully active and the APS lenses still work just fine. They may have phased out the APS models, but they have shifted the entire mount towards full frame because that is what the market wants. 

[Einst_Stein]

A simple answer from Leica could be rebadged Lumx S9. A slightly more could be CL2 with FF sensor. Use L mount lens, of course. call it M!

 

Edited 2 hours ago by Einst_Stein

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pop]

5 hours ago, beewee said:

These attributes probably include:

You missed the most important ones: speed, ease and accuracy of manual focusing. You know, there are people who choose their gear for their functionality.