ArtZ Posted July 21, 2008 Share #41 Posted July 21, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm quite sure Leica would like to compete with Hasselblad after the Imacon "betrayal". Revenge, as they say, is a dish best served cold. Even better when the dish served just out from the freezer :D Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 Hi ArtZ, Take a look here Elusive M9 with AF?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rob_x2004 Posted July 21, 2008 Share #42 Posted July 21, 2008 To be clear... I like to imagine / speculate about those developments... but me too DO NOT WANT them on M line... I think they can make a significant new RF camera WITHOUT adding that (*) damned features... there are many areas in which the M8 (anyway, a FINE camera) can, in the future, evolve without losing its heritage. How? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapp Posted July 21, 2008 Share #43 Posted July 21, 2008 I couldn't stop shaking my head while reading some idiotic (sorry) recommendations for the elusive M9 in another site. Live view? AF? Single lens camera? The 'recommendations' never stop. Thank God Leica doesn't listen. Thank God!!! Funny how Leica users are supposed to be purists and yet, so many of them accept buying a D3 @5500$ but cry at a 5000$ noctilux or 4500$ M8, calling Leica insane. Yeah, I think I got it. Real Leica users and afficionados buy and shoot a Leica the way it is meant to be. I wouldn't be surprised to see that only the non-Leica owners spend their time on Leica forums lecturing Leica. It was my rant of the day. I'm off shooting and hoping the M9 (when it comes) REMAINS A LEICA: Same shape, same form, same viewfinder, same M-shooting. Chow! If you are so happy with the current M cameras, stick to them, but do not make suggestions for a new camera. If it is perfect why change it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2008 Share #44 Posted July 21, 2008 How? Improve the sensor regarding high iso noise and dynamic range (It is ok now, but better would be welcome), minor ergonomic changes as often suggested in this forum. Refine it a bit. Weatherproofing. Maybe find a way to slim it down to film-M thickness. That is about all I can think off. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fefe Posted July 21, 2008 Share #45 Posted July 21, 2008 Yes, an ISO wheel, slightly thinner body and 1 to 2 stops better from noise perspective at high ISO would be a nice and probably reasonable improvement for a next generation M (and I would like to see it happen). Well the ability to set in a menu which lens you are using right now to skip the 6 bit coding thing on wide angles would be nice as well but I don't expect them to do it. Then I can dream for FF so all these nice 50mm lenses are now back to be "normals", a focus confirmation maybe (with eventually an indicator of an estimated distance between the current plane of focus and the object in the RF patch), but I definitely don't want an AF system that will certainly bring bulk to the system and is actually exactly what got me into the M8: I ran away from AF, away from having to spend my time trying to trick the AF to do whatever I wanted to do. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted July 21, 2008 Share #46 Posted July 21, 2008 Improve the sensor regarding high iso noise and dynamic range (It is ok now, but better would be welcome), minor ergonomic changes as often suggested in this forum. Refine it a bit. Weatherproofing. Maybe find a way to slim it down to film-M thickness. That is about all I can think off. Yea I would agree with you there particularly on the weatherprooofing and stuff...but turning it into AF with the present lens formulas and keeping it rangefinder? How? I mean I have heard of comedy before. If they decide to start something fundamentally new I guess they could retool and relayout their entire plant, restaff ... anyone got any inside on their factory extensions? Maybe they get someone like Panasonic on board to build them a pseudo slr. Hang on I think panasonic are a bit tied up at the moment putting in their one point three square kilometres of screens for the olympics. Wonder why Leica dont just start making bicycles or something equally sensible? That would have to keep someone happy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2008 Share #47 Posted July 21, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Och-well, there are plenty of wastepaper baskets in Solms, with one faction calling for AF and another for the return of the rewind lever... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted July 21, 2008 Share #48 Posted July 21, 2008 Jaap - I seriously think the only reason the rewind lever won't make a reappearance is because Epson did it first. Otherwise I seriously hope and pray that AF isn't on the Leica to-do list: what fefe said "I ran away from AF, away from having to spend my time trying to trick the AF to do whatever I wanted to do" is a great summation of why many of us don't want to see it happen. Could it be that the aging demographic of Leica users is the only reason this issue rears its ugly head with increasing frequency? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2008 Share #49 Posted July 21, 2008 You know I agree 100% with you,Mani on all this pie-in-the-sky stuff. The reason the RD1 has a rewind lever is not that it is retro or silent, it was a no-choice as it was a budget and development matter. They had an existing body which was being adapted for a sensor. A new electric shutter was one bridge to far. I am sure they would have if they could have. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted July 21, 2008 Share #50 Posted July 21, 2008 The reason the RD1 has a rewind lever is not that it is retro or silent, it was a no-choice as it was a budget and development matter. They had an existing body which was being adapted for a sensor. A new electric shutter was one bridge to far. I am sure they would have if they could have. Ah now this I'm sure you're right about! And before I used the camera I thought it was a rather embarrassing toy-feature, together with the way the menu is controlled by the 'rewind' knob. In fact, those two 'features' held me back from buying the Epson for a while - I felt it couldn't be serious, rather like how I feel about this. But don't they say 'necessity is the mother of invention'? The film advance lever adds so much to the contemplative feel of photographing with the Epson - not suitable for photojournalists I dare say, but the option of lever and motordrive advance might keep a larger number of people happy, and allow for a quieter shutter. Just wondering really. I think Leica engineers are probably way past the paperbasket stage in their plans for the M9. Too late for our wishlists. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted July 21, 2008 Share #51 Posted July 21, 2008 If there were to be no AF in the M8's successor, either in lens or in body, how difficult would it be to build a zoom into the RF eyepiece? I know this does not solve the problem of the tolerances in the RF mechanism or lenses but at least it would make getting accurate image overlap easier for 50/75/90/135 lenses. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcsang Posted July 21, 2008 Share #52 Posted July 21, 2008 Minor improvements would be nice. Improved noise reduction/handling in High ISO ranges (1250 and 2500) Easier way to change the ISO rather than going to the menu Improve the electronics to rid of "weird" errors (i.e. shutter recocking constantly, strange errors etc.) Add a "low ISO" (i.e. 100 or 50) option Add the ability to capture the aperture setting in the exif data I'm no electronics whiz or programmer but I would think that some of that (save for the ISO menu change) could be done without drastic changes in the body etc. thereby reducing the chance that Leica would be "re-inventing the wheel" per se. I really thought I would "want" full frame after trying the camera out, but I've since become accustomed to the whole 1.33x crop thing. I've noticed that I use the 28mm and 50mm the most with the 75mm now being thrown into the mix. I only want those minor changes for now - and I think those minor changes are possible without causing great upheaval at Leica. Dave Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted July 21, 2008 Share #53 Posted July 21, 2008 how difficult would it be to build a zoom into the RF eyepiece? Easy if you are NASA. And easy if you are happy with G9 quality. Guess I just figured it would have to keep up with consumer grade slr and fit in an M. Battery life anyone? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted July 21, 2008 Share #54 Posted July 21, 2008 but the option of lever and motordrive advance might keep a larger number of people happy, and allow for a quieter shutter. Space, and the cost of superfluous and mechanical parts? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljclark Posted July 21, 2008 Share #55 Posted July 21, 2008 Is this this yearning for the AF/DRF some kind quest for the perfect single camera -- the one does that does many things "OK"? Good luck -- but it does beg the question of why anyone would want such a camera. I've got 4 DSLRs at home, plus a Nikon FM2n, the M8, and the "backup" M6. I don't use all cameras for for all things. The Nikon D300s are for sports shooting and the occasional job that pops up where I need reach, flexibility, lighting control, and speed. The AF on those cameras is amazing. MF with them can be a challenge, since the VF's light and display path is optimized for AF. But the new Nikon AF is pretty sophisticated (D3, D300, and D700). That's the bar that Leica will need to reach, if not actually clear, on their first outing with AF either in a DSLR or DRF. And yet that is the point where those crying for RF in an M-body want Leica to invest limited R&D dollars? Are you guys nuts? My other two DSLRs are an Oly E-1 and an E-510 (purchased mostly for the IS). While the E-1 handling is very nice, the AF on either is pretty grim. To do manual focusing, I had to invest in KatzEye screens for both. Oly received a lot of flack for the "quality" of the AF on all their bodies except the recent E-3...Criticism richly deserved. I keep the E-1 around for special projects and because I like shooting with it. I tried the E-3 for a couple of months, found it running a poor second to the D300s, and sold it and an M6 when I bought the M8. The point? I don't want or need the M8 to do what the D300s do. I don't want or need the D300s to do what the M8 does. Different cameras for clearly different purposes. You want AF in a DRF? Fine. Form an investment pool and offer Leica 10 or 20 million Euros to start the R&D. This to produce a camera that will cost how much more than an M8? And a range of AF lenses that will cost how much more than the current M-mounts? And BTW -- which series will get the AF? The Summarits? I doubt it. And how many years will it take to roll out the first five or six DRF AF lenses? Really -- Put your money where your mouths are. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelland Posted July 21, 2008 Share #56 Posted July 21, 2008 You want AF in a DRF? Fine. Form an investment pool and offer Leica 10 or 20 million Euros to start the R&D. This to produce a camera that will cost how much more than an M8? And a range of AF lenses that will cost how much more than the current M-mounts? And BTW -- which series will get the AF? The Summarits? I doubt it. And how many years will it take to roll out the first five or six DRF AF lenses? Really -- Put your money where your mouths are. Can you just imagine the bitching here if Leica DID switch to/support AF ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted July 21, 2008 Share #57 Posted July 21, 2008 Space, and the cost of superfluous and mechanical parts? Seems to me that mechanical parts is what Leica are best at Rob. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcsang Posted July 21, 2008 Share #58 Posted July 21, 2008 <snip>The point? I don't want or need the M8 to do what the D300s do. I don't want or need the D300s to do what the M8 does. Different cameras for clearly different purposes.</snip> <paraphrase><quote=Kyle Cassidy>Really -- Put your Leica where your money was. </quote></paraphrase> Bingo. I've stated that over and over and over again. Why do people feel the need to create a sow's ear out of a silk purse (and vice versa) People get too hung up on brand loyalty, and even more so when you're talking camera brands. Forest, trees, and suddenly everyone is blind - Mind you, this type of behaviour is not exclusive or limited to Leica owners - the same type of attitude occurred within the PDML years ago. Dave Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2008 Share #59 Posted July 21, 2008 You guys do know that Leica invented autofocus? And that they deemed it "uninteresting for serious photography", enabling their partner Minolta to run a way with the patent.... The rest is history. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted July 21, 2008 Share #60 Posted July 21, 2008 You guys do know that Leica invented autofocus? And that they deemed it "uninteresting for serious photography" I would call that amazing foresight! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.