zlatkob

He made a valid point. Garry was working with small lenses, mainly the 28mm, and would have gotten no benefit from using an SLR. Credit to the person who asked the questions, and persisted to get a clearer answer.

Someone else recently posted a link to the same video in Barnack's Bar. I found the video completely unpersuasive, and disagreed with every point. When cameras got better, they got better; we didn't lose anything. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I found all of the sideways talking and camera fondling to be unconvincing.

You are 100% correct. However, there is another path: a different camera, with a different mount and lenses. Leica already does this with the SL, albeit in a much bigger package. Leica can keep making backwards compatible M cameras and M lenses for the next 100 or 1000 years, while also making another camera, with autofocus interchangeable lenses. Just as Panasonic makes the S9 and Sony makes the A7CR, Leica can make a small full frame camera in the shape of an M, with an M EV1 EVF, with M-like software and M-like styling, but with compact interchangeable autofocus lenses. Of course the lenses would not be backwards compatible with the M. But SL lenses aren't compatible with the M either. Everyone can be happy: M users can have the M's appeal and backwards compatibility forever, while those who prefer autofocus can have an M-ish / Q-ish small full frame camera with interchangeable compact AF lenses, perhaps similar to the Sigma i-Series.

The Sigma "i Series" lenses have an all metal construction. And they are compact. And there are nine of them. And they are available in L mount. So plastic isn't needed to make them small. And autofocus motors don't make them huge. There are metal examples from other manufacturers too (e.g. metal Sony 40/2.5, 173 grams). The Contax G1 and G2 showed that AF lenses could be small way back in the 1990s, albeit with the AF motor inside the camera. But they were AF lenses and they were compact. With today's technology, there are many compact AF lenses with AF motors in them. So really, that "AF lenses must be huge" argument should be retired. Obviously interchangeable autofocus lenses would not be for the M. I agree that's a no go. Rather they would be for some future version of the SL or Q, or a camera with some other name, but possibly with an M-style or Q-style shape.

Yes of course, a photographer is "better off" buying what exists rather than what doesn't exist. But we are here discussing something that doesn't exist. That may be silly, but it's fun. And here we go again: that argument that autofocus lenses must be "huge lenses" because ... big AF motors. This point is often made, but it is false. See my comment above, listing more than 20 current compact autofocus lenses. Agreed they are not as small as M lenses, but they are not at all huge or heavy. Some are even lighter than M lenses (see my comment above about the autofocus Sigma 90/2.8 ... just one example). There are now many real lenses that disprove the "AF lenses must be huge" argument.

Yes, it seems so obvious, right? The S9 already has the L mount. It just needs restyling with a Q shape, a Q interface, a Leica logo, and introduction as the "interchangeable lens Q" or "small, nicely-shaped SL". 😀 It would not be complete without an EVF, however, but that EVF already exists on the Q series and now the M EV1. The Q3 has an EVF and it is just 5 or 6mm taller than the S9. Some make it sound as such a camera is beyond Leica's small company resources ... a monumental task ... too hard because it would require a whole new system, etc. And yet it is clearly within Leica's reach and even a logical evolution. It could have the L mount for a wide range of lenses. Or it could have a new Q mount for more exclusivity and just a few new lenses. Either way, it brings autofocus lenses to an M-styled (ok, ok ... Q-styled) camera. By having the ability to change lenses, it would make Leica's current best seller (the Q series) even more appealing to those who rely on autofocus.

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.

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)?

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.

@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.

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.

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've heard this excuse about resources many times before: Leica is a small company and can't make [insert new thing]. And yet, from time to time, Leica does exactly that: new mount, new camera, new system, etc. Remember when the SL, S, Q, TL did not exist? All of those were seemingly not do-able or not foreseeable until Leica went and made them. And none of them replaced the M. So, likewise, Leica can introduce a new autofocus camera (M-shaped, M-sized, M-styled, but of course not called an "M") with a few new interchangeable autofocus lenses. It would not be a hill they could not climb. Even so, I believe you're right about the foreseeable future. A few more decades will likely pass before such a camera is made. That means many of us will not be around to see it.

I'm not a fan of the X-Pro series. The X-Pro lacks the rounded M shape and style. Focusing with the optical viewfinder involves too much guesswork as the autofocus box jumps to a different position after focusing.

Of course, there should be M-shaped, M-sized, M-styled camera with a line of compact interchangeable autofocus lenses. And most importantly, with great autofocus. It can be called an SL or a Q or something else. It can't be called an M because people will get upset if it's called an M. Some will say that compact interchangeable autofocus lenses don't exist, but many compact interchangeable autofocus lenses are on the market from various brands. It will certainly happen, but it may take a few decades. Leica has introduced new cameras, and autofocus lens lines, and none of them threw away the M niche or turned the M into a me-too product. In fact, the new autofocus products are very happily sold right alongside the M, and they even outsell the M.

All of these are compact, current full frame AF lenses: Sony 20/1.8, 28/2, 35/1.8, 35/2.8. Samyang 24/1.8, 35/1.8, 45/1.8, 75/1.8. Sigma 20/2, 24/2, 24/3.5, 35/2, 45/2.8, 50/2, 65/2, 90/2.8. Viltrox 85/2 EVO. They are not as compact as M lenses, but still compact.