I am a long time Leica owner and an M9 shooter until recently. Loved the image quality but finally decided the cost relative to the effective lens range was simply not worth it. What would bring me back to the fold - consistent, accurate framing, better low light sensitivity, and the ability to use macro and telephoto lenses (beyond 90mm's). That points in the direction of a super high quality EVF and a Sony style sensor.
seth Leica already makes the camera you want sans the low light bit, and it's called an S2.
M is a rangefinder camera. putting an EVF in place of a non-ttl optical viewfinder is no different than putting on a pentaprism.
people keep complaining, "oh why won't Leica just do what everyone else does?" but if they do it they will just complain "oh why does it cost so much?" so it's better to make the camera that people who get Leica want. which is the M9 with a better screen, better electronics and a CMOS sensor (yuck).
accurate framing and macro/telephoto came in with SLRs and didn't manage to kill Leica. it speaks to the enduring usefulness of the rangefinder design which is it's non-ttl viewfinder as well as it's relative compactness for being a system camera.
this is just people asking Leica to fall on their own sword, and we go through this ever time someone posts a topic related to their products.
Red, why dislike of CMOS? I've used CCD in the past, and the negative (banding) well outweighed any advantage in base ISO performance for me. Granted, I've never used an M9.
Actually I wish Leica don't listen what costumer want but build stuff what they like and let costumor choose if wanted or not, so far M3, M8 and m9 were like that, which are pretty successful. At least give me some surprise before release. If it turn out exact like rumor suggested, I will like it but can't help a little bit disappointed.
To me, I feel Leica is never a landscape camera, there always stuff much cheaper and better suit this stuff. I wonder why can ikon can't build a small high quality digital like fm2, om or AE size?
If not DOF limit, for f8 landscape why we can't settle with Nex, which cheaper and can be disposables easily with tech move on without too much $$ hit.
I guess why people like Leica, other than its function, it is because it is high quality toy with jewelry like small lens with best performance. If you can afford it (or even need saving for it) why not?
No need impose symbol status to everyone, for some, maybe, but certainly not all, especially for hobbist photographer. Why force your value system to others?
I understand that some Leica traditionalists like our friend zhangyue are not very comfortable with the EVF. This is very understandable. But they have to keep into consideration that the EVF is optional. To my eyes, the importance of the EVF is invaluable:
1. It replaces buying an external VF for every wide angle wider than 28mm.
2. It allows R lenses and practically any other mounts to be adapted and focused on the M body.
3. It allows existing M lenses to be focused closer via close up filters or extension tubes.
4. It allows the use of longer lenses, adapted or even future M lenses.
5. It allows for very precise focusing for critical applications.
And most importantly:
6. It will increase the versatility of an M body, increasing several folds the potential clients, making more sales and money for Leica, so that they could continue designing fine products.
rscheffler wrote:
Maybe it has been discussed in one of the Zeiss threads, but I have to admit I haven't been following those recently...
Anyway, Leica Rumors posted a week ago that there will be a 'surprise' Zeiss ZM lens announced at Photokina...
35 f/1.4? Though it might be difficult to beat the excellent CV35 f/1.2 at a low to moderate price point...
25 f/2?
75 f/1.4?
(Sorry to go a bit OT)
Actually it was announced by Zeiss themselves. The lens identity will be revealed at photokina if I understood correctly. Whatever it is, it's going to be a welcome addition. By the way, the exact wording was "at least one ZM lens" so that's even better
zhangyue wrote:
I wonder why can ikon can't build a small high quality digital like fm2, om or AE size?
I agree! FE2 size would be right up my alley... I am super interested in finding out what the new Leica offerings will be like. I am confident they will not disappoint. I hope....
Edward, actually, I am limited myself LV to LCD at the time I was thinking about LV. I agree additional EVF is very nice feature based on the experience from NEX-7, especially Live histogram and for WA lens. I am willing to pay $800-$1000 for it. (the reason for that is not because it worth it just I know its price with Leica dot on it which I have to swallow)
zhangyue wrote:
Edward, actually, I am limited myself LV to LCD at the time I was thinking about LV. I agree additional EVF is very nice feature based on the experience from NEX-7, especially Live histogram and for WA lens. I am willing to pay $800-$1000 for it. (the reason for that is not because it worth it just I know its price with Leica dot on it which I have to swallow)
And in fact, I find an LCD is much better to judge focus than EVF, but in direct sunlight, the EVF is indispensable.
If you don't need the red dot, I'm sure the Olympus EVF will work fine
Digi Lloyd is testing the MM. Look at those comments:
******************************
<rant>OK back from shooting with 90% of Noctilux shots useless out of focus garbage (even at f/5.6) with bad backfocus— and I used a 1.4X magnifier— so it could not have been me— and my Noctilux is perfect on my M9P. Apparently use of a deep red filter throws off the focus just like infrared does, or at least that is my quick theory until I go verify under fixed conditions. Apparently I’m going to have to compensate somehow if red filtration is to be used. My shots taken at closer range without filtration are better. And maybe it’s partly the rangefinder in the Leica M Monochrom body (the lenses are fine on my M9P). Hard to nail down without further research.
But the nasty usage reality is this— when a high-res digital camera has no Live View feature and the bargain-bin ultra low-res blurry LCD is paired with brain-dead firmware that refuses to display anything remotely close to actual pixels (to check focus accuracy post-shot), the result is hours of wasted time producing a lot of blurred images (well, they are sharp somewhere well behind the subject). What a shame. And very, very frustrating.
Seriously, after 3 years, Leica M bodies still cannot zoom into actual pixels to allow a critical focus check, or even a crude 'ballpark' focus check, it’s that poor. With the MM, this is even more critical. I had a lengthy conversation with Leica USA on this 18 months ago, with my factual explanation of the problem utterly repudiated and rejecting, as if denying reality were a legitimate response (“Leica cameras cannot by definition have any shortcomings”, more or less). Leica doesn’t have the sense even to acknowledge the limitation, let alone fix the stinking firmware (it’s software Leica, fix it already!).</rant>
*************************
OK, seriously do you think this company will deliver anything remotely modern and usable?
snowboarder wrote:
OK, seriously do you think this company will deliver anything remotely modern and usable?
Why don't we wait three days and find out.
I would argue that the M9, perhaps not modern is perfectly usable for a lot of different kinds of photography. Is it less usable than a modern DSLR with Live View for landscape work? Yep. Does that man that its not remotely usable, no.
thedigitalbean wrote:
Why don't we wait three days and find out.
Of course. But this is a speculation thread, we are allowed
to speculate right? MM being the brand new product shows us
where their technology/software is today...
Do you think those 3 days will make a difference?
Seriously we all know MM is really M9M. But couldn't they
at least spent some little resources improving the firmware?
They have guts to charge so much for such a poor product,
but it's Sony which gets trashed for the RX1 price...
_julian_ wrote:
Are we predicting that the M10, will come with the Sony 24.3 sensor. eg. the same as the d600, rx1, a99?
Leica by definition and track record are unable to be nimble enough to take on the latest and greatest sensor or feature set, so my guess is no, they won't come with the 24.3 sensor.
michaelwatkins wrote:
Leica by definition and track record are unable to be nimble enough to take on the latest and greatest sensor or feature set, so my guess is no, they won't come with the 24.3 sensor.
Total guess though.
But that would be a disaster IMO. People will probably swallow poor electronics and slow performance,
but if the IQ is not absolutely the best and it's beat by a tiny Sony compact, there is not much they could do
to defend it. Also remember - it's M10. 10 is a big and important number...
snowboarder wrote:
Of course. But this is a speculation thread, we are allowed
to speculate right? MM being the brand new product shows us
where their technology/software is today...
Do you think those 3 days will make a difference?
Seriously we all know MM is really M9M. But couldn't they
at least spent some little resources improving the firmware?
They have guts to charge so much for such a poor product,
but it's Sony which gets trashed for the RX1 price...
At one point I thought they were going to source the sensor from Sony, but now I'm not so sure. However, now I'm thinking it will be a CMOS sensor made by STMicroelectronics:
