edwardkaraa wrote:
I will add to the above that many M owners would get the cheaper mini as a back up body.
Do you think? I'm more waiting for the M9's to come cheap. I wouldn't want to miss the rangefinder.
Maybe a mini M stands for minimalistic M
M9 sensor, no backscreen, size of the MP, thickness of the MP, so, the body of the MP, winding crank (by hand) to reduce needed power so a smaller battery can be used.
Andrew, I would fully agree with you if Leica intended to dominate a given market segment, which most companies would attempt to do. But they seem both intent and satisfied with occupying niches within niches. As they do with rebadged Panasonic compact cameras. Yes, with what I heard, they would compete head-on with Sony et al., and enjoy only marginal market share because of a much higher price. All the more so as the Type 240 shows that there is no magic in Leica-designed electronics.
So, just as sales of the Leica X series are dwarfed by Fuji X-100, sales of their Mini will be dwarfed by main-line APS-C mirrorless.
My guess is it's something like a CLE with an APS-C sensor in it and and EVF instead of an RF.
I wonder if Leica is going to start developing more lenses that can focus closer than .7M now, since the new M and possibly this one won't be stuck with the RF limitation.
freaklikeme wrote:
I wonder if Leica is going to start developing more lenses that can focus closer than .7M now, since the new M and possibly this one won't be stuck with the RF limitation.
I think it would be very easy to design a "macro mode" - a sensor shift in camera
to allow a close focus mode for all existing lenses. But again, it might be too smart for Leica...
I really hope it's a full frame camera with the M mount...
Lee Saxon wrote:
Maybe with all the "history" and "legacy" hamstringing the M, this will actually be a better camera? No vestigial rangefinder? No removing the baseplate to remove the friggin memory card? Ergonomics?
Why would Leica want to compete with the Japanese and Korean electronics companies? The mechanical rangefinder is what sets them apart. Sure, the glass is good, but there's a lot of good glass out there, these days.
I'd likely want an LCD/EVF based camera more from Sony than Leica, even if they were the same price.
snowboarder wrote:
I think it would be very easy to design a "macro mode" - a sensor shift in camera
to allow a close focus mode for all existing lenses. But again, it might be too smart for Leica...
Or it would make the camera too fat to be called 'mini'.
douglasf13 wrote:
Sure, the glass is good, but there's a lot of good glass out there, these days.
freaklikeme wrote:
My guess is it's something like a CLE with an APS-C sensor in it and and EVF instead of an RF.
I wonder if Leica is going to start developing more lenses that can focus closer than .7M now, since the new M and possibly this one won't be stuck with the RF limitation.
I hope not. Not everyone has a M240 or wants one I really like to feel with the hard stop I'm at 0,7m. I have had the zeiss 28/2.8 with close focus of 0,5 and you really have to think about were the focus is.
Sure minimal focus to lets say 0,5m would be really nice, but if it isn't rangefinder coupled than prefer not to.
Bijltje wrote:
I hope not. Not everyone has a M240 or wants one I really like to feel with the hard stop I'm at 0,7m. I have had the zeiss 28/2.8 with close focus of 0,5 and you really have to think about were the focus is.
Sure minimal focus to lets say 0,5m would be really nice, but if it isn't rangefinder coupled than prefer not to.
They could always use the solution Nikon did way back in the day with the 5cm f1.4 LTM and have a noticable detent when you hit the point where the RF decouples to get close-focus. That lens focuses to 0.45m but is only RF coupled to 1m (the then-standard MFD for RF's, this lens dates back to the mid-1950's)
I'd call them technically brilliant. They're certainly excellent optical performers but in terms of rendering many would consider them lacking. Personally the only current Leica lenses I'd seriously consider on an M are the 28 and 90 Summicrons. The rest of the new ones are technically superb but supremely vanilla in rendering. Kinda like L glass with better resolution.
Mescalamba wrote:
1) RX1 made by Leica
2) "cheap" M-mirrorless with EVF + focus peaking
3) APS-H M-camera? (not much sense)
4) APS-C mirrorless ala Fuji X-E1
I wonder how many hope for 2).
I'm thinking both 2 & 4. APS-C M mount mirrorless with EVF and peaking, possibly with a design heavily inspired by the CL (and likely to prove a repeat of the CL experience for Leica, where it threatens the main M line due to its success and eating of M sales).
i bet it's a mirrorless CL shaped m-mount liveview camera with lcd only and an optional attachable evf priced between the x2 and ME. i'd like it to be FF, but i bet it's aps-c.
i think the best thing for leica to do with regard to close focus and liveview is put a helicoid on the camera mount for a macro mode, much like the adapters offered for other mirrorless cameras but permanently attached and with much better build. i can't imagine they'd actually do that though.
Leica certainly makes fantastic lenses, and I've owned quite a few, but my point is simply that it's the rangefinder that really separates them at 35mm, as there are fantastic lenses from other makes, too, and, if we're talking about using Leica's current, manual lenses, they can be mounted on an EVF-based camera from other companies.
If this is an EVF-based, M-mount, aps-c camera that is $3K+, I'm not really sure what Leica could do to convince me to buy it. If it had a rangefinder, I would consider it, although I'd probably still rather have a used M9 for a grand more.
If the camera were FF, on the other hand, I can see it being popular, at least until Sony makes such a thing that does ok with M lenses.
Well, 'Mini' might give the game away. Leica had some success with the diehard red dotters with their last ventures into small fixed lens cameras, but that was about where it ended.
An M compatible ILC just months after the M240 won't help their loyal user base. It may be an RX1 competitor, as APS-C mirrorless is very hot and about to get much hotter.
mawz wrote:
I'd call them technically brilliant. They're certainly excellent optical performers but in terms of rendering many would consider them lacking. Personally the only current Leica lenses I'd seriously consider on an M are the 28 and 90 Summicrons. The rest of the new ones are technically superb but supremely vanilla in rendering. Kinda like L glass with better resolution.
Apparently (?), the current 28 Summicron is "Boring" on the m240 and optically not quite up to the sensor. Sort of hard to believe but I guess this lens went from his most used to least used in short order:
do you guys think the M8 sensor size is abandoned forever? I liked the idea of that crop factor, very easy to achieve 50, 35 and even 28 fov without going ultra-wide and/or ultra big/expensive.
The APSC mirrorless market is saturated. Fuji, SONY, Ricoh, Samsumg, Nikon and Canon all have fixed or ILS models available. Leica's brand-power alone is not really enough to compete with Japanese and Asian engineering ingenuity.
Leica really need to play their current strategic advantage which is fullframe and good sensor performance with short flange lenses.
The full Rangefinder experience is sufficiently distinguished that I don't see mirrorless FF M interfering with M240 sales. On the other-hand a more affordable mirrorless cam, would be a great way to broaden the appeal and awareness for the M system.
Releasing a body with an M240 sensor makes little sense so soon after its release, as does a crop sensor when a NEX 5 or 6 can easily use any M lens with an adapter.
On the other hand, I can't imagine that the sales of the ME are so exuberant that Leica, a company with relatively modest resources in comparison to the other players, might not canibalize that sensor and craft a mirrorless body with enhanced EVF, minus video around that. Add compatibility with a native R>>M adapter and many fence sitters would pay the premium as they have for the RX-1, itself a balsy move by Sony.
On the other hand, I can't imagine that the sales of the ME are so exuberant that Leica might not canibalize that sensor and craft a mirrorless body with enhanced EVF sans video around that.
The m9/ ME sensor being non-CMOS doesn't do live-view which rules out the possibility of building a mirrorless cam around it.
One could also note that as a marketing strategy, Canon built a whole DSLR lineup (550d, 60d, 7d etc) around a single sensor, with the cameras differentiated on the basis of features other than image quality.
Spyro P. wrote:
do you guys think the M8 sensor size is abandoned forever? I liked the idea of that crop factor, very easy to achieve 50, 35 and even 28 fov without going ultra-wide and/or ultra big/expensive.
Probably is, even tho APS-H actually is usefull (compared to APS-C). But Canon doesnt seem to care either, so I guess its dead format..
_julian_ wrote:
The m9/ ME sensor being non-CMOS doesn't do live-view which rules out the possibility of building a mirrorless cam around it.
One could also note that as a marketing strategy, Canon built a whole DSLR lineup (550d, 60d, 7d etc) around a single sensor, with the cameras differentiated on the basis of features other than image quality.
Thats very nice and polite way to say how things are with Canon.
I really like to feel with the hard stop I'm at 0,7m. I have had the zeiss 28/2.8 with close focus of 0,5 and you really have to think about were the focus is. 