Adding IBIS would inevitably add bulk and weight.
Adding a Hybrid viewfinder would inevitably affect the optical one (see Fuji's implementation which is not bad).
Adding an AF mechanism to move the lens would totally change the feel of the camera and usability of some lenses.
Look, this already exists elsewhere where you can get it easily. Hell, even Leica's SL line has all of this already and is great with M lenses.
What you are trying to do is outfit a Ferrari for off-road instead of simply buying a Jeep!
Used M10s coming down in price. I personally wouldn't pay anything over 4K for one now. That might be the more appealing option than the R after the announcement. I'd have to think there's a lower cost version M10 coming now...like the M-E and M262 followed. That said, going by Leica's timeline that usually happens after a new version comes out so might have to be a M11 first. Their roadmap is wack. I hate their release theory.
I went from M9 to M240 to M262. Opted out of going with the M10 and went back to using my M6 a lot more and added an XPro with Leica adapter for digital. Was about to pull the trigger on a med format Fuji but waiting to try an M10R out first.
peters wrote:
Adding IBIS would inevitably add bulk and weight.
Adding a Hybrid viewfinder would inevitably affect the optical one (see Fuji's implementation which is not bad).
Adding an AF mechanism to move the lens would totally change the feel of the camera and usability of some lenses.
Look, this already exists elsewhere where you can get it easily. Hell, even Leica's SL line has all of this already and is great with M lenses.
What you are trying to do is outfit a Ferrari for off-road instead of simply buying a Jeep!
Stop it!
The Leica is definitely not a Ferrari. It’s more like a G63.
anselwannab wrote:
If this is such an improvement, why wasn’t it the M 11 then? What does this mean the M 11 is going to be? Now, more megapixels isn’t everything, especially nowadays, but it has been enough in the past to launch a new model. Is it that it’s just so related to the most recent monochrome that they didn’t think they could give it a new number? Leica has been all over the map with their number Scheme and rationale for it.
IMO, it's pretty simple. The M10-R tests the market without committing as THE next model. This gives Leica time to decide what they'll do with the M11.
Based on many comments here on the forum, it would seem there are enough who consider 24MP sufficient for their needs and not necessarily interested in a higher resolution model. If a significant portion of Leica's user base tells them this, then we may see low and high resolution M11 models.
What I think Leica is missing from its already fairly extensive model portfolio, is a FF version of the CL with IBIS. It could sit between the M system and the relatively large SL bodies and bridge both via an M-mount adapter.
rscheffler wrote:
What I think Leica is missing from its already fairly extensive model portfolio, is a FF version of the CL with IBIS. It could sit between the M system and the relatively large SL bodies and bridge both via an M-mount adapter.
This would be a kind of "M with an EVF but no rangefinder" they said they would not build. But they can change their mind.
pmeheut wrote:
This would be a kind of "M with an EVF but no rangefinder" they said they would not build. But they can change their mind.
Of course they'll deny it until it's officially announced, that's what all companies do, otherwise it would stop people from purchasing the current lineup while they wait for this model.
rscheffler wrote:
What I think Leica is missing from its already fairly extensive model portfolio, is a FF version of the CL with IBIS. It could sit between the M system and the relatively large SL bodies and bridge both via an M-mount adapter.
+1. I would not be surprised if the CL2 were a full frame camera, and if it isn't I would expect a full frame version like 1 or 2 years later.
Most manufacturers have bodies in the 650-750g range. The CL is 403g, the SL2 923g, both with battery.
Leica's line-up IMO is just screaming for a body in-between...
pmeheut wrote:
Leica does not do the same things as "most manufacturers".
True, but right now quite a few people do not even contemplate its L-mount body and/or lenses because of size and weight...
If Leica wants to make further inroads they will IMHO require a/o a lighter body and at least a handful of lighter (but optically excellent) Leica-branded lenses.
SlowDriver wrote:
True, but right now quite a few people do not even contemplate its L-mount body and/or lenses because of size and weight...
I'm one of them so I hear you but on the other hand, we do not know their sales figures, margin...
SlowDriver wrote:
If Leica wants to make further inroads they will IMHO require a/o a lighter body and at least a handful of lighter (but optically excellent) Leica-branded lenses.
Once again I agree as the CL with IBIS, a few more lenses in the range and some reassurance about the future of the system would attract me as an alternative micro 4/3 system.
But once again, Leica is doing quite well in a very difficult market so maybe some of their counterintuitive decisions are the right ones business wise even if not the best for the both of us and a few others.
rscheffler wrote:
What I think Leica is missing from its already fairly extensive model portfolio, is a FF version of the CL with IBIS. It could sit between the M system and the relatively large SL bodies and bridge both via an M-mount adapter.
Not gonna happen. It would be similar to the CL in the film days - big seller but in-house competition - both now with such digital CL for the M- and SL-series. Imagine such camera for $4K (or less?)….I would honestly get it in a blink of an eye even just with 24 MP FF sensor if the model allows interchangeable M-lenses.
rscheffler wrote:
IMO, it's pretty simple. The M10-R tests the market without committing as THE next model. This gives Leica time to decide what they'll do with the M11.
Based on many comments here on the forum, it would seem there are enough who consider 24MP sufficient for their needs and not necessarily interested in a higher resolution model. If a significant portion of Leica's user base tells them this, then we may see low and high resolution M11 models..
"What I think Leica is missing from its already fairly extensive model portfolio, is a FF version of the CL with IBIS. It could sit between the M system and the relatively large SL bodies and bridge both via an M-mount adapter"
Interesting idea. The perception of the SL(2) is that it is a very large camera. But not really that much larger than the M10 if you compare side by side in person. Adding the Grip and EVF to the M10 compared to the SL2 looks to be pretty "even Steven" in person. However, adding the respective system lenses takes negates the camera size argument other than adapting tiny M lenses to the SL body.
For those that prioritize weight and size, need EVF and IBIS your idea seems like a good idea to me "FF version of the CL with IBIS." Not sure if its a good business decision of course, but you never know.
Had to laugh out loud at Chris' description of "I think we just hit Leica Photography Bingo" at 5:01 in the video. Is he talking about my photography? 😳🤪🤣😂 "Coffee cup, empty shopping cart, rocks graffiti, unaware person"
rscheffler wrote:
What I think Leica is missing from its already fairly extensive model portfolio, is a FF version of the CL with IBIS. It could sit between the M system and the relatively large SL bodies and bridge both via an M-mount adapter.
retrofocus wrote:
Not gonna happen. It would be similar to the CL in the film days - big seller but in-house competition - both now with such digital CL for the M- and SL-series. Imagine such camera for $4K (or less?)….I would honestly get it in a blink of an eye even just with 24 MP FF sensor if the model allows interchangeable M-lenses.
Maybe Leica prefers to have more clearly defined gaps, but I don't really agree with you in respect to such a camera cannibalizing the M market. The M is a very distinct system. I guess some might buy it as a compromise in exchange for the compact size, but that wouldn't strike me as Leica's target M customer. What I had in mind was an L mount sibling, which would more affect the SL2 as it stands now. Making it L mount rather than M allows better compatibility across more of Leica's systems. The SL2 ia very competent camera but it also leaves open a lot of potential areas of refinement. Who knows, maybe Panasonic will introduce a smaller 'rangefinder-like' body, which Leica can then rehouse as a potential FF CL? The Sigma fp is in this direction but perhaps a few steps too far in respect to compromises. Maybe Leica will never fill this gap, but there's still Panasonic and Sigma... And from my perspective, that could work too since I'm more interested in Leica's SL Summicrons than the SL cameras.
The SL lenses and most of those in the L mount alliance are quite large, so if someone truly wanted the most compact Leica system possible, it would still be the M.
retrofocus wrote:
Not gonna happen. It would be similar to the CL in the film days - big seller but in-house competition - both now with such digital CL for the M- and SL-series. Imagine such camera for $4K (or less?)….I would honestly get it in a blink of an eye even just with 24 MP FF sensor if the model allows interchangeable M-lenses.
As Steve Jobs famously said: "If you don't cannibalize yourself, someone else will."
peters wrote:
Let me see if I can hijack things here a moment. What do you all think that there is left to do in an M11, and what do you think Leica will do?
Dual SD Card Slots? Yes
UHS-II SD Card Slots? Yes
Better Visoflex Option? Yes
Touchscreen in Menu? Yes
New High-Capacity Battery? Yes
Better ISO and HDR? Yes
Higher Resolution? Yes
Auto-Focus? No
IBIS? No
Hybrid EVF? No
Fully Electronic EVF? No
So, these are my thoughts on possible options. What are yours? Feel free to add features I didn't think of to the list....Show more →
Dual SD Card Slots? No
UHS-II SD Card Slots? Yes
Better Visoflex Option? Yes
Touchscreen in Menu? No
New High-Capacity Battery? No
Better ISO and HDR? Yes
Higher Resolution? Yes (but a minor increment, I don't see them going 40MP for the base model)
Auto-Focus? No
IBIS? No
Hybrid EVF? No
Fully Electronic EVF? No
Video? No
Built-in Diopter: No
Built-in GPS: No (only through Visoflex)
I think the M11 will be like the three generations before it: further refinements.
I don't expect anything major.
I would like better battery life, closer to that of the M240, for example. Electronic first curtain shutter. Refined liveview performance. Improved EVF that remains an optional accessory (I really value the tilt capability of the EVF). Refined wireless connectivity.
Sensor resolution will probably stay at 40, but DR and noise performance will be slightly improved.
IMO there's probably more that can be done with lenses currently. Some would benefit from refreshes to elevate technical performance to current standards. I'm thinking 35 and 50 Lux, both of which exhibit fairly strong field curvature. Maybe 35 Cron, too. 21 and 24 Lux could be discontinued and replaced with Crons instead to reduce size, improve optical performance and acknowledge that f/2 would be fast enough for most given the low light capabilities of current sensors. As it stands now, IMO, the gap between the Lux and Super-Elmar models is too extreme.
