It looks like the custom button was moved from the front of the camera to the top next to the shutter button. Also it does not seem like the bottom plate can be removed. (per rumors)
So, this leaked picture seems to be legit with ISO 64 on the dial and all.
Curious to see the resolution and DR at ISO64. I know everyone thinks it won’t happen and it’s against the Leica zeitgeist, but wonder if IBIS will ever be incorporated. I found the RX12 needed appreciably higher shutter speeds than the RX1.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Curious to see the resolution and DR at ISO64. I know everyone thinks it won’t happen and it’s against the Leica zeitgeist, but wonder if IBIS will every be incorporated. I found the RX12 needed appreciably higher shutter speeds than the RX1.
Also, watching the M10 prices fall
Yes, get a soon to be bargain 2nd hand M10/p make a lot of sense. Leica can stop M update today actually, I don't think it misses anything.
Having said that, I might order m11 but seriously, m10p is the only camera in production I can think of need no upgrade.
Pretty much looks like an M. Would be interested to see bottom - I wonder if I will be like the Q2 with access for battery and SD card. Also specs will be more important. I don’t think any of us thought the front would look dramatically different.
apatel wrote:
Pretty much looks like an M. Would be interested to see bottom - I wonder if I will be like the Q2 with access for battery and SD card. Also specs will be more important. I don’t think any of us thought the front would look dramatically different.
As an astute observer pointed out in a thread on the Leica Camera Forum, there is no attachment pin (which would be visible at the lower right of the Nokoshita photo if the M11 had a traditional baseplate) suggesting that the new M has the same battery and SD card access as the Q/Q2.
Dec 01, 2021 at 03:09 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
It seems this picture confirms a few things that were rumored. First, this does not look like a hybrid finder but rather a traditional optical rangefinder. I think that is a big plus, and it seems like we will get an attachable EVF. Hopefully that will be a new one that can be used with the M10 as well. It looks like a similar if not identical hot shoe, but we can't know that for sure. Second, the base is different and we won't have the same old baseplate. I do think it will have a battery and card like the Q cameras. Third, they kept the ISO dial, which I like, but I realize not everyone does. It will be interesting whether ISO 64 is a native ISO or simply pushed. The lowest ISO of the M10 was not native. I will be surprised if that ISO 64 is actually native, but we will see when the camera arrives. Fourth and probably the least surprising is that despite these changes it does not look at all like a radically different camera. It still look like an M to me and I think that is a good thing.
Steve Spencer wrote:
It seems this picture confirms a few things that were rumored. First, this does not look like a hybrid finder but rather a traditional optical rangefinder. I think that is a big plus, and it seems like we will get an attachable EVF. Hopefully that will be a new one that can be used with the M10 as well. It looks like a similar if not identical hot shoe, but we can't know that for sure. Second, the base is different and we won't have the same old baseplate. I do think it will have a battery and card like the Q cameras. Third, they kept the ISO dial, which I like, but I realize not everyone does. It will be interesting whether ISO 64 is a native ISO or simply pushed. The lowest ISO of the M10 was not native. I will be surprised if that ISO 64 is actually native, but we will see when the camera arrives. Fourth and probably the least surprising is that despite these changes it does not look at all like a radically different camera. It still look like an M to me and I think that is a good thing....Show more →
Like VW did many years ago when making cars, they started cutting production cost significantly by using the same platform/drivetrain for multiple car versions. Leica seems doing the same - using now the Q series as model and basic blueprint to make the M 11 regarding battery, no base plate etc.
This said, I don't think the M11 will therefore be cheaper though.....
genji wrote:
As an astute observer pointed out in a thread on the Leica Camera Forum, there is no attachment pin (which would be visible at the lower right of the Nokoshita photo if the M11 had a traditional baseplate) suggesting that the new M has the same battery and SD card access as the Q/Q2.
What caught my eye (via that thread) was the change in the top plate's shape around the VF. Is more (optional?) information than the meter readout coming our way? : D
retrofocus wrote:
Like VW did many years ago when making cars, they started cutting production cost significantly by using the same platform/drivetrain for multiple car versions. Leica seems doing the same - using now the Q series as model and basic blueprint to make the M 11 regarding battery, no base plate etc.
This said, I don't think the M11 will therefore be cheaper though.....
Sure, you can look at it that way... Or, one battery for multiple cameras makes it easier to use and travel with those cameras and a single type of charger. That's a big plus, IMO. Should the price be lower? Maybe that savings partly offsets what would otherwise have been a larger increase in MSRP for the M11 over the M10 due to other inflationary factors?
People have been complaining about the baseplate for ages and Leica has perhaps finally acknowledged those opinions (pending confirmation of this change in the M11). Leica actually does modify features based on user feedback.
It seems no matter what Leica does, they can't win.
But if they cut quality, by all means, roast them for it!
d.s. wrote:
What caught my eye (via that thread) was the change in the top plate's shape around the VF. Is more (optional?) information than the meter readout coming our way? : D
HMMM doesn't look to be different from my M 10s or my M 10 Mono?
airfrogusmc wrote:
HMMM doesn't look to be different from my M 10s or my M 10 Mono?
Yes, it does. The viewfinder is bigger than that of M10, if you look closely. Hopefully, it will have a bigger and better rangefinder to help achieve accurate focus, for the rumored 60 MP sensor.
ocean2059 wrote:
Yes, it does. The viewfinder is bigger than that of M10, if you look closely. Hopefully, it will have a bigger and better rangefinder to help achieve accurate focus, for the rumored 60 MP sensor.
I'm looking at my M 10 as I type this and it doesn't look any different. And I have no problem with focus.
Maybe it's an optical illusion of the photo and we will wait and see. I don't have any problems with focus accuracy either, even with M9. But I recently started using an M10R and its finder is certain an improvement. As I am getting older, improvement of rangefinder on M body is always welcome.
Agree my M 10s are an improvement over the older models I've owned (M-E, M 262 and original MM). The metal space around the glass looks to be the same on the above OP as the space on my M 10.
It would appear that the thickness of the top plate is different and that the rangefinder window is offset ever so slightly further away from the viewfinder compared to the M10. Could it be that they tweaked the mechanical internals of the rangefinder as well? The lens mount also looks ever so slightly more offset to our left, from the viewfinder.
but seriously, m10p is the only camera in production I can think of need no upgrade. 
