1bwana1 wrote:
Agree, not likely in the M12, but unless I get IBIS and faster boot times I am probably skipping M12 anyway.
I could not agree more but on the other hand, I bought each M (i.e, M8, M9, M240, M10 and M11) although starting with the M240, I thought "I do not need more".
And I'm very happy with the M11. IBIS would be great because 60 Mpix is not forgiving.
Fred Miranda wrote:
My plan is to never buy this camera. I really don't get what Leica was thinking, no offense to those who like it.
My sense is that they are trying to woo customers who either
(1) have fading eyesight and could benefit from the EVF,
(2) want a "WYSIWYG" experience from their wide angle and long lenses, or
(3) own newer Leica lenses with focus distances that are closer than 0.7m.
It's too bad that their execution of the M EV1 appears underwhelming. If Leica had managed Sony caliber speed and responsiveness with better focus-assist features to manage the razor-thin Noctilux depths of field while maintaining Leica UI simplicity, I would've considered one as an adjunct to my M11. As released though, I expect I'd be pretty frustrated using it - slow startup, focus peaking of questionable accuracy... all for the low price of $8K. I'll pass.
I don't mean to sound negative, but it feels like the real excitement around the M line peaked with the M10. Maybe that was the one that truly hit the sweet spot.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I don't mean to sound negative, but it feels like the real excitement around the M line peaked with the M10. Maybe that was the one that truly hit the sweet spot.
Not sure, but for me the M10 was the first digital M I was interested in. I wasn’t a fan of those fat previous bodies. At the same time, the M11 removing that dumb bottom plate was one of the reasons I traded up. I’m now at a point that I really like the minimal interface and the size of the lenses, but not much else.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I don't mean to sound negative, but it feels like the real excitement around the M line peaked with the M10. Maybe that was the one that truly hit the sweet spot.
Due to too many issues at the beginning and even in years after with the post-pandemic M11. Leica just now after years(!) fixed the magenta issue of the M11 with an firmware update - this should have come months after its release.
IMO the sweet spot is the M10-R - which actually is different from the original M10 since the M10-R uses a very different sensor.
johnvanr wrote:
Not sure, but for me the M10 was the first digital M I was interested in. I wasn’t a fan of those fat previous bodies. At the same time, the M11 removing that dumb bottom plate was one of the reasons I traded up. I’m now at a point that I really like the minimal interface and the size of the lenses, but not much else.
---------------------------------------------
retrofocus wrote:
Due to too many issues at the beginning and even in years after with the post-pandemic M11. Leica just now after years(!) fixed the magenta issue of the M11 with an firmware update - this should have come months after its release.
IMO the sweet spot is the M10-R - which actually is different from the original M10 since the M10-R uses a very different sensor.
I'm referring to the M10 series as a concept, shooting a digital camera with a mechanical rangefinder and the aesthetics of the classic M bodies, not any specific model or software updates. Within that series, I also consider the M10-R the sweet spot. The M11 improved many things, some seen as improvements and others as distractions, but the heart of the Leica M, the rangefinder mechanism tracing back to the M3, was improved yet remained fundamentally the same... Composing, focusing, and adjusting exposure feels the same whether I am using an M3, M10-R, or M11.
Historically, the M8 (first digital M but cropped sensor) and M9 full frame generated the most excitement, less so with the M240, and excitement returned with the M10 series, which brought back the classic thinner body design and Leica's focus on simplicity (software, buttons, controls). That was transformative. Since then, Leica has made incremental updates with faster hardware and better software, but nothing groundbreaking, and some changes added complexity. In that sense, the M series peaked with the M10, which was simple, back to basics, and aesthetically closer to the original M. At least that is how it feels to me from my experience shooting with all these cameras.
Could the M12 return to that simplicity and focus on essentials again? I do not think the M EV1 is the future of the M series as it has a different heart and shooting process. I see it as a variation that many will like but would not become the norm. I could be wrong, but that is my hope. Perhaps Leica will produce the M12 and M EV2 and let future customers decide which direction feels right. The market may ultimately guide how they proceed.
Leica were very clear in their announcement at the Sydney launch that the EV1 was a new branch of the M tree. Film, Digital rangefinder and Digital EVF. The EV1 will not replace the M rangefinder cameras.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Could the M12 return to that simplicity and focus on essentials again? I do not think the M EV1 is the future of the M series as it has a different heart and shooting process. I see it as a variation that many will like but would not become the norm. I could be wrong, but that is my hope. Perhaps Leica will produce the M12 and M EV2 and let future customers decide which direction feels right. The market may ultimately guide how they proceed.
Before an EV-2 I am fairly convinced that sooner than later Leica will release a firmware update for the EV-1 addressing some of the criticized issues - i. e. startup time improvement and adding more functionality to the frame level maybe even including electronic frame lines if desired. But it is unlikely that firmware will improve the current focus aids in the EV-1. Similar to the SL series when it was released, I expect Leica also to do purchase incentives for the EV-1 via some price reduction in the near future.
I hope the M12 with traditional rangefinder focusing continues its path - I am afraid (I hope I am wrong!) that the introduction of the 6-bit readout could also with a modified version of it make third party M lenses less compatible with electronic communication between lens and camera to give the edge to Leica M lenses in a camera like the M12. I wouldn't be surprised if Leica is already thinking how to give an advantage for their in-house M lens products (other than the 6-bit coding itself) over a huge variety of much cheaper Chinese and Japanese M lenses.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Perhaps Leica will produce the M12 and M EV2 and let future customers decide which direction feels right. The market may ultimately guide how they proceed.
I fully expect this to be the case. The question(s) that come to my mind are more about release sequence, quantities and variants.
By that, I mean will they release the M12 first, but in limited qty, then the M EV2 ... or vice verse. Or do they gauge sales of one, then when it tapers, release the other, etc.
We kind of know what the cards they'll have in their hand will be ... but, we don't know is how many of which, and when they'll play them.
retrofocus wrote:
I hope the M12 with traditional rangefinder focusing continues its path - I am afraid (I hope I am wrong!) that the introduction of the 6-bit readout could also with a modified version of it make third party M lenses less compatible with electronic communication between lens and camera to give the edge to Leica M lenses in a camera like the M12. I wouldn't be surprised if Leica is already thinking how to give an advantage for their in-house M lens products (other than the 6-bit coding itself) over a huge variety of much cheaper Chinese and Japanese M lenses. ...Show more →
I would suggest Leica work on some sort of electro-optical, rather than pure optical rangefinder focus aid for the M-EV2.
Such a feature would likely have to compensate for lens focus breathing, where magnification changes with distance.This is a unique opportunity to embed calibration tables for their back catalogue of lenses; giving a clear advantage over third party lenses. Even for the M12 optical rangefinder, if frame lines are generated by overlaying a LCD mask, rather than hardware defined, the opportunity to make use of the focus breathing data exists.
Fred Miranda wrote:
---------------------------------------------
I'm referring to the M10 series as a concept, shooting a digital camera with a mechanical rangefinder and the aesthetics of the classic M bodies, not any specific model or software updates. Within that series, I also consider the M10-R the sweet spot. The M11 improved many things, some seen as improvements and others as distractions, but the heart of the Leica M, the rangefinder mechanism tracing back to the M3, was improved yet remained fundamentally the same... Composing, focusing, and adjusting exposure feels the same whether I am using an M3, M10-R, or M11.
Historically, the M8 (first digital M but cropped sensor) and M9 full frame generated the most excitement, less so with the M240, and excitement returned with the M10 series, which brought back the classic thinner body design and Leica's focus on simplicity (software, buttons, controls). That was transformative. Since then, Leica has made incremental updates with faster hardware and better software, but nothing groundbreaking, and some changes added complexity. In that sense, the M series peaked with the M10, which was simple, back to basics, and aesthetically closer to the original M. At least that is how it feels to me from my experience shooting with all these cameras.
Could the M12 return to that simplicity and focus on essentials again? I do not think the M EV1 is the future of the M series as it has a different heart and shooting process. I see it as a variation that many will like but would not become the norm. I could be wrong, but that is my hope. Perhaps Leica will produce the M12 and M EV2 and let future customers decide which direction feels right. The market may ultimately guide how they proceed....Show more →
Maybe the benefit of the EV1 is that it will deflect a lot of EVF-in-an-M chatter and allow Leica to really 'return to the basics' with the M12.
That said, I don't think it will happen. At least not to the extreme. If I was to get an M12 I'd still want the option to use an auxiliary EVF for my wide lenses (rather than inaccurate optical finders) and a tilt EVF to boot (like all previous versions).
Hopefully Leica can put a fast processor in the M12 and finally also a fast sensor, eliminate the mechanical shutter (that stupid (IMO) claptrap metering system) or at the very least provide EFCS.
What exactly will Leica do for the M12? There's no fast readout sensor available to other brands right now. Unless the M12 has the sensor from the S1ii/Z6iii which is 24MP.
A new processor would be nice. Is that enough though with the current sensor. For sure the A1 sensor won't be available.
Gordon
Nov 07, 2025 at 04:20 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
flash wrote:
What exactly will Leica do for the M12? There's no fast readout sensor available to other brands right now. Unless the M12 has the sensor from the S1ii/Z6iii which is 24MP.
A new processor would be nice. Is that enough though with the current sensor. For sure the A1 sensor won't be available.
Gordon
Maybe the 45 MP sensor from the Nikon Z8/Z9? I could also see a new sensor that hasn't been introduced being made for Leica. Sony makes a 26 MP stacked sensor for the Fuji X-H2S and that scaled up to full frame would make a really interesting sensor for the Leica M12. It would be a 60 MP stacked sensor but it would have a slower sensor read out speed than the 50 MP sensor in the A1/A1 II.
flash wrote:
For sure the A1 sensor won't be available.
Gordon
Why not it has some age on it now and versions of it's core architecture and manufacturing processes are available in two Nikon cameras the Z8 and Z9, and maybe others. This would follow Sony's pattern of keeping the best proprietary for a period of time then sharing. Sony is also sharing it's partially stacked sensor technology with other camera brands while not yet using it in their own brand cameras (mabe in upcoming A7V?). Sony is in the business of selling sensors for profit. Internally, Sony is on to the next generation of Global Shutter and three layer stacked sensors for it's future flagships.
Would I trade down 60 mpx for 50mpx? Possibly depending on what else I am getting. Things like IBIS, instant boot, usable electronic shutter. Probably worth the trade to me.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I don't mean to sound negative, but it feels like the real excitement around the M line peaked with the M10. Maybe that was the one that truly hit the sweet spot.
Fred,
Back in the M10 intro days there was the first Q to compete with M sales and I wonder if even the SL 601 model (introduced Oct 2015) was competing with the M10 (introduced Jan 2017) even though I also very much liked my M1o models.
Back in those days it was a bold move for Leica to introduce something other than an M model. The Q has been terrific for them with the Sl not so much. I recall a big EVF problem a friend had with his first 601 which the Q at the same did not have.
I am sure once Leica saw the Q scales becoming their best seller that knew they had to do something for M users. and we have it now.
stgrove wrote:
Fred,
back in the M10 intro days there was no Q to compete with M sales and I wonder if even the SL 601 model was competing as I do not remember the years of the M10 even though I also liked mine.
The first gen SL was already available when the M10 was made. Likely also the reason why video was removed starting with the M10 - to avoid in-house competition with the fairly new SL at the time. Marketed as "Das Wesentliche" for the M10 and many bought in with the slogan excusing lack of features the M 240 included.
retrofocus wrote:
The first gen SL was already available when the M10 was made. Likely also the reason why video was removed starting with the M10 - to avoid in-house competition with the fairly new SL at the time. Marketed as "Das Wesentliche" for the M10 and many bought in with the slogan excusing lack of features the M 240 included.
All good reasons, but the first gen SL was not up to its best specs at introduction since comparing it to the first Q its EVF was not as good as the first Q. That was probably back when Q and SL teams were competing with each other instead of sharing best advice.
stgrove wrote:
All good reasons, but the first gen SL was not up to its best specs at introduction since comparing it to the first Q its EVF was not as good as the first Q. That was probably back when Q and SL teams were competing with each other instead of sharing best advice.
I don't think that the Q- and SL-series ever competed against each other. Leica made sure that this is not going to happen - SL series as video centric mirrorless camera with exchangeable lens mount and good AF capability L-lenses, whereas Q is the smaller travel-based single lens option camera series - also can do video and AF in the attached lens but not to the extent of the SL series. If Leica was good in anything, then that to this day including the EV1 they avoided in-house competition between their camera systems extremely well.
