I just received and participated in a new survey from Leica. It focused on whether or not to return to the old removable base plate on M cameras. The questions revolved around whether I would be willing to lose some features, and have a smaller less run time batter in order to have a removable base plate.
I cannot believe that this is even being considered. The removable baseplate esthetic is nothing but a useless throwback to film days. It makes zero sense in a modern digital camera. Especially if it compromises functionality or convenience. There must be some noise being made by Leica film traditionalists. Seriously people why would anyone want to do this.
The only body that I think would be appropriate for a return to a removable base plate is the M11-D type of camera. I guess there are people out there with such a longing for "the good old days" that they enjoy loss of features. Great, knock yourself out. Buy a film camera if you want a base plate designed so you can load film. That is not a digital feature. I would be deeply disappointed if Leica took such a step backwards in the general M cameras.
So disappointed by the inconvenience and philosophy of such a move that it would likely be the end of my Leica M purchases. Leica, don't be coerced by a bunch of codgy old people yearning for yesterday. Where do these people come from? Leica, let's look forward, not backwards!
1bwana1 wrote:
It makes zero sense in a modern digital camera.
Not much in a Leica that makes sense as a "modern digital camera". Imo a Leica M should have brass top and bottom plates.
(imo it should also have the thumb rest from the M10-D as that improves ergonomics a ton, but different topic..)
My M-P 240 battery is physically bigger than the Nikon EN-EL15c. Yet the Nikon battery is higher capacity than the M11 battery (16Wh vs 13.32Wh). And funny enough the M11 battery has the exact same specs as the M-P240 battery: 7.4V, 1800mAh, 13.32Wh..
So this is clearly not a question of available space.
1bwana1 wrote:
I just received and participated in a new survey from Leica. It focused on whether or not to return to the old removable base plate on M cameras. The questions revolved around whether I would be willing to lose some features, and have a smaller less run time batter in order to have a removable base plate.
I cannot believe that this is even being considered. The removable baseplate esthetic is nothing but a useless throwback to film days. It makes zero sense in a modern digital camera. Especially if it compromises functionality or convenience. There must be some noise being made by Leica film traditionalists. Seriously people why would anyone want to do this.
The only body that I think would be appropriate for a return to a removable base plate is the M11-D type of camera. I guess there are people out there with such a longing for "the good old days" that they enjoy loss of features. Great, knock yourself out. Buy a film camera if you want a base plate designed so you can load film. That is not a digital feature. I would be deeply disappointed if Leica took such a step backwards in the general M cameras.
So disappointed by the inconvenience and philosophy of such a move that it would likely be the end of my Leica M purchases. Leica, don't be coerced by a bunch of codgy old people yearning for yesterday. Where do these people come from? Leica, let's look forward, not backwards! ...Show more →
I 100% agree with your sentiment-
Its not a film camera and there is no reason to put a baseplate on that adds nothing to the camera. If you want to shoot film, shoot film.
What would be awesome is if the battery was the baseplate section itself and you could clip and secure it on and off without affecting capacity or functionality but adds a nice haptic element to the process.
If the M12 is going to have the same quality firmware as the M11's firmware for the first 2.5 years, then quick access to the battery for rebooting is a must.
1bwana1 wrote:
Why do you feel that way. It makes zero functional sense.
To me the appeal of an M is how it looks and feels. If I want max functionality I will choose a Nikon, Canon or even a Sony every day of the week.
I also really don't mind removing the bottom plate. It's not like I'm doing it all the time. So if not having the removable bottom plate means no brass bottom plate, then that's a compromise on the core essence of an M for something that I don't see much benefit in. If they can make it from brass and still with that cut-out for the battery, that's fine with me too.
I also do prefer a more "analog" shooting experience, it's just more fun. If someone remade the Epson R-D1, I'd be all over that.
And I'm 37 years old btw, so not sure you can count me into "codgy old people yearning for yesterday"
Completely agree. I had an M10 and now have an M11. I liked the baseplate on my M10 and it was a fun “feature”. However having the M11, I would not go back if it removed functionality. I value the USB-C port for charging and really appreciate the longer battery life.
pmeheut wrote:
Same here. I could not agree with you more.
Leica has caved to this sort of nonsense in the past in order to appease traditionalists.
Case in point - the shutter speed dial on the M6 TTL and M7. Leica made it bigger so it is easier to use, and it turned in the correct direction to the exposure meter arrows in the VF (when in manual mode for the M7, M6 TTL is manual exposure only).
Makes total sense, an absolute improvement over the older much smaller shutter speed dial used previously in all Ms apart from the M5 (very different M).
What happened? Bunch of whiners whined, and Leica listened to the whiners instead of keeping the improved product. So I would not be surprised if Leica returns to the detachable base plate, and then sells it as a returning to tradition thing.
Desmolicious wrote:
Leica has caved to this sort of nonsense in the past in order to appease traditionalists.
Case in point - the shutter speed dial on the M6 TTL and M7. Leica made it bigger so it is easier to use, and it turned in the correct direction to the exposure meter arrows in the VF (when in manual mode for the M7, M6 TTL is manual exposure only).
Makes total sense, an absolute improvement over the older much smaller shutter speed dial used previously in all Ms apart from the M5 (very different M).
What happened? Bunch of whiners whined, and Leica listened to the whiners instead of keeping the improved product. So I would not be surprised if Leica returns to the detachable base plate, and then sells it as a returning to tradition thing....Show more →
I think Leica's questions are deliberately tangential to what they really want to know.
My take is that they might need to shrink the battery dimensions and hence capacity in the M12, but new functionality will draw more current, so a double hit.
My response to the final questions was "A leicavit sized clip on battery, to enable extra features such as video, or extended operation at cold temperatures would be fine."
I filled out the survey as well. When I had the opportunity to comment, I said the following: "A removable bottom plate can only negatively impact my capacity to change batteries and memory cards in the field. In my experience this arcane design ethos is useful if you like having a dented baseplate from repeated drops that are the result of switching out low capacity batteries under the pressure of time."
I forgot to request that all batteries have built in USB-C connectors*, so they can be charged out of camera without bulky and expensive docks. *e.g as Smallrig sell.
OwlsEyes wrote:
I'm a big No to going back in time.
If they asked about going back in time to a body the size of the M240 ... and that extra real estate meant bigger battery ... or IBIS ... or BOTH. I could go "back" for that (I rather enjoy how my M246 fits in my hand). If that came WITH or WITHOUT the bottom plate being removable ... I couldn't care one way or the other about the bottom plate.
That said, I wouldn't mind if they configured the bottom plate to have an Arca Swiss dovetail in it. But, that's likely a bit far fetched for them.
I wouldn't mind the bottom plate being removable (or not), but not at the ADDITIONAL EXPENSE of battery reduction ...
FrozenInTime wrote:
I forgot to request that all batteries have built in USB-C connectors*, so they can be charged out of camera without bulky and expensive dicks. *e.g as Smallrig sell.
