Can't say I'm a huge fan of live-view. The only time I use live-view is when I'm double stacking extenders on my C***n 5D2 w/ 300/2.8 to achieve a 840mm effective focal length for wildlife. I initially got the 5D2 for increased resolution (migrated from the 30D) and the HD video capabilities but soon found out that I rarely shot video or used live-view. These days the 5D2 is relegated to deep-sky night photography and wildlife, the rest of the time (95-98%) I use the M8.2 for its speed (I generally zone focus) and its portabilty (weight makes a huge difference in the mountains where I cover 12-18km with over 1000m of elevation gain in various terrain in a day).
With that being said, if Leica decided to put in live view, I won't complain. Personally, I won't be using it much but the mere presence of live-view does not detract from the M-ness of the camera. Moreover, I can't see why adding live-view will increase the size of the camera with exception of adding an add-on EVF. Even if there was an optional EVF, it wouldn't make much sense to allow live view to work on the existing main LCD.
From an M8 user standpoint, the key things I want to see in an M10 are:
- decent/usable ISO 12800
- improved battery life
- higher resolution LCD that works well in broad daylight
in that order above.
Other nice to have features would just be gravy:
- I wouldn't complain about an increasing resolution to 24-36MP since the lenses can resolve it and SD cards are dirt cheap, as are hard drives
- Video is nice since I don't need to carry a little point and shoot for the off chance that I want a little bit of video
- Live view is probably a given, how it is executed remains to be seen; having the option is nice but I'll still be using the optical viewfinder 99% of the time
If we're lucky, Leica will use the same olympus compatible EVF and we can just buy the olympus version at 1/3rd the price. Since Leica is a small company with limited development resource, I suspect they'll just use the same EVF as the X2 which means we'll most likely be able to use the olympus version. As nice as the hybrid viewfinder is, I don't think Leica has the resources to completely redesign the RF optics.
When Leica created the M8, they had limited resources and so they stuck to what they already knew - using the existing RF optics design, using the same shutter as the R8/R9. They didn't have the expertise to do the electronics so they outsourced the signal processing and electronics design to Jenoptik.
When it came time to create an M9, Leica decided to minimize risk by changing very little of the M8 and only added a bigger sensor while still outsourcing the signal processing and electronics design to Jenoptik. Admittedly, during the development of the M9, they were also working on the X1 and S2 and didn't have much resources left to put an M9 together in house. In order to minimize risk and ensure that the M9 would be launched on time, they focused mainly on improvements that can be performed externally (by Jenoptik and Kodak).
With the S3 rumoured to be announced and the X2 only recently released, I suspect Leica will once again outsource M10 development to Jenoptik. Afterall, they've developed a good business relationship with Jenoptik an Jenoptik has gained a fair bit of expertise over the years working on the M8 and M9 (and probably the M monocrhrome). As such, I can't see that relationship changing. What might change is that Leica might decide to integrate a new Maestro processor in the M10 since they've now gained the expertise in that arena through the S2 development. Some of the Maestro work can be easily ported to the M9. Infact, it would not surprise me at all if much of the live-view implementation (and maybe focus assist/confirmation) will have come straight from the X2 development work.
Both from a business standpoint and from a technical standpoint, it makes sense to economize on development from previous project. It would also not surprise me if Leica reused the 3.0 inch LCD introduced on the S2 or the 2.7 inch LCD found on the X2. Doing so reduces risk in both development and sourcing of parts; it also allows Leica to keep inventory of parts that can be shared across several different products.
With that being said, if Leica decided to put in live view, I won't complain. Personally, I won't be using it much but the mere presence of live-view does not detract from the M-ness of the camera. Moreover, I can't see why adding live-view will increase the size of the camera with exception of adding an add-on EVF. Even if there was an optional EVF, it wouldn't make much sense to allow live view to work on the existing main LCD.
From an M8 user standpoint, the key things I want to see in an M10 are:
- decent/usable ISO 12800
- improved battery life
- higher resolution LCD that works well in broad daylight
in that order above.
Other nice to have features would just be gravy:
- I wouldn't complain about an increasing resolution to 24-36MP since the lenses can resolve it and SD cards are dirt cheap, as are hard drives
- Video is nice since I don't need to carry a little point and shoot for the off chance that I want a little bit of video
- Live view is probably a given, how it is executed remains to be seen; having the option is nice but I'll still be using the optical viewfinder 99% of the time
If we're lucky, Leica will use the same olympus compatible EVF and we can just buy the olympus version at 1/3rd the price. Since Leica is a small company with limited development resource, I suspect they'll just use the same EVF as the X2 which means we'll most likely be able to use the olympus version. As nice as the hybrid viewfinder is, I don't think Leica has the resources to completely redesign the RF optics.
When Leica created the M8, they had limited resources and so they stuck to what they already knew - using the existing RF optics design, using the same shutter as the R8/R9. They didn't have the expertise to do the electronics so they outsourced the signal processing and electronics design to Jenoptik.
When it came time to create an M9, Leica decided to minimize risk by changing very little of the M8 and only added a bigger sensor while still outsourcing the signal processing and electronics design to Jenoptik. Admittedly, during the development of the M9, they were also working on the X1 and S2 and didn't have much resources left to put an M9 together in house. In order to minimize risk and ensure that the M9 would be launched on time, they focused mainly on improvements that can be performed externally (by Jenoptik and Kodak).
With the S3 rumoured to be announced and the X2 only recently released, I suspect Leica will once again outsource M10 development to Jenoptik. Afterall, they've developed a good business relationship with Jenoptik an Jenoptik has gained a fair bit of expertise over the years working on the M8 and M9 (and probably the M monocrhrome). As such, I can't see that relationship changing. What might change is that Leica might decide to integrate a new Maestro processor in the M10 since they've now gained the expertise in that arena through the S2 development. Some of the Maestro work can be easily ported to the M9. Infact, it would not surprise me at all if much of the live-view implementation (and maybe focus assist/confirmation) will have come straight from the X2 development work.
Both from a business standpoint and from a technical standpoint, it makes sense to economize on development from previous project. It would also not surprise me if Leica reused the 3.0 inch LCD introduced on the S2 or the 2.7 inch LCD found on the X2. Doing so reduces risk in both development and sourcing of parts; it also allows Leica to keep inventory of parts that can be shared across several different products.
Last edited: