The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

THE NEW LEICA M Press Release

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
New CMOS,no AA filter , sharp glass = nasty moire.

I agree we are not sure of this chip. Not sure how it will handle all the aspects of image quality. It's new and unproven not like Nikon buying a chip from Sony that has a good track record. I know this maybe exciting to many M shooters but are we not forgetting the M8 release . This is all new and it's possible something can be off . Granted time marched on from the M8 but I don't discount anything. I'm actually interested in this but I won't be waiting outside a Leica store inline to get one on release day like I will for a iPhone.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yes software can handle moire. Just pointing out all is not rosy until its released and tested. No camera is
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I can assure you my Ricoh GXR M mount has never seen a tripod in her life. I shoot all the time at working aperture, handheld, and about 60-40 ratio of focus peaking to magnified view.
Mine's seen a little more tripod work than that, but not a lot.

I have no problem shooting with it at all, for a very wide range of subject matter.

Godfrey
 

lambert

New member
Leica should really have applied a little more ingenuity in designing the new M. The tack on $200 external EVF is simply lazy design. I'm sure that many use an M purely for the RF experience. And the preference is to use the inbuilt finder. Sure, we sometime use external finders for wides. But that solution was devised in 1954. Fuji's hybrid implementation is brilliant and should have been Leica's model. Not the tack on solution employed by the bottom end of the market.

To make matters worse, if you want to record video in stereo (which I expect applies to most) you need a another tack on gadget which is even uglier than the tack on EVF. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't use the two at the same time.

I just don't understand all the hype with the new M. Where have Leica pushed the boundary?
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Leica should really have applied a little more ingenuity in designing the new M. The tack on $200 external EVF is simply lazy design. I'm sure that many use an M purely for the RF experience. And the preference is to use the inbuilt finder. Sure, we sometime use external finders for wides. But that solution was devised in 1954. Fuji's hybrid implementation is brilliant and should have been Leica's model. ...
External finders were devised long before 1954. My father's Leitz varifocal finder dated from at least the late 1940s if not the 1930s. :)

The Fuji hybrid viewfinder just doesn't impress me at all. It's a "okay" optical finder and a poor quality EVF IMO. That's one of the reasons I didn't buy an X100 or Xpro1. I'd much rather have a REAL rangefinder/viewfinder with superb optics and a simple frameline display, supplemented by an add-on, high quality EVF for the occasions when I want/need TTL viewing.

We'll likely not agree no matter how much we argue about our personal preferences. If the new M is not to your taste, don't buy one ... that's pretty simple. It suits what I wanted nearly perfectly, drat, now I have to pony up the cash to buy one. ;-)
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Yeah I don't get why people are seemingly in a tizzy over the EVF now. It's really no different than those who used a frankenfinder or accessory viewfinder of your choice. The benefit is what who see is what you get. For everything in between 28-135mm the New M works as a traditional rangefinder like the M9. Until EVF technology gets up to a higher level I don't see a reason to compromise what is tried and true and add cost to an already expensive body for those who may not utilize the feature to begin with.
 

lambert

New member
Fair enough, but whether it's 1950 or 1930, the external finder is still a very old concept. And in referring to Fuji's approach, I meant that that they should adopt some form of hybrid design not Fuji's exact specs (EVF's need not be low res). The point is that Fuji's approach was creative, Leica took the easy path. Guy's suggestion, for example, of focus confirmation in the VF would also have been superb.

Don't get me wrong. The M is a lovely camera. And it will be great for stills. But so is my M9P. Liveview via LCD/external EVF is old hat. I was looking forward to a step-change in technology. Not a recycling of old ideas. Leica so often push the boundaries when it comes to lens design. I guess I was just hoping for them to do the same with their next generation M digital.


External finders were devised long before 1954. My father's Leitz varifocal finder dated from at least the late 1940s if not the 1930s. :)

The Fuji hybrid viewfinder just doesn't impress me at all. It's a "okay" optical finder and a poor quality EVF IMO. That's one of the reasons I didn't buy an X100 or Xpro1. I'd much rather have a REAL rangefinder/viewfinder with superb optics and a simple frameline display, supplemented by an add-on, high quality EVF for the occasions when I want/need TTL viewing.

We'll likely not agree no matter how much we argue about our personal preferences. If the new M is not to your taste, don't buy one ... that's pretty simple. It suits what I wanted nearly perfectly, drat, now I have to pony up the cash to buy one. ;-)
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Fair enough, but whether it's 1950 or 1930, the external finder is still a very old concept. And in referring to Fuji's approach, I meant that that they should adopt some form of hybrid design not Fuji's exact specs (EVF's need not be low res). The point is that Fuji's approach was creative, Leica took the easy path. Guy's suggestion, for example, of focus confirmation in the VF would also have been superb.

Don't get me wrong. The M is a lovely camera. And it will be great for stills. But so is my M9P. Liveview via LCD/external EVF is old hat. I was looking forward to a step-change in technology. Not a recycling of old ideas. Leica so often push the boundaries when it comes to lens design. I guess I was just hoping for them to do the same with their next generation M digital.
Probably news to every designer of ultraminiature LCD technology that the EVF is "old hat". Sheesh.

Leica's body designs have always been delightfully conservative, well thought out, incremental improvements. Adding a radically new, totally different imaging system into the viewfinder would be very risky. Have you ever used other cameras with LCD overlays on optical finders? I have ... I'd MUCH rather have the gorgeous Leica rangefinder/viewfinder. Adding the option of a high quality EVF (and one that can be upgraded at that) independent of the body, for those who might want it, is a brilliant idea as it gives one options.

Sorry. We won't agree. I have no need for an LCD display of my focus point when I have a rangefinder or a high quality TTL viewfinder. Unnecessary complication.

As I said once before, perhaps in this thread, not every camera meets all needs and desires, nor satisfies every purpose. The new M does what I want (and need) nearly perfectly, based on the specs and the videos of it in action. Can't wait to use one! :)

G
 

StephenPatterson

New member
I am as big of a Leica fan as anyone, yet I absolutely refuse to purchase a camera without seeing full resolution sample images shot with a range of lenses. To do otherwise is just throwing money to the wind and hoping for the best. In spite of all the bells and whistles if the image quality is not superior to the M9 I will absolutely not be "upgrading".

In fact I am seriously considering skipping this camera and waiting for the next improved version in a few years, mainly because of the clip on EVF, clip on Stereo Mic, bolt on blender...this thing with all the accessories is bigger than a 5DMkIII! I have no issue with using clip on viewfinders on my M9 for wide angle lenses, because this is only necessary for perhaps 10% of all my shots. For the other 90% it's a 35mm or 50mm lens...no clip on anything, no handgrip, no stereo mic, no GPS, just images. It's criminal that Leica does not include the EVF, because the thought of composing live view images on a rear LCD is just ridiculous.

Wouldn't it have been wonderful if Leica had enabled users to self calibrate their M optical rangefinders with the Live View display? That would have been very useful.

I'm sorry, but this thing just feels like a digital M5 to me. Too much slightly outdated technology crammed together in an attempt to make it all "play nice".
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Gosh! You make it sound as if Leica is shoving their camera down your throat, forcing you to buy it.

You don't like it, you don't want it? Don't buy it. It's that simple. In the end it's just another camera.
 

dhsimmonds

New member
The fact remains that the 24 Mpx CMOS sensor is apparently made by a Belgian company founded in 2007 trading under the name of CMOSIS.

Whilst I am sure that it is a solid design, frankly I have never heard of them before. The processor used in the new M is the same or similar to that used in the S2 which is of proven design now.

I am invited to the London offices of Leica UK as a group when we expect to see and discuss new Leica products at the end of October, so hopefully I will know more then but meanwhile I shall wait quite a while before I sink megabucks into another Leica. :rolleyes:
 

StephenPatterson

New member
Gosh! You make it sound as if Leica is shoving their camera down your throat, forcing you to buy it.

You don't like it, you don't want it? Don't buy it. It's that simple. In the end it's just another camera.
Godfrey, I'm simply saying that without demonstrating IQ there is nothing to consider. Until we have full resolution images to view and compare it's just a gadget with a red dot that hopes to become a camera. In the meantime I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid.

For anyone who hasn't seen the sample images on Leica's website they are 800x542 pixel jpegs (96 pixels/inch) coming in under 150K size. Unbelievable for a new product announcement.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
just wondering if the new LED framelines come up as pairs, or specific to the FL lens that is mounted.

also read Reid Reviews on the M, informative as always, and he was involved to some extent in the design feature list
 

edwardkaraa

New member
just wondering if the new LED framelines come up as pairs, or specific to the FL lens that is mounted.

also read Reid Reviews on the M, informative as always, and he was involved to some extent in the design feature list

The lines are as usual, in pairs. Only the light source is different, daylight vs LED.
 

Chris C

Member
The lines are as usual, in pairs. Only the light source is different, daylight vs LED.
Edward - Maybe through wishful thinking, I had understood the framelines were in 'singles', not pairs. Are you suggesting that a 'ghost' [twinned] frameline is in view in the viewfinder whilst the correct frameline for the mounted lens is illuminated?

............... Chris
 

edwardkaraa

New member
Edward - Maybe through wishful thinking, I had understood the framelines were in 'singles', not pairs. Are you suggesting that a 'ghost' [twinned] frameline is in view in the viewfinder whilst the correct frameline for the mounted lens is illuminated?

............... Chris
Sorry, but it seems both lines are fully illuminated by the LED, exactly as in the older VF.

From David Farkas report:

I also took a peak through the optical viewfinder to find that 1) it was still there and 2) the LED-illuminated frame lines look identical to those in the M9 Titanium. The frame lines are still in three sets: 28/90, 35/135 and 50/75. My guess is that the mechanical cam is still employed to move the traditional frame mask, but the illumination is now all internal. The frame lines change illumination based on ambient light and can be user set to either red or white. The red looks more high-tech, but the white is classic.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Godfrey, I'm simply saying that without demonstrating IQ there is nothing to consider. Until we have full resolution images to view and compare it's just a gadget with a red dot that hopes to become a camera. In the meantime I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid.

For anyone who hasn't seen the sample images on Leica's website they are 800x542 pixel jpegs (96 pixels/inch) coming in under 150K size. Unbelievable for a new product announcement.
Wow,

as already stated several times - just stop reading about this new "ugly" M and even better, do not consider buying it!

That saves you lot of headache and all the other members in this forum as well - ok?

Just a recommendation ....
 

D&A

Well-known member
Just some additional thoughts. Personally speaking for myself, the big question as some have alluded to is ultimately the full rez images this camera produces, especially with the change to CMOS. In one sense I think those at the helm at Leica are acutely aware of the expectations that most are placing on this new 24mp sensor and that the look and quality of the files it produces not only matches, but exceeds those from the M9. On the other hand, something tells me Leica was determined to announce and show the prototype of this camera at Photokina and for whatever reason, it wasn't near being ready, especially from the standpoint of final sensor and/or firmware development and thus no files or full scale images were publicly displayed or available.

If this is the case Leica might feel that they won't actually release the camera until which time they feel its ready and if that means a delay in early 2013, so be it. As long as full rez files aren't released, image wise, there is nothing to criticize (or praise) in terms of image quality. So ultimately there will be a lot of conjecture, both ways, until which time there are files to play with.

As for EVF and other external bits and pieces, as Guy, myself and other have stated it would have been nice if the EVF had been somehow incorporated into the internal optical finder as some sort of overlay that could be turned "on" or "off" as desired, I think whether it was a technical, financial or design decision, it as far as Leica wanted to go for this round of a new M. As Marc has pointed out, keep all these devices away and off the new M, and basically the camera appears close to the look and handling of an M9, except with the incorporated LV and other improvements (and new 24mp sensor of course). Once the EVF and/or other external options are attached, I too, without handling this new camera, feel it's a bit bloated. Heck, even when I attach a regular external optical finder to a M9, I feel it has already changed its handling/compact feel.

No doubt this new camera with many of its associated accessories and ultimately their performance and handling is going to be very subjective. Its just what some want and other don't....and a few of us, maybe right in the middle.

I can't say for sure if this is sort of an interim product in the sense that in the future, some of the external options will eventually find their way inside the camera, such as a hybrid finder and maybe that external mic. Hard to say, but if they do, then some will feel it's even more like a feature laden DSLR and further away from the traditional M rangefinder roots. That is why I believe Leica made the conscious decision to keep a M9 like camera such as the ME in the product line and for the time being, such a more classic digital M rangefinder will always be available, as an alternative.

*** P.S. I should also add that Leica may have made the conscious decision not to incorporate a hybrid finder at this time, one up to their standards, simply due to the costs involved and with the desire to keep the price point of the digital M from climbing ever high as it's done since the introduction of the original M8. With making the external EVF optional as well as the mic etc., the've given options to the pricing structue of this system while keeping the costs of the camera itself down (relatively speaking). With regards to keeping its present price point, I think most would agree, this was a pleasent surprise, even though these cameras are still very expensive.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:
Top