...
However, I question the elimination of any sort of exposure confirmation. Essentially, digital capture has more similarities to slide film, than much more forgiving neg film. Given that a rangefinder is noted for its spontaneous and intuitive handling, and spawned certain genres of photography (decisive moment, street, journalistic, etc.), not many creators of that type work chose slide film.
My experience is that raw capture is really quite in line with getting good exposures on negative films with respect to latitude, given modern sensors' dynamic range. Exposure
technique, however, is still more similar to slide film: Negative films have most all of their exposure latitude on the overexposure side, where slide films and digital sensor have most latitude on the underexposure side. So instead of "meter for the shadows and process for the highlights", the old rule of thumb for negative films, you use "meter for the highlights, process for the shadows" for digital.
(Olympus has the brilliance in various cameras including the E-M1 of providing Spot-High metering pattern. This is a small spot area calibrated to give proper exposure when targeting a Zone VIII to Zone IX area. I use it often! It is very close to the mark, most of the time, when working with scenes that have a wide dynamic range.)
I am sufficiently skilled enough at getting proper exposure with film cameras using either slide or negative films that I see little need to require a histogram. And if a miss a few, well, who cares really? A digital exposure doesn't even cost me the price of a piece of film and processing ... ;-)
BTW, there is 'exposure confirmation'... Just like was pioneered in the Nikon FM and later available in the M6TTL (and M7, and other digital Ms, and other cameras ...), the metering readout has (+, 0, -) lights/arrows/etc which tell you where your exposure setting is relative to the meter's view of the subject in five distinct steps. Placing the metering area on the appropriate thing and glancing at the readout is much less intrusive and faster than analyzing a histogram. It's worked for decades of photographers in all kinds of real situations in studio and field...
Frankly, for most "decisive", or "of the moment work", having a LCD review is already too late. Yet I'd like to have the ability to enter into a lighting situation and get an exposure reading in the form of a Histogram reading off the sensor. I do not think a huge LCD is needed for that. Something, somewhere activated by a half press of the shutter maybe. ...
The only way to have what you're looking for there is to have some permutation of a live view heads-up display, which defeats the whole purpose of engineering down to the basics and eliminating potential distractions IMO. I never needed it when I was shooting film only. I find I only rarely need it today when I'm shooting digital. And when I do, I have other cameras (the E-M1 for instance) that do it just right.
I may (most likely will) never own an M Edition 60. But I like the design concept a lot, and often strive to shoot in the manner that this design concept implies. It works particularly well for me in certain types of endeavors where I'm looking to minimize all possible burdens on my attention so that I can concentrate on the subject at hand, which tend to be situations where I'm shooting black and white, working with people and expressions and situations. I have no time then to analyze a heads-up display, be too fussy about focus, etc. I need to be in the moment, looking, watching, and ready... Knowing that the equipment is already configured and ready at any moment.
If the new Monochrom model were offered in a production-priced version of the ME60 body, I would have already pressed the buy button.
G
