I like the bottom plate on my M10. I think it's a fun element, and it's easy enough to get to the battery and card. And my bottom plate is real, not fake!
SlowDriver wrote:
Has this been confirmed? There were some rumors that Leica was not satisfied with M EV-1 sales.
I don't know how one would officially confirm that. However anecdotally from my friends working in Leica stores despite resistance from existing M RF users, it seems to be selling steadily to new customers, and to Q users wanting to add or move to an M camera.
mgscheu wrote:
I like the bottom plate on my M10. I think it's a fun element, and it's easy enough to get to the battery and card. And my bottom plate is real, not fake!
!
Yes, it is made of metal and exists of course. But the purpose for it no longer exists so it is a fake feature in that sense. I never even used it on my M10-P replacing it with a half case that allowed access to the battery and sd-card through a hinged flap.
I don't get why people want to pretend to themselves that they are shooting film when using a digital camera. But they do as evidenced by the D series of Ms. I have heard some say that they would like to have a fake film advance lever to load the shutter on a digital M. That is about as useful s the bottom plate I guess. For me, if I want to feel like I m shooting film, I actually shoot film with a 74 year old Leica IIf. On that camera I use the bottom plate often...
mgscheu wrote:
As do I on my IIIf. But I like the bottom plate on my M10. You don’t. And that’s fine.
I'm a bottom plate enjoyer as well, yes it's silly but it's nostalgic and fun. I'm a bit of a romantic about these things. I also only have to swap out my battery maybe once a week. If I had to do it every 36 shots I wouldn't be a fan lol.
With the M12 around the corner, I keep thinking about how Leica tends to balance between two approaches with the digital M system. The M240 moved things forward with more tech features, while the M10 felt like a step back toward simplicity and the classic feel. The M11 then moved forward again, adding more electronics, features, and refinement. Luckily, the rangefinder core has remained intact, with the exception of the newer EV1 line, which seems to sit in a different category..
So the question with the M12 is this: do they continue building on the M11 with more electronic mirrorless features and digital convenience, or do they step back again like they did with the M10 and return it on a simpler, more traditional shooting experience?
Leica seems to auto-correct over time, but there is no real way to predict which way they will go next. Different photographers want different things, from more modern mirrorless features to a more simple, classic shooting experience focused on only exposure and rangefinder focusing. It will be interesting to see where they take the digital M from here. At this point, IQ is excellent across almost all modern cameras, even APS-C systems,,so I think the real distinction for the Leica M will continue to be about style, rangefinder, build quality, and the shooting experience, rather than technical specs I hope they return to simplicity and maybe even continue refining the mechanical rangefinder experience further.
Yes, I would keep the larger battery! That was a genuine improvement over the M10 series and brought the capacity back in line with what the M240 series offered.
Fred Miranda wrote:
With the M12 around the corner, I keep thinking about how Leica tends to balance between two approaches with the digital M system. The M240 moved things forward with more tech features, while the M10 felt like a step back toward simplicity and the classic feel. The M11 then moved forward again, adding more electronics, features, and refinement. Luckily, the rangefinder core has remained intact, with the exception of the newer EV1 line, which seems to sit in a different category..
So the question with the M12 is this: do they continue building on the M11 with more electronic mirrorless features and digital convenience, or do they step back again like they did with the M10 and return it on a simpler, more traditional shooting experience?
Leica seems to auto-correct over time, but there is no real way to predict which way they will go next. Different photographers want different things, from more modern mirrorless features to a more simple, classic shooting experience focused on only exposure and rangefinder focusing. It will be interesting to see where they take the digital M from here. At this point, IQ is excellent across almost all modern cameras, even APS-C systems,,so I think the real distinction for the Leica M will continue to be about style, rangefinder, build quality, and the shooting experience, rather than technical specs I hope they return to simplicity and maybe even continue refining the mechanical rangefinder experience further.
Yes, I would keep the larger battery! That was a genuine improvement over the M10 series and brought the capacity back in line with what the M240 series offered....Show more →
There are still digital features that can be added to M cameras that can enhance image quality, expand use cases, and improve the photography experience, without compromising the RF manual focus, manual exposure, experience, and maintain form factor and ergonomics. I would like to see these implimented.
Fred Miranda wrote:
With the M12 around the corner, I keep thinking about how Leica tends to balance between two approaches with the digital M system. The M240 moved things forward with more tech features, while the M10 felt like a step back toward simplicity and the classic feel. The M11 then moved forward again, adding more electronics, features, and refinement. Luckily, the rangefinder core has remained intact, with the exception of the newer EV1 line, which seems to sit in a different category..
So the question with the M12 is this: do they continue building on the M11 with more electronic mirrorless features and digital convenience, or do they step back again like they did with the M10 and return it on a simpler, more traditional shooting experience?
Leica seems to auto-correct over time, but there is no real way to predict which way they will go next. Different photographers want different things, from more modern mirrorless features to a more simple, classic shooting experience focused on only exposure and rangefinder focusing. It will be interesting to see where they take the digital M from here. At this point, IQ is excellent across almost all modern cameras, even APS-C systems,,so I think the real distinction for the Leica M will continue to be about style, rangefinder, build quality, and the shooting experience, rather than technical specs I hope they return to simplicity and maybe even continue refining the mechanical rangefinder experience further.
Yes, I would keep the larger battery! That was a genuine improvement over the M10 series and brought the capacity back in line with what the M240 series offered....Show more →
I just hope they do not continue with more MP as I see they are partnering with a Chinese sensor company. Not sure what this will offer for better IQ than what we have now. More parts from China. assembled in Portugal with final assembly screws set in Germany. Oh boy. The more I hear, the more older M models are appealing to me.
stgrove wrote:
I just hope they do not continue with more MP as I see they are partnering with a Chinese sensor compony. Not sure what this will offer for better IQ than what we have now. More parts from China. assembled in Portugal with final assembly screws set in Germany. Oh boy. The more I hear, the more older M models are appealing to me.
Looking at gpixel's facility, capability portfolios, and fabrication relationships I think it is likely that the Leica sensors will primarily be designed in Europe and fabricated in Isreal if that makes you feel better. I can't see that as bigger problem than fully designed and fabricated in Japan as Leica's current sensors are.
I’m hoping that with the EV version out, the next M will be allowed to be more ‘roots’ based.
I understand that we have to have a battery and electronics now that the camera is digital, but does it have to be auto wind? Talk about getting to concentrate on the decisive moment than to make people reset the shutter.
That, and faster start-up. Film just clicks.
I have an M10, bought used. I frankly haven’t been shooting it much lately, so I’m not really the market
stgrove wrote:
At least Sony sensors have a good track record.
Currently the best record in the World by a huge margin.
I don't understand the obsession about Sony or whoever else is making a camera's sensor. Although not a direct analog, at it's core the sensor is the modern replacement for film. Although everyone had their favorite films, they were OK to put film made by just about anyone in their cameras. I say go with the best sensor available for that particular cameras use case and forget about who makes it, or where.
anselwannab wrote:
I understand that we have to have a battery and electronics now that the camera is digital, but does it have to be auto wind? Talk about getting to concentrate on the decisive moment than to make people reset the shutter.
I find that a ridiculous concept. Want to feel like you are shooting film? Then shoot film. Leica still makes cameras to do just that.
Thankfully, I believe Leica is too smart to do something like this.
1bwana1 wrote:
I find that a ridiculous concept, want to feel like you are shooting film? Then shoot film. Leica still makes cameras to do just that.
I could not agree more. I like the simplicity of the Leica M, the viewfinder, the size, everything.
But I'm not nostalgic or if I am, I shoot an older camera: film M or R, Olympus OM-3, etc.
And each time remember that variable iso, modern shutter, much greater dynamic range than the film, less grain, faster post-processing and at a much lower cost are valuable
My dream camera is a M11 with an hybrid viewfinder, IBIS and optional small AF lenses... Same size and weight of course.
And besides, I have plenty of film cameras working without battery starting with a Nikon F without a meter.
pmeheut wrote:
And each time remember that variable iso, modern shutter, much greater dynamic range than the film, less grain, faster post-processing and at a much lower cost are valuable
Actually I am not finding film to be that expensive in comparison to my digital M setup. I have over 20K allocated to my M11 when you include my lens collection.
For my film I have:
A Leica IIIf that cost $250 including a 5CM Summaron 3.5 in excellent condition. I am paying $200$1,291 for a CLA on both and a new shutter curtain on the camera.
I bought an amazing Leitz Summaron 3.5CM 3.5 that is in incredible condition physically and optically for $300 which included an M adapter and hood.
I bought a Box Lab setup including the pro-lid for developing B&W film without a darkroom including, all accessories and all chemicals needed for $293. By good fortune the manufacturer of this is located near me here in Italy.
I bought the new version of the Valoi-32 scanning setup and all accessories for $248. Again fortunately the manufacturer is in the EU.
So my film World cost a total of $1,291.
I can by the 36 exposures (most times I actually get 38) film stock for between $9 and $14 depending on what film and where I buy it. I can develop the roll for about $1.5 in consumable costs. I get better scans than most labs can provide for zero consumable costs. I can do ita ll without any dedicated space in the house. My bathroom (good thing I don't share bathroom with the Wife, I have my own) and desk is all I use. That adds up to more film than I can likely shoot in my lifetime before film equals what digital has cost me.
All of these numbers of course assume I won't eventually buy some special edition M-6 film camera. My bad history on things like that predicts I will not be able to resist doing that however.
When I consider the enjoyment I get from it, shooting film seems like a good value to me.
1bwana1 wrote:
Actually I am not finding film to be that expensive in comparison to my digital M setup. I have over 20K allocated to my M11 when you include my lens collection.
For my film I have:
A Leica IIIf that cost $250 including a 5CM Summaron 3.5 in excellent condition. I am paying $200$1,291 for a CLA on both and a new shutter curtain on the camera.
I bought an amazing Leitz Summaron 3.5CM 3.5 that is in incredible condition physically and optically for $300 which included an M adapter and hood.
I bought a Box Lab setup including the pro-lid for developing B&W film without a darkroom including, all accessories and all chemicals needed for $293. By good fortune the manufacturer of this is located near me here in Italy.
I bought the new version of the Valoi-32 scanning setup and all accessories for $248. Again fortunately the manufacturer is in the EU. ...Show more →
Yes but you are comparing 2nd hand, old Leica camera and lenses to a brand new M11.
Also, my guess is that you are not shooting that many films. I remember shooting weddings or car races with it.
It also meant I needed a faster scan setup, i.e. a Coolscan 4000 or 5000 with autoloader...
I can also shoot digital with a much cheaper camera than a M11: my micro43 setup gives me excellent results. I use it to shoot theater plays (I'm the official photographer of the small theater near my home). 3 cameras, 3 zooms, 3000 pictures per play...
Total cost: much less than a M11
But in the end, I agree: shooting film as a hobby in B&W when developing and enlarging/scanning at home is not that expensive.
1bwana1 wrote:
I don't get why people want to pretend to themselves that they are shooting film when using a digital camera.
Likewise, Leica should stop the M series altogether and only focus on SL for full practical machine, so no one is pretending anything (lacking grip, old school rangefinder). 😂
I love the baseplate, but lacking the baseplate isn't the reason why I don't consider the new bodies for now...
jeffersoncasey wrote:
Likewise, Leica should stop the M series altogether and only focus on SL for full practical machine, so no one is pretending anything (lacking grip, old school rangefinder). 😂
I love the baseplate, but lacking the baseplate isn't the reason why I don't consider the new bodies for now...
The difference is that the RF and the Leica form factor is a very relevant way to shoot M lenses digitally. Current M lenses are also optimized for digital. All the controls and access points are optimized for digital. An unnecessary film advance lever and removable base plate designed to load film are not. Big difference...
!