Leica Mini M

Started May 23, 2013 | Discussions
Edward48
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,141
Like?
Re: What is the point?
In reply to Daedalus2000, May 25, 2013

I'm wondering the same thing Kostas.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GXRuser
Contributing MemberPosts: 656
Like?
Re: Leica Mini M
In reply to Joe Pineapples, May 25, 2013

Joe Pineapples wrote:

janlu wrote:

To me the picture of the upcoming announcement is really confusing.......

If they didn't call the X and D-lux series as micro and nano M , it would make more sense to me , the M  cameras have always been RF cameras but now all the camera are Ms.....Booo ????

If the Leica family was presented as : Dlux , X-series , M , and now mini M , i would have thought for a M with a fixed lens , with about the X dimensions or just a very little bit bigger , with the RF and of course the aperture ring on the lens....... This is what i would consider a mini M .

But now , by the way they have renamed all the products , it also could be a reflex ....   with just an "M" print on it  ......

Ahhh ...but no , i'm wrong...that kind of camera will be the "mini S"    Who know ?????

Gianluca

"M" just refers to the lens mount, which includes the rangefinder coupling mechanism.  It wouldn't surprise me if Leica made a body that accepted M-mount lenses but abandoned the coupled rangefinder for an EVF with focus assist. It would be cheaper, more accurate, and wouldn't require periodic calibration...

J.

1+

i could see a version with either a full frame, aps-c. different end users, different prices.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Toccata47
Senior MemberPosts: 2,141
Like?
Re: Doubt it is literally "Mini"
In reply to D Cox, May 26, 2013

D Cox wrote:

I think the Leitz lenses are the main reason to use a Leica.

Until recently, the rangefinder was the most accurate way to focus. But it has a major disadvantage - it has to be made with very high precision as it is not a direct readout from the focal plane.

Now, we have Live View and peaking, which show you the sharpness of the image on the sensor itself. This removes all need for calibration of mirrors and lenses. It is simpler, cheaper and better.

One advantage of peaking is that it shows the focus over the whole image, and not just in a patch in the centre.

An advantage of an EVF over the traditional Leica viewfinder is that it can be used with long tele lenses, or for macro work, or with the camera on a microscope. On the other hand, the view is less "clean" and more like a TV.

Well, mirrorless broke the "m" monopoly wrt leitz lenses. Rangefinder focusing on a camera is hardly the most accurate or reliable way to focus. Calibration issues aside, when was the last time you heard "zone focus" and "slr" in the same sentence?

Of course an evf pulls the slack with long lenses, but "peaking" is less accurate and even less reliable than using a rangefinder and is nearly useless below f2.8.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jim Radcliffe
Forum ProPosts: 11,343Gear list
Like?
Re: About that Rolex...
In reply to janlu, May 26, 2013

janlu wrote:

you guys are very much fun..... i'd prefer a Rolex than an iPhone , no matter if it doesn't keep accurate time....

I guess we have different priorities and reasons for owning such items as a Rolex.  By the way, I did not buy mine.. it was a gift.  I would never buy one.  I have better things to do with my money.

-- hide signature --

Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com
The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear used to capture it.

 Jim Radcliffe's gear list:Jim Radcliffe's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Fujifilm X-Pro1 Pentax K-5 IIs Fujifilm X-E2 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
leerob
Contributing MemberPosts: 914Gear list
Like?
Re: Details
In reply to boarderphreak, May 27, 2013

hope it wont be priced at $10K 

 leerob's gear list:leerob's gear list
Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ray1684
Regular MemberPosts: 184
Like?
Re: Details
In reply to leerob, May 27, 2013

lol what a tease, Leica has started to 'unbox' the new camera on their website

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jim Radcliffe
Forum ProPosts: 11,343Gear list
Like?
If it's not Full Frame....
In reply to GXRuser, May 27, 2013

GXRuser wrote:

i could see a version with either a full frame, aps-c. different end users, different prices.

If the Mini M is not FF and accepts ALL M mount lenses then Leica will have missed the mark and the opportunity to bring in new users to the Leica fold.

You need to think of the Mini M as a "starter drug" which will lead to the eventual upgrade to the M.  For many, the Mini M may be all they need or want but for so many more the cost of the  M RF body is just too prohibitive.  An alternative to those expensive RF bodies which will use M mount lenses is long overdue.   I don't mind spending money on glass that will always work but digital bodies come and go.  Make the bodies affordable, keep the glass at the present price point.

I can't believe I just used the adjective "affordable" in the same sentence with the noun, Leica. I guess we can all still dream.  

It's the Leica glass that is so good and is so responsible for those amazing Leica photographs.  Leica glass rules, no two ways about it... but an affordable body is what is really needed... and if that means getting rid of the RF mechanism, I'm all for it.  Those who desire the RF experience will still have it.  Those who are willing to adopt another focus method will then have their option as well and still be able to use those incredible M lenses.

-- hide signature --

Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com
The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear used to capture it.

 Jim Radcliffe's gear list:Jim Radcliffe's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Fujifilm X-Pro1 Pentax K-5 IIs Fujifilm X-E2 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rckirk
Forum MemberPosts: 52Gear list
Like?
Re: If it's not Full Frame....
In reply to Jim Radcliffe, May 27, 2013

Leica Rumors is reporting that everything points to an APS-C based camera with a fixed zoom lens. This sounds like an X2 with a fixed zoom lens.  I hope that is not the case.  If it is. then Leica will have missed the mark and lost the opportunity to bring me in as a new user.


 rckirk's gear list:rckirk's gear list
Camera Awesome
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tom Ames
Contributing MemberPosts: 642Gear list
Like?
Re: Leica Mini M
In reply to Ray1684, May 27, 2013

A competitor to the RX1 and priced similar like the Sony, would get me interested in Leica.

 Tom Ames's gear list:Tom Ames's gear list
Nikon Df Fujifilm X-T1 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.4G Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jtan163
Contributing MemberPosts: 939Gear list
Like?
Re: About that Rolex...
In reply to janlu, May 27, 2013

janlu wrote:

Jim Radcliffe wrote:

Joe Pineapples wrote:

On the other hand, a cheap modern digital watch is probably better as a timepiece in every measurable way than a 1960s Rolex, but there is still something nice about the Rolex...

J.

I actually have a 1960s Rolex.. it's gold and steel, doesn't make a ticking sound, looks great, feels great in the hand, quality workmanship... but... it doesn't keep accurate time worth a damn.  I never wear it, not even for the bling factor.

I check the time with my iPhone... much more accurate and versatile.. plus it can take pictures.

you guys are very much fun..... i'd prefer a Rolex than an iPhone , no matter if it doesn't keep accurate time..... you can always take timeless pictures with every camera .....no  ????  

Regards, Gianluca

If you want a good story about Rolexes and photographers check out Tim Page.

I don't remember the exact specifics, but he lost a Rolex in the fishpond or decorative pond in Vietname in the 60s. I think it may have been blown off of him.

And there is sat for over 20 years.

He went back in the 80s or 90s and they somehow found the watch in the pond.
I believe he wound it up ad it worked.

The story is in his biography Page After Page.

 jtan163's gear list:jtan163's gear list
Olympus C-740 UZ Nikon D7000 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tapper123
Senior MemberPosts: 1,156Gear list
Like?
Something I know about the Mini M...
In reply to Ray1684, May 27, 2013

...I know I won't be able to afford one.

 Tapper123's gear list:Tapper123's gear list
RX100 III Sony Alpha NEX-F3 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
janlu
Senior MemberPosts: 6,388
Like?
Jim ......
In reply to Jim Radcliffe, May 27, 2013

Jim Radcliffe wrote:

janlu wrote:

you guys are very much fun..... i'd prefer a Rolex than an iPhone , no matter if it doesn't keep accurate time....

I guess we have different priorities and reasons for owning such items as a Rolex.  By the way, I did not buy mine.. it was a gift.  I would never buy one.  I have better things to do with my money.

With all respect , i can't really care less if you bought your Rolex or it was a gift..... not even on how you spend your money .... but thanks for the clarification , it's really useful .

And yes , you are right... we are very different .... in so many ways .

Nice to meet you , Gianluca

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jim Radcliffe
Forum ProPosts: 11,343Gear list
Like?
Re: If it's not Full Frame....
In reply to rckirk, May 27, 2013

rckirk wrote:

Leica Rumors is reporting that everything points to an APS-C based camera with a fixed zoom lens. This sounds like an X2 with a fixed zoom lens.  I hope that is not the case.  If it is. then Leica will have missed the mark and lost the opportunity to bring me in as a new user.

That would be exactly what I would expect from Leica.

-- hide signature --

Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com
The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear used to capture it.

 Jim Radcliffe's gear list:Jim Radcliffe's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Fujifilm X-Pro1 Pentax K-5 IIs Fujifilm X-E2 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
earful
Senior MemberPosts: 1,101
Like?
Re: If it's not Full Frame....
In reply to Jim Radcliffe, May 27, 2013

sadly, i have to agree at this point. oh, well, i can forgive a bit after the m monochrom, which was/is an intriguing and exciting camera (but not in my price range at this time). my wallet thanks leica for making a new product i will not be interested in buying.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Joe Pineapples
Senior MemberPosts: 1,921Gear list
Like?
The true story about the Rolex...
In reply to jtan163, May 28, 2013

jtan163 wrote:

janlu wrote:

Jim Radcliffe wrote:

Joe Pineapples wrote:

On the other hand, a cheap modern digital watch is probably better as a timepiece in every measurable way than a 1960s Rolex, but there is still something nice about the Rolex...

J.

I actually have a 1960s Rolex.. it's gold and steel, doesn't make a ticking sound, looks great, feels great in the hand, quality workmanship... but... it doesn't keep accurate time worth a damn.  I never wear it, not even for the bling factor.

I check the time with my iPhone... much more accurate and versatile.. plus it can take pictures.

you guys are very much fun..... i'd prefer a Rolex than an iPhone , no matter if it doesn't keep accurate time..... you can always take timeless pictures with every camera .....no  ????  

Regards, Gianluca

If you want a good story about Rolexes and photographers check out Tim Page.

I don't remember the exact specifics, but he lost a Rolex in the fishpond or decorative pond in Vietname in the 60s. I think it may have been blown off of him.

And there is sat for over 20 years.

He went back in the 80s or 90s and they somehow found the watch in the pond.
I believe he wound it up ad it worked.

The story is in his biography Page After Page.

I believe the true story was he went back to the village where he had lost the watch in the pond, and they served him a huge carp for dinner.  When he cut open the fish, there inside it was his watch! He put it on his wrist and wound it, and it worked as well as the day he lost it...

Well, that's how the story should have gone, anyway

J.

 Joe Pineapples's gear list:Joe Pineapples's gear list
Ricoh GR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
meagre offerings
Senior MemberPosts: 3,577Gear list
Like?
Re: The true story about the Rolex...
In reply to Joe Pineapples, May 28, 2013

jtan163 wrote:

janlu wrote:

Jim Radcliffe wrote:

Joe Pineapples wrote:

On the other hand, a cheap modern digital watch is probably better as a timepiece in every measurable way than a 1960s Rolex, but there is still something nice about the Rolex...

J.

I actually have a 1960s Rolex.. it's gold and steel, doesn't make a ticking sound, looks great, feels great in the hand, quality workmanship... but... it doesn't keep accurate time worth a damn.  I never wear it, not even for the bling factor.

I check the time with my iPhone... much more accurate and versatile.. plus it can take pictures.

you guys are very much fun..... i'd prefer a Rolex than an iPhone , no matter if it doesn't keep accurate time..... you can always take timeless pictures with every camera .....no  ????  

Regards, Gianluca

If you want a good story about Rolexes and photographers check out Tim Page.

I don't remember the exact specifics, but he lost a Rolex in the fishpond or decorative pond in Vietname in the 60s. I think it may have been blown off of him.

And there is sat for over 20 years.

He went back in the 80s or 90s and they somehow found the watch in the pond.
I believe he wound it up ad it worked.

The story is in his biography Page After Page.

I believe the true story was he went back to the village where he had lost the watch in the pond, and they served him a huge carp for dinner.  When he cut open the fish, there inside it was his watch! He put it on his wrist and wound it, and it worked as well as the day he lost it...

Well, that's how the story should have gone, anyway

J.

I prefer your version Joe.

pc

 meagre offerings's gear list:meagre offerings's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
meland
Senior MemberPosts: 3,279
Like?
Re: Something I know about the Mini M...
In reply to Tapper123, May 28, 2013

Tapper123 wrote:

...I know I won't be able to afford one.

I suspect Leica's business model is deliberately to make most of their products unaffordable for most.  That high price, coupled with an undoubted level of quality of course, is what makes Leica attractive to some.

Given the very low volumes that Leica produces, they probably have got the balance about right in terms of price and volume.  Assume an M9 sold for say 30% less, would Leica really be able to sell significantly more of them?  I rather doubt it.

But then an M9 or 240 is unique, sort of.  You either get it or you don't but at least it sits in a position in the market where it doesn't really have any competition, not from other cameras anyway.  The real difficulty for Leica is in making a product at 'affordable' prices that is of interest to new buyers and to people who want a camera as a picture making tool as opposed to buying into a kind of legend.  Once you introduce a product that in terms of functionality competes head on with Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. it can only command a certain price premium based on the perceived additional level of quality and the Leica name.  And the question then is whether that price premium can be sufficient to generate enough profit with the relatively tiny volumes that Leica are able to make and therefore sell.  And if the product is simply a badge engineered Panasonic then how many people will be prepared to pay extra for it in any case?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
docvale
Regular MemberPosts: 186Gear list
Like?
Re: Something I know about the Mini M...
In reply to meland, May 28, 2013

Leica is like Ferrari, or some super high-end audio companies: little production numbers, no-compromise concept, all numbers sold at the release on the market.

Other companies go for different strategies. Keeping the parallel with high-performance audio (another big passion of mine), I can state that if Panasonic would have produced nowadays for the first time the legendary Technics SL-1200 (a rather affordable turntable) it would have not sold at <$1k (such as just before being discontinued) but probably at 5x that price. But Panasonic made a design with an R&D investment that was predicted to be covered by millions of sales. And that is what has occurred: I'm speaking about the very best seller of the entire history of audio.

The main difference is between niche vs mass market. Leica belongs to the former group, and that is intrinsic to its nature. An affordable Leica is an oxymoron: they might gain some sales, but they would loose their niche-status and, with that, a chunk of customers.

 docvale's gear list:docvale's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
meagre offerings
Senior MemberPosts: 3,577Gear list
Like?
Re: Something I know about the Mini M...
In reply to docvale, May 28, 2013

docvale wrote:

Leica is like Ferrari, or some super high-end audio companies: little production numbers, no-compromise concept, all numbers sold at the release on the market.

Other companies go for different strategies. Keeping the parallel with high-performance audio (another big passion of mine), I can state that if Panasonic would have produced nowadays for the first time the legendary Technics SL-1200 (a rather affordable turntable) it would have not sold at <$1k (such as just before being discontinued) but probably at 5x that price. But Panasonic made a design with an R&D investment that was predicted to be covered by millions of sales. And that is what has occurred: I'm speaking about the very best seller of the entire history of audio.

The main difference is between niche vs mass market. Leica belongs to the former group, and that is intrinsic to its nature. An affordable Leica is an oxymoron: they might gain some sales, but they would loose their niche-status and, with that, a chunk of customers.

an affordable leica isnt a oxymoron, its a certified market winner if it was what the market lacked.

lt would only gain customers, probably many many more than they have now, yes, it may lose a little of its niche reputation, although it would still have the M9s, the M240s and the MMs, plus all that lovely but very expensive glass, which will always be niche due to the high prices.

pc

 meagre offerings's gear list:meagre offerings's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
docvale
Regular MemberPosts: 186Gear list
Like?
Re: Something I know about the Mini M...
In reply to meagre offerings, May 28, 2013

meagre offerings wrote:

an affordable leica isnt a oxymoron, its a certified market winner if it was what the market lacked.

lt would only gain customers, probably many many more than they have now, yes, it may lose a little of its niche reputation, although it would still have the M9s, the M240s and the MMs, plus all that lovely but very expensive glass, which will always be niche due to the high prices.

pc

Of course.

I meant switching production strategy, dumping a segment of camera bodies which are sold at sky-high prices and focusing on products that would be placed on a less expensive price range.

But if the Leica Mini will be what has been rumored on the Leica Rumors website, honestly I wouldn't see a breakthrough that would deserve $3k... I'd rather invest on APS-C based mirrorless systems.

 docvale's gear list:docvale's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads