Leica teases 'Mini M' for 11th June release: Digital Photography Review

Leica M sets the standard of shutter noise in many US courtrooms

Read more on LeicaRumors.com: http://leicarumors.com/2013/05/02/leica-m-the-only-camera-allowed-in-many-us-courtrooms.aspx/#ixzz2Usc1f100

0 upvotes

Compared to a Fuji X, the M9 is might loud.

The film Ms were nice and quiet.

The Sony RX1 would also beat a digital M. No, the new M isn't real quiet either.

Bet the idea is left over from film days.

0 upvotes

Saw a preview of this new Leica on another site... a fixed zoom and only an the back viewing screen for a viewfinder? Puleeeze, give me a break - AND AN OPTICAL VIEWFINDER! Oh, and it's three times the price of an XPro1 and many times more than an X100S!!! Panasonic will have a non-red dot version too for far less. Just when I thought Fuji had pushed Leica in the right direction, they show that Teutonic resolve to dig their heels into the dirt and stay in the bunker!

0 upvotes

T3--

I wrote that focusing with a rangefinder is "often" faster than with a DSLR, not always faster as you implied I claimed.

Specifically in lowlight the rangefinder system is often faster, particularly if you feel that you'd rather not use the disruptive focus assist light on various digital cameras--SLR, mirrorless, P+S.

Being able to see what's just outside the frame is often really helpful. (Though yes most don't shoot with lenses beyond about 90mm on a rangefinder--it's not a camera for shooting close ups of distant action sports.)

I don't get the sense that you have much, or any, experience with a rangefinder.

1 upvote

This constant freeze up during posting, much more frequent now with GearCrap, equals double posts, with at least one, like the above, in the wrong place.

0 upvotes

I think the Holy Grail here is a reasonably compact full frame Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens (EVIL) camera with autofocus lenses that can also be focused manually in a practical way. Perhaps an optional model with an additional optical rangefinder can be offered as well. I think it was smart for Fuji to offer the EVF only X-E1 and it would be smart for Leica to follow suite. Seeing what Sony has done with the full frame RX1, which is significantly smaller and lighter than my OM-D (which is small and light enough as it is) it seems like this is a reasonable goal. I guess it doesn't matter who produces it first, but I don't think I'll ever be able to pay Leica money.

0 upvotes

What a load.

0 upvotes

It will be Leica X2 - in the big case. 18MP APS-C. It is all on what Leica is capable

0 upvotes

It's a 4/3rds mirrorless built in partnership with Panasonic. You can get it bundled with the 25mm f/1.4 Leica D lens.

It won't be full-frame, and it won't be apsc.

You heard it here first.

0 upvotes

Sure, but somehow those Panasonic "Leica" lenses never quite equal the best Leica M lenses. (And I think the Panasonic Leica lenses plenty good.)

I'll assume you have Leica M lenses, well there are adapters for things like the Sony Nex system and then there's the Epson R-D1 (kinda of an old APSC sensor, but decent).

0 upvotes

There are so many mirrorless alternatives already that I don't think I would be prepared to pay the Leica-premium just to get a fullframe sensor, even if I had the money to buy Leica. Then again, Leica has managed to sell rebranded Panasonic compacts for years, so for some people the red dot is probably worth the premium. I have an M3, and if I would ever go digital Leica it feels like I would want the rangefinder.

0 upvotes

Sure, but somehow those Panasonic "Leica" lenses never quite equal the best Leica M lenses. (And I think the Panasonic Leica lenses plenty good.)

I'll assume you have Leica M lenses, well there are adapters for things like the Sony Nex system and then there's the Epson R-D1 (kinda of an old APSC sensor, but decent).

0 upvotes

Leica makes beautiful cameras, but this one looks boxy and hard to handle.

F.

4 upvotes

"You're holding it wrong."

2 upvotes

It's for the bellows, silly. Everything will be revealed on June 11.

0 upvotes

I'd be happy with a modification to the Leica X2 that adds a zoom lens. I don't need interchangeable lenses, since the Leica Vario-Sumicron zooms e.g. on the LX5 have fast f2.0 apertures.

And even if the price is not immediately affordable, one can always wait about 2 years until the model gets into the 2nd hand market.

The current generation of cameras are, in my view, so good that I'd be happy to pick one up 2nd hand in a few years time. Once you hit 16MP, there's no need to get 24, 36MP. Generally, the top of the range cameras now have reached a plateau where improvements are minor. We ourselves just have to get on with the artistic side now.

1 upvote

I agree, my M8 has more than enough resolution just could do with lower noise in the shadows and better high ISO. You are right about the other stuff as well. I came to the M8 from m4/3 and Fuji X cameras and have found the manual focus only approach to be no handicap whatsoever. We live in a camera world that is obsessed with features but largely ignores the important question of the capabilities such features could bring (or not). I see very few features that actually produce a real capability benefit. Even something like AF is only really a benefit in high end DSLR cameras that can focus really quickly and track subject movement.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

@NJHr '"Even something like AF is only really a benefit in high end DSLR cameras that can focus really quickly and track subject movement."

Really? I shoot weddings and portraits, sometimes for hours on end, mostly of stationary or slow-moving subjects, and I find it EXTREMELY beneficial that I don't have to MANUALLY focus every one of my shots. AF, even on static objects, is a great convenience that allows our brains to concentrate on other aspects of photography, like composition and exposure. And AF is great for tired, older eyes, and alleviates eye fatigue.

To say that "AF is only really a benefit in high end DSLR cameras that can focus really quickly and track subject movement" is really silly and narrow-minded. In fact, I'd say that AF is just as important for lower-end DSLRs where you usually don't have the best, brightest, largest, highest-magnification viewfinders, and where accurate manual focus is often very difficult and unreliable, not to mention fatiguing.

2 upvotes

T3--

The rangefinder system is often faster to focus than the AF systems on DSLRs. You should try it--for more than a few hours-- before you dismiss it.

A big thing that rangefinders have, that no SLR has, is being able to see what's immediately outside the image area.

0 upvotes

Another big thing that rangefinders have is paralax error.

He shoots, he scores! Back of the net! GOOOAAALLL!

Thanks for playing.

0 upvotes

@ HowaboutRAW- "A big thing that rangefinders have, that no SLR has, is being able to see what's immediately outside the image area."

I love how rangefinder fans say this is such an advantage with rangefinders, when in reality it's just a positive spin on the fact that you're forced to frame an image using frame lines that only cover a small fraction of the actual viewfinder. The longer the focal length, the tinier your frame is compared to the actual viewfinder. Many might say that this is simply a waste of viewfinder area.

As for rangefinder focusing being faster than DSLR AF, I think that's certainly a dubious claim, at best. There's nothing in a rangefinder manual focus system that magically makes it faster than any other manual focusing system, let alone modern DSLR AF. Heck even some mirrorless AF systems are far faster and more accurate than rangefinder focusing. Look at Oly's touch focus, where you just touch the screen and that area snaps into focus. Super fast!

0 upvotes

T3--

I wrote that focusing with a rangefinder is "often" faster than with a DSLR, not always faster as you implied I claimed.

Specifically in lowlight the rangefinder system is often faster, particularly if you feel that you'd rather not use the disruptive focus assist light on various digital cameras--SLR, mirrorless, P+S.

Being able to see what's just outside the frame is often really helpful. (Though yes most don't shoot with lenses beyond about 90mm on a rangefinder--it's not a camera for shooting close ups of distant action sports.)

I don't get the sense that you have much, or any, experience with a rangefinder.

0 upvotes

I see the GearCrap sign-in is still screwing with comments sign-in.
Get real guys, it's not 1998 anymore. And no in 2013 not everyone wants to share on Amazon, GearCrap, FBook, Twitter etc.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

1 upvote

I have to absolutely agree with you here. The whole "sign in with..." thing is tired and kitsch. If it interferes with actual functionality it then goes beyond just annoying. Time to end it.

0 upvotes

A cheap (/reasonably priced) one.

0 upvotes

I'd go for the version described in the lead: a version of the M 240 with a built-in EVF in place of the rangefinder. Leica's unique strengths are its small but outstanding lenses, the full-frame M 240 sensor which can accommodate them without vignetting or magenta corners, and its elegant design. But for many photographers the rangefinder mechanism is an anachronism. It is expensive, delicate, space-consuming, inaccurate (compared to magnification and focus peaking), and useless for most wide-angle (< 28 mm), macro, and telephoto (> 135 mm) shooting. For the first time, the combination of a CMOS sensor and an EVF makes the rangefinder mechanism dispensable. For those photographers who aren't attached to rangefinder focusing, why not provide all of Leica's other advantages in a smaller, lighter, more robust, less expensive, and more elegant package? That is what Fuji did with the XE1, and it's successful both in sales and in reviews...

0 upvotes

Mini, APC. Is justa X2 with interchangable lens? Leica sees the mirrorless market. Leica sees sales. It may just use M lens. No AF. Oh well it is just 3/4 of a month away. I can wait.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Those who have used older 35mm camera lenses on a 4/3 camera understand the appeal of this camera form factor. For example I use Leica M lenses on a 4/3 camera but have to pay the price of doubling the effective focal length. An M mount camera with a full frame sensor and manual focusing based on the LCD is quite appealing. Simple adapters theoretically will allow any lens of any brand to focus to infinity. The need for manual exposure control is a plus. The cons are that it is nearly impossible to focus on an LCD in daylight and the Leica price premium will render the camera unaffordable to most users.

0 upvotes

My friend, learn a bit about mirrorless cameras. I've focused NEXs using the screen, in daylight, as fast or faster than my Leicas. You seem stuck in early 2010.

0 upvotes

"The cons are that it is nearly impossible to focus on an LCD in daylight..."

A bit of rear LCD shading goes a low way. Besides, it all depends on just how bright the daylight is, and from what direction its coming from. I'd say most serious photographers avoid shooting in harsh bright daylight anyways. Plus, Leica does sell a Leica-branded detachable hotshoe-mounted EVF that I'm sure they'd love to see people. So if this new camera has no built-in viewfinder, then I'd say there's a very good chance it will accept an external EVF. Thus, no need for the rangefinder.

0 upvotes

When a product model called Mini. It would be smaller and less function. When it named with M. It should have the M mount. I guess it is manual focus with the M mount, cannot use R lenses without adapter, no rangefinder, focusing with high resolution live view lcd display panel, with focusing aid indicator, optional Visofles EVF2, metal cast body, less weight and smaller size than Leica M, still full frame and same resolution as Leica M, price about USD4500. Just guess, don't be too serious.

0 upvotes

M mount because it has a letter M on it's name? Micro M? Nano M?

0 upvotes

M = M mount? Then why don't the Nano M and Micro M have an M mount? Clearly, the "M" doesn't have much to do with the M mount anymore. The "M" is just marketing now. "M-mount" will still refer to the Leica mount. But "M" alone (without "-mount") no longer denotes the M mount.

0 upvotes

T3--

The Panasonic LX7 is not a Leica M camera. Nor is the Leica version (D-Lux 6) likely to sport an M--no matter what this silly marketing poster states.

M cameras take M mount lenses sans adapter.

0 upvotes

@HowaboutRAW - Why don't you tell that to Leica, because apparently they haven't received your memo. Why don't you go to Leica's own Facebook page and take a look: Leica M, Mini M, Micro M, Nano M.

https://www.facebook.com/LeicaCamera

M, M, M, M, on cameras that aren't using the M mount lenses. Maybe when you become CEO of Leica, you can run it the way you want. But until then, I think Leica and you have a difference of opinion regarding the use of the "M". Apparently, Leica doesn't mind being a little more liberal with their policy regarding the use of the letter M.

0 upvotes

T3--

I don't go by FBook postings, and barely have an account--there is no need to tell FBook what interests me. I'll wait until I see an X2 (or D-Lux 6) with an M on it. Didn't notice it on the X2 I've seen.

So on the B+H website, neither the X2 or the D-Lux 6 have the letter "M"--there's a red dot.

So I'll trust an actual photogear site not some FBook posting.

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

T3--

That Leica-FBook poster, reproduced above, also doesn't have "Ms" on the cameras that don't take M mount lenses, so there's only an "M" on the Leica M so far.

A red dot is not the same as an "M" here.

0 upvotes

Lots of lens development and there are already excellent lenses for the Olympus, Samsung and Fuji mirrorless system.

0 upvotes

Problem for me though is:

Olympus: Great that they have in camera image stabilization, why doesn't everyone? Also cool designs.. But damn four-thirds :/

Samsung: Possibly the best alternative? Would had been great with in camera image stabilization rather than paying for it over and over again. No problem if the camera was bigger because of that.

Fuji: Possibly somewhat more expensive? But more importantly they so far haven't cared about video and I don't want a camera who can only do half of the tasks. There's no excuse. Haters gonna hate.

0 upvotes

aliquis:

Just to be clear I was stating reasons that Leica would have for NOT developing a new mirrorless system with newly engineered AF Leica lenses.

Those three manufactures make excellent lenses. And Sony may catch up some day. And Panasonic is most of the way there.

So yes, Leica could do it and and body based IS, but I think it unlikely.

None of this invalidates your points about those mirrorless systems. I too find the 24fps video system in the Fuji X cameras very odd. Frankly it looks like the frame rate varies.

I'm glad that Samsung has mostly worked out the buffer problem with the NX300, but something is lacking in the image quality of the raw samples that I've shot with that body. So better high ISO performance seems to have been achieved at a price. (You can bet I'll check with a MF Zeiss lens on an NX300 body.) Here's where I wish Samsung would go with fewer pixels. They already have much better lenses than Sony and the best Samsung lenses beat Fuji.

0 upvotes

Just so long as we never see the Leica name/logo emblazoned on a smart phone, I'm still OK. If that ever happens I'll most likely go barracuda fishing with my old M lens caps.

0 upvotes

Yeah, well, people used to say the same thing about the Leica name/logo emblazoned on any digital camera, let alone compact digital cameras that are simply re-branded Panasonic digicams. But obviously, that's all water under the bridge now.

0 upvotes

T3--

And until about 2003 digital couldn't match film.

0 upvotes

I can't see how a no-af, no-rf camera could provide quick and accurate focusing. Digital manual focusing aids are great, but are they reliable and fast enough to be the sole focus control? Sure, the Ricoh GXR did it, but that was 600$ add on to an already existing camera, amongst other modules that have AF.
An all new interchangable lens, APS-C, AF camera would make much more sense.

0 upvotes

Leicas are beautiful, solidly engineered cameras...heritage quality is what sells Leicas, that and a reputation for glass of supreme quality. Keep these things Leica please.
It needs manual controls and a viewfinder, and it needs to take pictures that stand with the best of the rest. Then I'll buy one.
Or I would if I had the patience to save for long enough.
Which I don't so I'll probably be staying with my Nikon/Fuji combo and my son will have to buy his own.

0 upvotes

It seems difficult for Leica to design a camera, more or less having the electronics on board, just up to a mainstream level. It was Jenoptik that did the job using, let me express it carefully, a bit peculiar sensors. I admit Leica stands for a solid, puristic + stylish design but so many things didn't evolve in a sense you can take this still serious at such a price level... Look at the LCD of this famous M? The data you get in the RF? Yes, their lenses are the best in class. Or is it Zeiss? It's a matter of credibility and I don't know what to think of a stripped down version of the too basic M at an outrageous price level. From a different angle: is this Mini M the ultimate proof Leica is facing a too strong competition from far more competent manufacturers? This is not really where the market has been waiting for, instead a true 'up to date' M @ half the price would have done miracles. Now I'm afraid that Fuji, Sony, Olympus,... will take over what was always so precious to Leica!

0 upvotes

The Leica rangefinder has at least since the 80's been a camera for purists. Making it into a competitor for Canon and Nikon "do-everything" DSLR's destroys that idea. I think it would be a good idea if they would stick with a very basic M camera, maybe even without a color LCD display. Just a small menu display, and no connectors like the ME.
A second line of camera's, without a rangefinder but Live-view and an electronic viewfinder could excist alongside that M.

0 upvotes

Three years ago, there was no true competition for Leica. But now high end mirror less camera's have become a hype and the competitors are far more competent technology-providers than Leica. It is not the red logo that let you make better pictures, but R&D, more advanced technology will move you into competences you did not have before. Better sensors, more sensitivity, higher ISO competences, increased dynamics vs competition, precise metering systems, overall camera speed, hi-res viewfinders and unfortunately, also AF. If Sony fits the next gen RX1-concept with interchangeable Zeiss-lenses and a decent EVF the M is in very serious trouble. If Fujifilm releases the X-Pro2, most people will look over Leica due to its price. I only mention those two but I'm sure there is a lot more in the pipeline in even the next year. Leica needs a further technology boost, lower their silly prices and partner up even more with f.i. Panasonic to achieve this.

0 upvotes

Between FF RF Leica and X2 we can expect two (although non-RF) things (considering M8 already exists):
-kinda Pentax K-01
-kinda Sony RX1 (with interchangeble M mount?!)
I would choose RX1...
By the way, what does "M" mean associated with "micro" and "nano"?
So in the "M" line of cameras we'll have Leica on one side and mini, micro and nano on the other. Or something like that...

0 upvotes

some entrepreneur could use all these ideas to build the perfect camera of this millenium...

2 upvotes

I think the only successful product would be a stripped down full frame mirrorless camera that took M-mount lenses.

Maybe they could do away with the rangefinder (kinda radical, but frankly the Ricoh GXR M-mount module proved you can do this) to cut costs and size.

Hopefully what it won't be would be either an aps-c version of the M, or some fixed lens X100 clone. There are already cameras out there that fill that niche. I hope Leica are brave and aren't worried about cannibalizing M sales and produce a decent camera.

I've been wanting an excuse to invest in a set of Leica primes, I hope they give me it.

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting

1 upvote

I agree, but I'm waiting this from another brand than Leica. Actually I'm waiting for the Digital version of the Minolta CLE.

0 upvotes

DustyWalker:

There's the Epson R-D1, that's an APSC sensored Leica M mount rangefinder.

First shipped in about 2005, there are 3 versions.

0 upvotes

A proper Leica mirroless system camera, with Autofocus would be a huge step, I don't think manual focus EVF will work well enough , which means new lenses and developing a the electronics to drive them

Although Sony and Fuji are must have them rattled.
Are they really going to launch a full on system camera into that "space" arguably they should do, M series is a bit like the turntable in HIFI or the Crocodile, the dinosaur that survived.
just hope for their sake they don't loose the plot completely and do a Hassleblad looney, that would be sad

0 upvotes

attomole:

There are many Leica M lenses in existence, big user base, even the not optically great ones are very good, then there are a lot of other manufacturers' M mount lenses--including Zeiss. So those are good reasons to keep the M system going--and it's not hard to manually focus rangefinders.

Then yes, a Leica mirrorless system with specially built lenses would probably sell and be good to use, however it takes a lot of development time and monies to design those new AF lenses. The Leica camera/lens company is not big and was nearly bankrupt 5 of 6 years ago.

Remember then that Panasonic did some Japanese Leica lenses for the 4/3rds system. And then Fuji, Olympus, and Samsung all make excellent lenses for their mirrorless systems. So Leica has serious competition in this department and already started down a partner path.

0 upvotes

HowaboutRAW:
Thanks but I'm waiting for FF. This is the reason why I mentioned the Minolta CLE.

0 upvotes

DW-

Repeating myself from elsewhere: For an M body a full frame is hard without that special curved micro lens array in front of the sensor--so far that's Leica Ms only.

In other words a big reason so many DSLR manufactures went the APSC sized sensor: Vignetting.

And yes full frame has more vignetting problems, particularly with fast lenses.

Leica/Kodak made a special effort to solve this starting with the Leica M8--they developed a curved micro lens array that sits directly in front of the sensor and bends light to the pixels--more of a bend the further the pixel is away from the center of the sensor. The M9 had a similar lens array. (And I imagine the new M does too.)

0 upvotes

I go back on what I wrote earlier. Like some others here, I'm starting to think now it will most likely be a FF- M camera with the rangefinder mechanism lobbed off.

0 upvotes

It's a bit boxy but it looks like it's got a red dot on the front so I'll probably want one...

0 upvotes

Great. I thought it was a stupid idea to have Live-view in a rangefinder camera in the first place!
It would be smart if Leica made a ME type camera (rangefinder with only the essentials) and a Live-view camera both with the 24Mp sensor.
What's the point spending thousands of dollars on a rangefinder if you're only using Live-view and R-lenses?

0 upvotes

Totally agree. I could care less about live view on a rangefinder camera. Give me a budget m-mount, even if it's aps-c sized. I love my R-D1, but it's definitely aged.

0 upvotes

And don't forget that you pay more for a M-lens because it has a rangefinder tube built in. An extra waste of money if you use the "M" as a Live-view camera.

0 upvotes

Monochrom:

Quote: "rangefinder tube built in"? And this item adds cost? My M lenses, Konica and Leica, simply had an angled piece of metal that served to move the an arm in the body that changed the rangefinder settings. I can't imagine that piece of metal cost much, and the engineering was paid off in the 1960s.

There are plenty of not particularly expensive M mount lenses, a few of the not great ones were even made by Leica.

0 upvotes

It's not so much the metal tube itself but the calibration of the tube so it delivers the right setting to the rangefinderarm in the camera. That's a process that has to be done for each individual lens by hand.

0 upvotes

Monochrom:

That's engineering that was worked out decades ago. One 50mm M mount lens focuses the same as the next (yes there's some macro lens exception).

Remember: Konica, Voightlander, Minolta, etc all made M mount lenses that focused correctly. And it's not like there was some extra $500 premium added to each lens' price tag.

0 upvotes

An interchangeable lens variation of the X2 with built in EVF I think. Hopefully with an updated sensor incorporating phase-detection elements for faster AF - thats the trend now right?

0 upvotes

Considering Leica's long history of partnering with Panasonic..... I think it is highly likely that the Mini M will be a Leica branded version of the expected Pansonic GX2... but selling for twice as much.

Naturally, it will come with a longer warranty, a nice leather case, and much better customer service. But it will cost you over $2,000.

And wouldn't it really be great to see some high end Leica lenses designed for M4/3... complete with AF?

OK... maybe I got carried away. But it is a nice fantasy.

7 upvotes

I got the impression this is more a lower cost vehicle for proper M lenses. I'd be surprised if Leica launched into Micro Four Thirds having shunned it for so long. Besides, other than lower end compacts, Leica has made a point of going its own way in recent years, with the Panasonic relationship being increasingly less important to them.

0 upvotes

It's not quite true that Leica has shunned Micro Four Thirds, since they are members of the consortium.
And don't forget that Leica released a Four Thirds DSLR, the Digilux 3, which was a rebranded Panasonic DMC-L1. Now Panasonic are about to release a m4/3 camera that pays homage to the L1, and I'm pretty sure we'll see a Leica version too. Remains to be seen, though, if the 'mini M' is that camera or something else.

0 upvotes

I really have to agree with Revenant on that.

If this Mini M isn't a rebranded Panasonic, then it will appear as a Digi-Something.

It seems pretty obvious by now that this whole "M family" membership thing does not require a camera to have an M mount. Of the three cameras and a box in the photo, only one of them has an M mount.

0 upvotes

I'm betting smaller than a breadbox.
And more money than it's worth.

0 upvotes

It seems unlikely, but I'd love to see an APS-C Leica M with a fully coupled rangefinder for under $3,000 (under $2,000 could actually make it relevant). It could be the digital equivalent of a Leica CL; I'm sure Cosina would be happy to build it for them.

6 upvotes

A Cosina digital CL would be a dream.

0 upvotes

COSINA did it !!

I have 2 Epson RD1
and it is dream and reality for far less than 2000$ both !!!

so what :)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

4 upvotes

le_alain:

Shooting raw what do you think the top ISO for your Epson is?

And which variation do you have: R-D1, R-D1s, or R-D1x?

0 upvotes

Yes of course, RAW only to get the best of the RD1,
so I have the pleasure to never use the LCD for any setup !

Till 1600 it's was a good camera, and still not ridiculus today: Better than a M9, worst than a M or a Nex 6 or D7100 or any FF or recent APSC, but very usable to 1600, great to 800.

I use one only with uwa (12mm with a finder) and other for my Voigtlander or Leica lense , from 21 to 90mm) x1.5 of couse, it's the subject of the post !
Both are RD1 (with RDs firmware) so really RD1s.
RD1x can use memory card >2GB, but you con't turn the screen, so it could'nt be a RD1x for me.
I also would like a new RD2 with a D5200 sensor, or a sensor better suited for wide angle (but corner fix a great)

1 upvote

le_alain

Yes that Toshiba sensor is promising.

Another manufacturer could use those Voightlander M bodies too--doesn't have to be Epson.

Sony must have the Konica designs for the Hexar RF, and then separately Sony would have the designs for the older Minolta variation of the M rangefinder.

Full frame is hard without that special curved micro lens array in front of the sensor--so far that's Leica Ms only.

Good to read about good experiences with the R-D1s. Yes, it would be a good idea if other manufactures caught on to the idea of not having to look at screens to change settings.

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting

1 upvote

Have we forgotten the M8? APS-H sensor with limited high ISO. Most likely an EVF with M mount and R lens adapters. 20 MP max because they just introduced the expensive M 240. Price, $3,000.

0 upvotes

Yes,
and in case of Cosina Voigtlander, absolutly nothing to change in the old design of the RD1, and Konoka Exar should be great too .
Nohardware and to developp, it's great as it is!
Just put a newer elctronic inside!
Leica has good result with their new sensor in FF, but with inside RAW/lens correction. I am OK with APS-C option.
With the RD1, the dng correction is done if necessary with cornerfix, iin DNG, and I can use the 12mm with satisfaction.
The new CV 21mm f1.8, works great and is developped for these sensor (perhaps retrofocus?) and doesn't need any coorection.
Just need 2 varaintes of the camera, with this view finder, and a wider one, till 15mm or 21mm.

0 upvotes

I didn't forget the M8, I refuse it and chose the RD1 over it, because:
- you need the LCD screen to change any shooting setting, even to adjust +- EV !
- I don't like the M8 color at all, it's unpredictable. sometimes great, sometimes totally out.
- it's really noisy, and use any cornerfix on a color picture is a pain .
- you need the UV filter for every lense when doing color
The sensor, the RD1 give better color, lower noise, and a greater ergonomy !
- and today, still more expensive

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Dixondeuxyeux:

No I didn't forget about the Leica M8 and I give credit to Leica/Kodak for the curved micro lens array in front of the sensor.

However, the Epson R-D1 shipped out before the Leica M8. And as le_alain points out not having to go through menus is a really a nice feature. (Given that I only have a few jpegs from the Epson and a few DNGs from the M8, I defer to le_alain's judgement about colour.)

0 upvotes

le_alain:

The rumor is that Konica developed a digital variation of the Hexar RF, but then didn't produce it, then came the merger with Minolta, then as you know the camera/lens department went to Sony.

So with a new sensor, new LCD--so not like Epson--new processor Sony should be able to ship something based on what Konica developed for the Hexar.

0 upvotes

HowaboutRAW
Interesting news !
If there is a range finder body with a Sony sensor, it will be great!
If we can live witout LCD, EVF ... or at least an OVF-EVF as the Fuji X-Pro.

0 upvotes

le_alain:

I wouldn't go so far as to call it news; it's a years old rumor.

(I suspect Sony doesn't see the market, because they're so attached to things like auto focus.)

I'd be happy with a M mount rangefinder with a good high ISO APSC sensor--and new image processing computer.

0 upvotes

I'd like to see a MILC like the OM-D in either APS-C or MFT, with EVF of course.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

MFT is well below the threshold we are looking for here.
APS-C would be nice but Leica can't compete head on with Fuji and Sony, unless its a fixed lens zoom of course.
APS-H or FF is expected.

2 upvotes

Why is m4/3 below the threshold? Leica did release a Four Thirds DSLR (a rebranded Panasonic). Just because they have positioned the 'mini M' between the full-frame M and the APS-C X2, it doesn't mean that the sensor size can't be smaller. Maybe they just consider an ILC to be more high-end than a fixed-lens compact?

0 upvotes

Autofocus? Is that so difficult?

1 upvote

Autofocus would be difficult if the camera takes their M-mount lenses.

3 upvotes

massimogori:

What CFynn wrote, seconded.

The X2 and S2 both have autofocus.

1 upvote

there is no mount.

1 upvote

Let me rephrase my point: is that so difficult to make Leica lenses AF? Seems to me that quite a few companies in Japan already moved from manual focus to autofocus...

1 upvote

Leica M photographers consider RF MF as largely superior to AF.

you could do the M mount with a new AF system as well but lets see

0 upvotes

In my opinion they have to, Harold. If it has to cost less than the M, the mini most probably will not have the rangefinder and will just feature the rear LCD. In lack of AF lenses it would be like focusing with the ground glass of a view camera (with the lower resolution and dynamic range of the LCD, of course). Not the best tool for street photography.

By the way, that was the reason why I preferred the Fuji X-pro1 over the new M.

0 upvotes

The Fuji X lenses are not as good as good Leica M lenses.

No, it is not exactly possible to make M lenses auto focus. (Contax did an AF moving sensor body for manual focus Contax/Zeiss lenses.)

There is nothing in principle stopping Leica from making AF lenses for other systems, eg the S system lenses are AF.

Manual focus with a decent Leica M rangefinder is just not that hard. And in lowlight is frequently better and faster than even good AF systems.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

> And is in lowlight is frequently better and faster than even good AF systems.

Have you actually tried to use a Leica M in the dark? I borrowed a friend's with the 50mm f0.95 lens, tried to use it in a dark bar and there wasn't enough light to get a decent focus reading and even at f0.95 the shutter speed was too slow and the image was out of focus anyway

Also had my GX1 with 20mm with me. Focuses almost instantly (thanks focus assist light) and built-in flash in bounce mode, bam, done, great picture.

0 upvotes

> In lack of AF lenses it would be like focusing with the ground glass of a view camera

I'd think it work the same way as the M module for the Ricoh GXR and include various focus peaking options, most Ricoh GXR owners seem to be pretty happy using it.

0 upvotes

Andy Crowe:

Just to be clear: You do understand that one does not focus through the lens with a rangefinder system? One doesn’t get a focus reading; one matches images in a viewfinder. (And I don’t dispute that beyond ISO 1000 a Leica M9 isn’t the greatest–so even with a fast lens you could have run into exposure trouble.)

Then, well no not with a Leica M body, instead I used my Konica Hexar RF film body with my Leica F1.0 Noctilux in a very dark bar/club. So yeah, I know of what I write. Often the manual focus on rangefinders is easier/better to use than the AF system on modern DSLRs.

NB: If you’d rather not cause distraction turn off the focus assist light, in fact it never even occurred to me that one would bring up such technology.

NB2: Even fastish contrast AF systems aren’t considered particularly fast.

Just noticed, quote:
"flash...bam done", I should have started there. That means you don't know where one would use a nice lowlight reasonably quiet camera.

0 upvotes

Leica's biggest market (by far) is now wealthy people in China who will pay lots of money for high end luxury brand European goods as a status symbol. They buy and use this stuff just to show others just how affluent they are.

It will be nice of course, but I suspect this will be a camera aimed principally at that market.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting

1 upvote

How expensive is an optical rangefinder assembly really? You used to be able to buy clip on made-in-Germany optical rangefinders that fit the accessory shoe of cameras that didn't have a rangefinder. They wern't very expensive. At one time plenty of fairly inexpensive cameras had built-in rangefinder focusing too.

It is not some new technology anyone had to spend R&D money on - and Leica probably have plenty of old equiptment for making optical rangefinders.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

the clip on rangefinders as well as the cheap ones don't have parallax correction: so the image you see through the viewfinder is not identical with the image you photograph. the parallax correction makes it much more complicated and expensive

1 upvote

the rangefinder mechanism probably adds around £1,500 to the cost

0 upvotes

Oh really? I'm sure Leica want you to beleive it costs that much, but the optical viewfinder in a Cosina Voigtlander Bessa rangefinder has parallax correction - and I can buy _two_ of those cameras for "around £1,500" (for the whole body). In fact they do better than Leica as they also correct the frame size as focus changes.

Though they don't have a range finder, the optical viewfinders in the Fuji X100, X200 or XPro also have parallax correction.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting

1 upvote

They're quite anal about accuracy and durability.
And Germans with gloves on aren't cheap.

2 upvotes

Rangefinder != viewfinder.

Those clip-on viewfinders are not rangefinders as they have no kind of focus coupling with the lens.

The expensive part of the rangedfinder is the very exact tolerances required for the split-image to line up exactly with the focus of the lens.

Sure you can make them cheaply without the same tolerances, but it won't be nearly as well calibrated. Maybe that would be fine for cheap f2.8 lenses, but you'd never be able to focus properly at larger apertures.

1 upvote

Andy Crowe:

In 2002 a Leica (German made) M body retailed new for about 2000 US dollars. That price included the rangefinder. Konica and separately Minolta made M mount rangefinders, there's still a film body sold with the Zeiss name, then there are all of those Voightlander bodies, including the digital Epson R-D1, only the last one with the sensor cost a bit more than 2000 bucks. All were about 1000 bucks and under--maybe the Zeiss is a bit more.

And no there was not extra special sauce in the Leica variation of this M rangefinder system.

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

@ Andy

I'm not confusing rangefinder with viewfinder. There were clip-on rangefinders - just not coupled to the lens. They had their own distance readout and then you manually set the focus ring on the lens to the same distance.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Sadly I think Zeiss recently announced that they were discontinuing their rangefinder film cameras -which I think were made by Cosina. Many people rated the viewfinder & rangefinder in those cameras better than Leicas. The rangefinder had a longer base for a start.

You can still get the Cosina Voigtlander Bessa rangfinder cameras. I beleive the bodies cost around $700. Never seen any complaints about their rangefinders being less accurate than Leica's.

0 upvotes

Without that "expensive" rangefinder part you have to order one of these http://www.kinotehnik.com/products/lcdvf/overview with it. (99$) It is great, I ordered one for my VF-less camera. Unfortunalty my display sucks. Resolution is too low. But I can see all the subpixles really sharp.

1 upvote

I glanced at nearly all the comments and don't understand why I seem to be the only one concerned about focussing manual focus glass. That's what the rangefinder part of the M is for.

So take away the rangefinder, and you get a camera that takes manual focus lenses, without the part that helps you focus?

Let's hope it comes with some stellar focus confirmation aids.

3 upvotes

People have been using focus peaking and focus magnification on EVF/LCD digital cameras to focus manual lenses for some time now. Look it up. Focus peaking highlights in-focus areas in yellow, red, or some other color that stands out, on the LCD screen. Focus magnification gives you a highly magnified area of your image to assist in manual focus.

Both systems (focus peaking and focus magnification) are very effective, without the need for a complicated, expensive, space-hogging, and delicate rangefinder mechanism. It also means that you don't need a mechanical linkage to the manual lens, like you do with a rangefinder system. Rangefinder cameras require the lens' focusing ring/scale to be physically/mechanically connected to the optical rangefinder in the camera. Focus peaking and focus magnification, on the other hand, works with any lens. No mechanical linkage to a mechanical rangefinder mechanism required.

3 upvotes

It is time to make a FF MILC.

1 upvote

@T3 I've used focus peaking on my Ricohs and Sony's so no need to look it up, and while I'm a fan I don't see it in its current incarnation as something to rely on for every shot, all the time. Too many false positives and a bit of luck needed to nail critical focus.

We really need something much better than current standards of FP.

I can't believe you are serious about magnification, I find it useless for anything other than static product photography. I hate losing sight of the composition.

The Fuji X100S split view focus using PD sensors looks interesting on the DPR demo, but I haven't seen how well it works in practice.

0 upvotes

That is why it is not going to be interchangeable and without the rangefinder. As I mentioned in an earlier comment, Leica wouldn't simply allow use of their interchangeable lenses on any other of their cameras except the M.

0 upvotes

Unless you always put your subject in the center you need more luck nailing focus with a rangefinder than with focus peaking.

1 upvote

> It is time to make a FF MILC

Technically the M8 and above are FF MILCs. If you mean modern system with autofocus then the Sony E mount physically supports a FF sensor (see their FF E-mount video camera) so a FF NEX camera may be in the works

0 upvotes

@Najinsky - do you seriously think rangefinder focusing is any more accurate? There are all kinds of limitations associated with rangefinders. For example, rangefinders can suffer from "backlash", which is slack in the focusing mechanism. Since rangefinders don't offer TTL viewing, what the lens is focused on might be slightly different from what the rangefinder window shows. Plus, rangefinders can lose calibration because they are delicate mechanisms. Also, rangefinders simply have limits to accuracy because of their geometry. For example, the Leica 135/2.8 can't be focused reliably below f/5.6! So its rather silly that you think so much of rangefinder focusing systems, considering their limitations. Rangefinder cameras fell out of favor for a lot of good reasons.

Oh, and rangefinder cameras are so much better at critical focus for "anything other than static" subject matter? Haha. The only way you can get buy with a rangefinder for moving subjects is by zone focus anyway.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

@T3 - You have picked up on the wrong emphasis. It's not about the removal of the rangefinder, or rangefinder quirks, it's about what focus confirmation aids WILL be included. That's what will peak my interest in using this camera.

If you're truly happy with FP and magnification, I'm happy for you and good luck with your shooting.

But I don't understand why you try to turn it into an argument or debate. Your personal preferences will not be influencing my decision one jot.

I'm assuming the sensor and ergonomics will be great; the three important unknown factors are performance, size and how quickly and accurately I can achieve focus. So I'll be hoping for something a notch up from the current standards of FP and magnification.

0 upvotes

And i thought that Sony would be the first to release a FF milk! (Not that the M is not one already).

On the other hand, i still think that Sony will be the first to produce an affordable one... :)

Or could this simply be an aps-c M?

0 upvotes

Personally I think its more likely a X-2 remodeled with build in EVF and an M mount , same APS-C sensor, might be even some new lens that are electronically coupled. It would made a lot of sense. A FF Mini-M is going to eat into the M240's sale quite alright and this do not bond well with the business.

Another option might be similar but with the M240's FF sensor but no build in EVF , instead, it would allow the attachment of external / optional EVF ( same model as that for the M240 )

IMHO the really big question still is the lens / mount; would Leica dare to introduce electronic coupling into the M mount, frankly speaking it would cure a lot of issue and problem. It may even allow AF lens, sort of like Pentax K mount would allow old K manul focus lens as well as the latest DA

0 upvotes

My dream Leica camera would be, firstly, affordable, and have a full frame sensor or APS-C with a non-interchangeable 24-90 Leica zoom lens with at least f2.0 or preferably f1.4 aperture. That would cover most of my photographic needs. i.e. their X2 with zoom lens.

I am disappointed with the Sony RX1 and Leica X1, X2 series because I need a good zoom lens, rather than fixed focal length.

The Leica zoom lens on the Panasonic LX5/LX7 - Leica D-Lux 5 etc is really sharp, and I'd love a Leica camera with non-interchangeable zoom with a decent sensor size.

0 upvotes

affordable Leica? Good luck with that :)
btw, Fujifilm X-Pro is quite good.

1 upvote

Have you looked at the Fuji X-E 1 or X-Pro 1 with the 18-55mm (27-83mm FF equivalent FOV)?

2 upvotes

an affordable Leica camera would not be a dream, it would just be a Sony or a Fuji

thats not Leica's market niche

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting

1 upvote

It would go completly against Leica's business model to make an M-mount camera that is trully affordable for the average person or inexpensive.

They are in the luxury brand business - but they have a product which is much harder to forge than a LV handbag or a Rolex watch.

Of course all these things are affordable to the wealthy customers Leica is aiming for.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I don't know with a quality zoom lens on a large sensor. The best you can have with are the 24-70mm f2.8s. Or the, Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 APSC zoom lens. So you see, once you use a zoom, everything is larger and heavier, and more expensive.

0 upvotes

I wish other camera brands can capture the great looking design or Leica cameras. In my view, Fuji cameras, particularly the X-Pro 1 and X10 look fairly ugly. The X100 is passable, but not gorgeous. Sony's RX100 is svelte, Olympus OM-D too - but the Panasonic M43's are lumps of plastic. It's similar to the case where most Japanese and Taiwan PC manufacturers just can't capture the striking good looks of Apple Macs. I really like cameras that look nice.

0 upvotes

I'm not an EVF fan. I do have an x100s which I love, but shoot almost exclusively with the OVF.

Whatever Leica does, I hope an integrated OVF is an option.

1 upvote

I don't know what this camera is (or isn't). This is all conjecture. What I'm pretty confident of is that the manufacturer who first markets a reasonably affordable, small AF FF MILC with a decent feature set, a high grade built in EVF and a matched suite of four or five small sharp primes will do well. They'll be running out the door.

OTOH, it might be the second or third one. Whoever makes the first one will probably be price gouging.......

0 upvotes

If I would think like Leica or any other company, this Mini will not be interchangeable. It's like them saying if you want our lenses, then get the M. Porsche don't allow more powerful engines on their Cayman or Boxster models so that their 911's remain above those.

Based on it's physically larger size, this might probably be a full frame with a fixed, prime lens of f2.0 to f1.8. Focal length might be a bit longer than X2, 40mm or longer. Price it $1,500 above the Sony RX1 and there we have the Leica Mini.

0 upvotes

is panasonic about to release a new model then?

1 upvote

this camera is not a Panasonic, and will be made in Germany

1 upvote

If Leica produces a EVF full frame interchangeable lens camera, why would Leica price it lower than the M?

It is not a matter of cost, but a matter of how willing people are going to pay for it. There will be enough interest in an EVF Leica it make no sense to price it low.

Prepared to be underwhelm.

0 upvotes

I bet Leica is doing the same as Fuji with the X-Pro 1 and put a EVF in and get something like the Fuji X-E1. That would open up a whole new range of customers with no extra development since everything is there already.
The Name Leica M-E1.

0 upvotes

I'd love to have my way with some quality fritz engineering, shame it is a bit over priced, especially here in Aus. I hope someone in the marketing department at Leica has the cajones to explain to the engineering team that it's now the year 2013, not 2003.
They could be dominating the market in so many categories if they wanted.
This is quite the interesting snippet of news however. Curiosity piqued.

0 upvotes

I'm afraid Leica is gonna embarass itself. At this point they should only make lenses.

1 upvote

I'll take a wild stab and say you aren't a Leica owner. Don't be so positive next time, the smile is hurting my face.

9 upvotes

Why would a camera company that makes wonderful cameras which sell well stop making cameras? You read some dumb things on the internet...

2 upvotes

It won't be cheap, perhaps $1000-$1500 less than the M 240.

0 upvotes


Just Posted: Leica X2 real-world sample gallery Nov 16, 2012	Leica unveils X2 16MP premium large-sensor compact May 10, 2012	Leica invites entries for its Oskar Barnack Award 2013 Dec 10, 2012	Photokina 2012: Interview - Jesko von Oeynhausen of Leica Sep 19, 2012

	Pentax Efina Jun 3, 2013
	Olympus PEN E-P5 May 10, 2013
	Samsung NX2000 May 1, 2013
	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V Apr 24, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Apr 24, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Apr 24, 2013
	Ricoh GR Apr 17, 2013
	Samsung NX1100 Apr 11, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6 Apr 9, 2013
	Fujifilm FinePix S8400W Mar 22, 2013
	Fujifilm FinePix XP200 Mar 22, 2013

Considering switch from Nikon, to replace D700 ...	150
Sobering Sales Numbers for Mirrorless	150
New Pentax K-50 leaked	75
Hmmm AF fine tuning : Bullsh#t	72
Praise the Macro Lenses. Post your best macros ...	52
How to turn my Canon PowerShot S3 IS into a ...	42
Still no signs of an Olympus f2.8 zoom?	39
Mirrorless & DSLR Jan-April shipment & ...	39
Help me create the best 6D system on a $3500 ...	39
Selecting Camera	38
electronic first curtain shutter - on or off?	37
Sigma 60/2.8... sigma be damned (for its ...	37
Thom Hogan: DSLRs going obsolete	36
USPS... The worst mail servie in the world	34
K5(II) SD Card Door Coming Open	34
Done Deal - Switched to Fuji XE-1 from ...	32
What's Happening to Sony Stores?	31
Replacing Olympus OM-D with Fuji XE-1 or Xpro-1	30
Focal reducers, why complexity for the sake of ...	30
micro 4/3s , Owls IF	30

Leica teases 'Mini M' for 11th June release

Leica M Typ 240

Leica X2

Comments

Your email address:
Your name: