Leica teases 'Mini M' for 11th June release

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.

Another big thing that rangefinders have is paralax error.

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

Thanks for playing.

@ 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!

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.

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.

@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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.)

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

> 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.

> 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.

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

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.

@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.

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.

> 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

@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.

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.

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.