Is this the new Leica &#39;Mini M&#39;?

Yes. Then it must be true. You seen to be a reliable source. I always trust a faceless dude on internet forums that has a brand new account.

Why, just yesterday I was hanging out with the ghost of Oskar Barnack and apparently he did most of the designing.

Jun 2, 2013permalink

inthebuisness

Ha Ha, youre a funny guy JDThomas.
Wait until the 11th and see if I were right or not.
Then I will say: I rest my case.

Jun 3, 2013permalink

inthebuisness

...oh almost forgot, Im quite sure Oskar Barnack had nothing to do with the design, maybe it was your ghosts you were talking (drinking?) with ;)

Jun 3, 2013permalink

slonyer66

I know for fact that "inthebuisness" is right.
I also had it in my hands, for about 5 minutes, since I work for a prof.photostore in europe. We had a preview with Leica.
So JDThomas, maybe you shouldnt be so ignorant?

Jun 3, 2013permalink

ARB1

Sooo, I'm guessing it didn't have an EVF?

Jun 7, 2013permalink

ultimitsu

So it is a 19-45 F3.5 to F6.4, right?

if we talk about 135 equivalent why do you say 28-70 F5.25-9.6?

May 31, 2013permalink

starwolfy

no.

28-70mm F3.5 to F6.4 is correct.
The brightness of the lens is a more important detail than the "24x36" equivalent Depth of Field.

Jun 2, 2013permalink

Carbon111

Leica makes some of the best lenses in the world. Ultra-sharp even wide open.
...which really makes me question if this is real.

May 31, 2013permalink

xentar

Well, I am sure, at f/6.4 it will be ultra-sharp, even when "wide open".

May 31, 2013permalink

Carbon111

If this is real, it's a *very bad* miscalculation on Leica's part. That lens is too slow to be useful in my opinion.

I was hoping for a Leica response to the Sony RX1.

If this *is* confirmed as the new camera on the 11th, I'll use the money I've started saving on a used Summilux-M Instead. Time to replace my Cron.

Jun 2, 2013permalink

renapearl

Rumours, rumours, rumours, this hype is what helps sell the cameras. With regards to Leica making the best lenses in the world, as a Leica users I would agreed BUT the lens does have to be calibrated/true and not to mention the rangefinder being correct. I have a 75mm lens which is back in Sohms for the thirds time because of front focusing, and yes the camera has also been sent back with the lens. But like most other Leica users - we accept it!

Jun 4, 2013permalink

Cheng Bao

It's time for sony to revive DSC-R1. Sony can even keep lens unchanged

May 31, 2013permalink

guyfawkes

Absolutely. How my R1 would would work with one of Sony's latest sensors! Wow! I'll donate my R1 if Sony will do the transplant for me.

Jun 1, 2013permalink

JagK

Wait for the Panasonic at a considerably lower price without the red dot

May 31, 2013permalink

Monochrom

If it's true, this camera is a gadget, not a serious rangefinder camera. Leica will have special editions of this camera to attract "i nééd this" kinda people....

May 31, 2013permalink

On the contrary, many might call a Leica rangefinder camera an over-priced, anachronistic "gadget" catering to people more interested in mechanical gadgetry and status rather than serious photography. It's all a matter of perspective.

May 31, 2013permalink

Monochrom

Maybe, but a rangefinder is still the most precise way to focus, specialy with a wide-angle lens in dark situations.
And the overpricing is not caused by the rangefinder alone, the sensor has a lot to do with that as well. Just look at the price difference between the M and the M-E.

May 31, 2013permalink

xentar

While the above may be true, digital rangefinder bodies are unique. Mirrorles cameras with no viewfinder and slow kit lenses - not so much. Which makes the brand the only reason for a certain kind of people to buy something like this.

May 31, 2013*permalink

Not sure the survey instrument company is the same as the camera body and lens maker.

May 30, 2013permalink

jberk

They arent

May 31, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

Leica is the brand that you will not find a comparison with any other photo camera, in this site . That is maybe because you will not be able to justify that extremely high prices these things are sold. Human vanity sells high prices.
One thing though we have to admit, the logo is very attracting

P.S Dxomark camera rating is very disappointing for Leica and the amount of money someone must pay to own this piece o-fart

May 30, 2013permalink

agentul

i'd like a comparison between Leica and Hasselblad.

May 31, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

I'm afraid Leica wouldn't pass a comparison versus 500$ photo camera

May 31, 2013permalink

edbollom

Is this going to be a Lumix GX1 but with the red dot? It really is unbelievable that the v-lux range have been conning people out of there money for so long when they are exactly thesame as Panasonic's LX series but far more expensive! The lenses are great but the camera bodies are 100% style over substance.

May 30, 2013permalink

luigibozi

You cannot ask five x price for the same thing, even if you're Leica... I think it's not a GX1, although a GX1 seems to fit that box... ;)

May 30, 2013permalink

edbollom

Maybe Leica should have stuck to high quality optics and film cameras? Thier digital cameras just can't compete with the competition for the same price. Its companies like Fujifilm that are coming up with the interesting ideas now.

May 30, 2013permalink

edbollom:

There's still another manufacturer of digital M mount rangefinder bodies? Which one.

And what's the competition for the S2 system? I can think of some competitors, but they're more expensive and harder to use outside of the studio.

Leica M lenses used to cost less, as recently as about 7 years ago, but then the company shrank to one lens factory in Germany, and Leica redid a lot of lens designs.

May 30, 2013permalink

edbollom

Ok the s2 is a different story and not a camera I have experience of. But why buy an M body when you could get a Nikon d800 or canon 5d with an m adaptor and get wider dynamic range, better bit depth and higher resolution? Ok so they are well made and more compact but for me its the quality of the image that's most important.

May 31, 2013permalink

http://www.m-journey.net/wp-content/gallery/m9vsd800e-1-cameras/photo-2.jpg

edbollom:

I didn't know there was an easy way to mount an M lens on a Nikon body, those lenses have a shallower focus plain. One can mount a Leica R lens on a SLR body, but then some of the R lenses can't work with full framed bodies.

Just get a manual focus Zeiss for a Nikon body if you want near Leica image quality.

I'm not a huge advocate of Leica bodies, but right now its the only digital M system, nothing stopping another company from making a digital M rangefinder (eg Epson/Voightlander). Though Leica/Kodak worked out a curved microlens array that really helps and does mean that the M9 can do things that the D800 can't--less vignetting when a fast lens is wide open.

May 31, 2013permalink

Viggo

While I agree with Leica being overpriced, and useless with electronics, the the V-lux and LX are actually the same price, the difference in total price is because the Leica is bundled with Lightroom and/or Elements. Now that those softwares have become cheaper, it's not absolute truth anymore.

May 31, 2013permalink

starwolfy

Why buy a M instead of a D800 or a 5d Mk II ?

Maybe here is one of the reasons:

Jun 2, 2013*permalink

luigibozi

That slightly opened box (on Leica's website) seems not being able to have the zoom inside. Or maybe is a M-mount camera?!

May 30, 2013permalink

Timmbits

"According to mirrorlessrumors.com the new camera will cost 2450 Euros (~$3100). What do you make of this latest rumor? Let us know in the comments."

Someone remind me why an apsc should cost this much?

May 30, 2013permalink

Because it has a Leica red dot on it.

May 30, 2013permalink

Entropius

For that price you could get an E-M5 and a whole bunch of lenses that are a lot faster than f/6.whatever...

May 31, 2013permalink

Babka08

I may or may not buy it, if it might or might not have an f/6.4 short range zoom, or perhaps a range viewer sort of, with possibly an apsc sensor or other than that, and I am convinced it's going to have the red dot, so that's the dealbreaker for me if so because otherwise whether or not it has a battery or not that type of lens technology in history maybe.

May 30, 2013*permalink

LJ - Eljot

There is the Leica MD (1964 bis 1966) wich has also no rangefinder.

If you don't have a rangefinder use this:

http://www.kinotehnik.com/products/lcdvf/overview

it is a realy great product.

May 30, 2013permalink

Geoff Brown

I suppose Leica makes more money from surveying instruments and other precision optical devices. Cameras are not their main source of income or sales nowadays. The cameras are a luxury item for the fortunate few!

May 30, 2013*permalink

Not sure the survey instrument company is the same as the camera body and lens maker.

May 30, 2013permalink

Not sure the survey instrument company is the same as the camera body and lens maker.

May 30, 2013permalink

ManuelVilardeMacedo

I'm not so sure about that. Recently they've opened a new state of the art factory for manufacturing M and S bodies. This part of business must be doing well.

May 31, 2013permalink

ManuelVilardeMacedo:

Right and all those bodies and lenses sell out immediately.

Also confirmed elsewhere the survey instrument company is not the same.

May 31, 2013permalink

kadardr

These things are not for shooting pictures, they are for satisfying gear lust of the wealthy.

The little Ms are shamefully piggybacking the M heritage.

That is problem.

May 30, 2013permalink

Well in the picture none of the mini Ms have the letter M on the body. And in reality too. It's probably just stupid FBook marketing by Leica.

And note: No M on the bodies in the "picture" above.

May 30, 2013*permalink

xentar

3.5-6.4 with a 28-70 range? That makes the OM-D kit lens look bright in comparison.

May 30, 2013permalink

Ulfric M Douglas

That lens ... didn't I get one on the front of my G1 all those years ago?
;) Half-serious.

May 30, 2013permalink

RScharadin

(fingers crossed) I hope that the leak is only half correct in that the mini-m is more like a "non-rangefinder" M8 with the sensor size but still has the ability to change the lenses.

May 30, 2013*permalink

maniax

If you really want a leica, get a M6. It will cost as much as a rebel and although its not digital, it will make wonderful photos.

May 30, 2013permalink

hexxthalion

No it won't, you might, with it.

Jun 6, 2013permalink

architographer

How can any sub-M without RF compete the future NEX FF?

May 30, 2013permalink

Adeel-A

I agree with the people who say that the M-mini should be the M without the rangefinder. It should be a slightly more affordable system camera. Similar to how we have an entry level FX for Nikon/Canon now.
If this is indeed a fixed lens camera with a zoom, leica still is trying something different compared to Fuji(X100) and Sony(RX1). You are still getting a "Leica" and at the same time you are not reduced to only one focal length. I personally wouldn't mind a zoom (a good zoom) over a fixed lens for travelling. I recently went to Turkey and Greece and there is no way I would be ok with just one focal length, but at the same time it was annoying to switch lenses. The focal length proposed here sounds just about right. Probably not wide enough.

May 30, 2013permalink

Den Sh

You might not understand this but Leica thinks that they already have budget rangefinder (M-E). It's only that 'budget' is defined as $5000 for 2009's tech.

May 30, 2013*permalink

walkaround

If true, it is a huge disappointment, and an epic fail. Why would anyone buy this over a Canon Rebel? Leica lives or dies on its rangefinder lenses. The "mini" should've been an M240 without the rangefinder.

May 30, 2013permalink

GabrielZ

Just a slightly re-styled X2 with a fixed zoom? I hope not - more likely that zoom is a kit lens and this in fact is an interchangeable lens variation of the X series. Shame it doesn't incorporate an EVF as standard - or maybe it does...that thicker top-plate might not just be a styling flourish.

Two or three years back Leica hinted that they were looking into the APS-C interchangeable lens - mirrorless camera market. Maybe this is what they've come up with? But it'll have to be something very special to compete with the price/performance ratio of Fujifilm's offerings...but then I suppose that 'Leica' nameplate will be enough for many people.

Still, looking forward to see what they have up their sleeve.

May 30, 2013*permalink

sproketholes

I dont know how this company is still in business.

May 30, 2013permalink

Claus Ladefoged

People not understanding why Leica is still in business have apparently zero sense for aesthetics, design and lack understanding of not everything having to be an arms race for more and more features.....

May 30, 2013permalink

Because they offer great cameras for niche consumers and make the best lenses in the business.

If you've ever used a real Leica M you'd understand.

May 30, 2013permalink

Well I've owned a number of Leica M's and I struggle to understand how they're still in business. If it wasn't for Chinese collectors, they probably wouldn't be! The M8 was terrible, the M9 had more than it's fair share of issues. Film Leica's were great, but their digital offerings have been somewhat lacklustre, problematic and overpriced.

May 30, 2013permalink

walkaround

JD, this Fuji ripoff is in no way a Leica M.

May 30, 2013permalink

yabokkie

Leica don't know how to make good consumer cameras but they know something else.

May 30, 2013permalink

Tom_A

Perhaps they are in business because next to collectors many people like making photos with Leicas? Have a look at the Leica forum, many people simply enjoying them as photo tools and posting pictures.

May 30, 2013permalink

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good

@walkaround: This isn't even an official Leica product photo. It's a mock-up someone made and posted to the internet. So before you go jumping to conclusions and calling it out as a "Fuji rip-off" maybe you should wait until the REAL camera is released.

@DaveBowman: Maybe for YOU the M8 was terrible, but in my hands it produces wonderful images. Take a look at all of the images that I've made with that TERRIBLE camera:
http://flic.kr/s/aHsjEDChts

May 30, 2013permalink

Ed Gaillard

May 30, 2013*permalink

@JDThomas - so, you think the M8 was worthy of the 'Leica' name do you? It was in no way clunky, slow, periodically hung, shutter would lock, needed filters after the fact because it hadn't been tested properly... the list goes on. I can take good images with a pinhole camera made out of a tin can - you're point is what exactly?

May 30, 2013permalink

@DaveBowman: Yeah, I do think it was worthy. What exactly is YOUR point? If you don't like it and you don't want it, why are you crying about it? There are plenty of options out there for you. So instead of complaining about a camera that doesn't do what you want it to, why don't you go find one that does EVERYTHING you want it to and be positive about it?

May 30, 2013permalink

@JDThomas - oh dear, seems I've hit a nerve. I understand you own the camera, paid good money for it, etc. etc. Sorry your feel you need to be so protective, but it's understandable. If I'd paid for a Rolls Royce and received a Skoda I'd be upset too. The fact remains that the M8 was a serious blot on Leica's reputation of quality cameras, given what had gone before. Thankfully they pulled it back a bit with the M9, but there were still issues. Pity you can't accept it for what it is. As I don't own one anymore I assure you I'm not the one crying :). The cameras I own do what I need them too. I'm still entitled to have an opinion on those I've owned (and regret) though.

May 30, 2013permalink

It's perhaps worth adding that I have nothing against Leica products per se. I just believe that since they were dragged kicking and screaming into the digital age they've struggled to produce cameras to the same quality as their analogue counterparts. I know there are those who consider it blasphemy to utter a bad word against an M, those for whom Leica can do no wrong. However, when I pay for quality I expect to get it, end to end. The M8, for me, was a big disappointment. Sure, it took pictures, but the shortfalls were really unforgivable from a manufacturer synonymous with quality. When I start missing shots because of camera failings I'm going to call a spade a spade and not gloss over it purely because it has the Leica logo and a price tag that means it 'must be good'. If it works for you JDThomas, and you can live with the issues, then more power to you!

May 30, 2013permalink

@DaveBowman: You didn't hit a nerve. I'd have to actually care about what you thought. The M8 does everything I expect the M8 to do. I didn't buy it expecting to fire off 100 fps or AF or whatever. I bought it to do what it does. And it exceeds my expectations sometimes. I accept the camera for what it is. A Leica M8.

If there are thing the M8 can't do, I have other cameras to cover those areas. There's no regret on my part. I'm perfectly happy with my M8.

I don't tie my self-worth to a camera like a lot of people do. I have owned and sold more cameras than I care to count. It's part of my job. I use a camera that gets the job done for me. The M8 does a great job for me. That's not my ego talking because I spent a bunch of money on it, it's the truth. If it wasn't working for me I'd get rid of it. It's just a camera. And it happens to be a camera I like. A lot.

You're not the only one entitled to have an opinion. And you know what they say about opinions...

May 30, 2013permalink

@JDThomas - Indeed, like you I also bought it to do a job, a job for which my previous Leica's had always served me well. Unfortunately it fell well short. I fully accepted the camera for what it was - an M8. I failed to accept it for what it was pretending to be - a Leica.

Not sure about opinions, but I know what they say about assumptions. Like I said, if it works for you, bonus. You're displaying a very defensive posture for someone who claims not to care though.

May 30, 2013*permalink