a dumb question about a digital MP?

Q

qruyk12

Established
Local time
9:01 PM
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
130
might be a dumb question... as a recent M8.2 owner and a former MP owner...

Why did Leica not make the MP and/or M7 into a digital camera. Why build a new body, new shutter, etc...? Just adapt what is already proven in front of the digital sensor.
 
I think the basic answer is due to engineering everything to fit inside a small body. Many more parts involved with a digital camera than the old nuts and bolts of a film M. Probably simpler to just start anew. Someone more technical can probably elaborate on this...
 
qruyk12 said:
...Why did Leica not make the MP and/or M7 into a digital camera...
Click to expand...

Because it will seriously retard its recapturing of investments for the M8/9/10... There are some 300,000 M2/3/4/6/7/P made; and if you believe these forums, they still function flawlessly.

Besides, the lurking THOUGHT POLICE will soon tell you that if Leica hadn't done it, than it can't be done. :rolleyes:
 
You couldn't get it into the space available, and besides, the whole interior had to be redesigned anyway. Batteries, memory cards, things like that. Why do you think digital Ms are thicker? With a load of electronics already in the body, an electronically controlled shutter makes sense. Also, the M8 was designed to be assembled faster and more easily than a mechanical M: from memory, in 7 hours instead of 11.

Or, of course, Frankie could be right, and the people he calls the thought police - sorry, THOUGHT POLICE, by which he means most people with whom he disagrees - are uniformly stupider and less well informed than he is.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
Actually, they did do this, and it is fantastic. The in-house models, there are three, are secretly kept and moved to separate locations only known by Leica. The technology is so incredibly advanced that it is being sought by government agents as we speak. It is my understanding that Leica plans to release them in 2099. Unfortunately, there will only be the three models. Because, the design team died during some "unknown" industrial accident. I hear someone, I have to go.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.
 
I wouldn't expect Leica to be able to cram all of the electronics into the size of an MP body, but there are really small things I would incorporate from the MP, namely the nicer viewfinder preview lever and the lens release button. The equivalent parts on the M8 feel cheap compared to those on my MPs. I've no idea how these compare on the M8.2 or the M9.
 
"Space, the final frontier."

Epson/Cosina found 4mm in the R-D1 by simply shifting the lens mount/cavity forwards...enough to house the entire CCD/electronics package. It was the outrigger LCD that added ~8mm of bulk.

Thought Police (thinkpol in newspeak) are the secret police in George Orwell's novel "1984", who dealt with anyone daring to think unapproved thoughts.

To many, Leica has become almost a religion. Self-anointed evangelists preach...there is but one true RF god.

Those not guilty need not defend themselves. ;)
 
Last edited:
The biggest change was the shutter, moved from cloth horizontal travel to metal vertical travel. They probably could have retained horizontal travel if they had moved to titanium foil shutter curtains, like the F3FP wihch was used with a digital back. I'm not sure if the cloth would cause an issue with build-up/static on the CCD? I simply do not know the exact reason. BUT: Kodak did come out with a Digital camera with horizontal travel, and it was never done again after 1992.

SO: change the shutter mechanism, can't reuse the basic body design. Everything has to move.
 
Jaap: great link.
Sweeney: Do you know if the space demand would be equivalent between the two shutter systems? From an intuitive stand point, I am thinking there was an issue. Since, Leica liked the shutter system. If we could find some diagrams, it would prove interesting.
 
Roger Hicks said:
...the people he calls the thought police - sorry, THOUGHT POLICE, by which he means most people with whom he disagrees - are uniformly stupider and less well informed than he is.
Click to expand...

After much thoughts, I have to say what has been on my mind ever since my first posting that had caught your attention, even if saying so is fringing on being uncivilized...

Mr. Hicks, it is getting tedious and silly...but since you attacked first...

As I originally wrote, THOUGHT POLICE [Thought Police or thought police, howsoever pedantic you desire] in these forums are those who insist, in one way or another that "...if Leica hadn't done it, than it can't be done." What give you the right to quote or infer out of context, and often?

If Thought Police in RFF exists, you are the outstanding example of such bigotry.

Leica didn't do many thing for good business, technological or even selfish reasons...all within its rights. Even someone like you, having spent 40 years using, promoting or worshiping Leica, has no real standing.

Few RFF members have direct lines to Zeiss, spoken to anyone at Leica, or ever met Kobayashi-San; or can make micro lens, bypass 6-bit patent... That shouldn't make their good-faith opinions invalid...we are all just interested parties sharing these forums.

Or, was it that most of us shouldn't speak, unless you pre-approve? Leica uber alles.
 
Oh dear, a Leica vs Non-Leica p*ssing contest again...

Glove slapping, choose your weapon at the crack of dawn on a fogged field outside town, etc.

Sigh.


Right! Seems the OP's question is answered, isn't it?
 
qruyk12 said:
might be a dumb question... as a recent M8.2 owner and a former MP owner...

Why did Leica not make the MP and/or M7 into a digital camera. Why build a new body, new shutter, etc...? Just adapt what is already proven in front of the digital sensor.
Click to expand...


Its a great concern that we should all be worried about. I wonder why Leica didn't just take the M3 body and turn it into the M2, M4, M6 and M7. It seems like common sense, so I'll guess they do it just to annoy.

Steve
 
Frankie said:
After much thoughts, I have to say what has been on my mind ever since my first posting that had caught your attention, even if saying so is fringing on being uncivilized...

Mr. Hicks, it is getting tedious and silly...but since you attacked first...

As I originally wrote, THOUGHT POLICE [Thought Police or thought police, howsoever pedantic you desire] in these forums are those who insist, in one way or another that "...if Leica hadn't done it, than it can't be done." What give you the right to quote or infer out of context, and often?

If Thought Police in RFF exists, you are the outstanding example of such bigotry.

Leica didn't do many thing for good business, technological or even selfish reasons...all within its rights. Even someone like you, having spent 40 years using, promoting or worshiping Leica, has no real standing.

Few RFF members have direct lines to Zeiss, spoken to anyone at Leica, or ever met Kobayashi-San; or can make micro lens, bypass 6-bit patent... That shouldn't make their good-faith opinions invalid...we are all just interested parties sharing these forums.

Or, was it that most of us shouldn't speak, unless you pre-approve? Leica uber alles.
Click to expand...

Dear Frankie,

Hold on a minute. You're the one who's accusing meof be being a bigot, a member of the thought police, etc. You're the one who wants to share your 'good-faith opinions', while attacking me when I set forth mine.

You're the one who accuses me of 'worshiping' Leica, when I simply know a fair amount about them and regard them as my favourite cameras. I leave it to the rest of the forum to decide who is being more unreasonable.

Your disagreements with me don't affect the facts, but we can at least try to be civil. I have just realized that you probably took my last post, about everyone who disagrees with you as being stupider and less well-informed than you, the wrong way. I meant it in the sense that you appear to think that we are stupid and/or ill-informed, not that you are invariably stupid and ill-informed. I apologize for the lack of clarity.

R.
 
Last edited:
biggambi said:
Do you know if the space demand would be equivalent between the two shutter systems? From an intuitive stand point, I am thinking there was an issue. Since, Leica liked the shutter system. If we could find some diagrams, it would prove interesting.
Click to expand...


The space demand for the horizontal travel shutter is much greater than that of the segmented vertical travel shutter. I'm sure the reclaimed space made it possible for the M8 and M9 to be as small as they are. They are "jam-packed". The size of the battery is miniscule compared with my Nikon DSLR batteries. Look at the diagram for a Leica II, or take one apart, and you see how much space is taken.

And- again a question is asked, and little intelligent discussion takes place. I can understand why Leica changed the design to the vertical travel shutter, and am amazed by how small the M8/M9 turned out. I hope others can appreciate that accomplishment.

Personally, it probably broke the hearts of the Leica engineers to put a vertical travel shutter into the M8 after using horizontal travel shutters for over 90 years. This was discussed when the M8 was in design, with Leica engineers stating it could not be done. I suspect it would have driven the size of the camera up, and was not because a horizontal travel shutter in and of itself is incompatible with a CCD. Cloth Shutters curtains- maybe.

Just consider me on thought patrol.
 
Last edited:
Space is what it comes down to. Apparently the body is even too wide to support anything other than a .68x viewfinder.

Another thing I find odd is people who complain about the M8's battery life. I get about 450 shots out of one. Which isn't bad considering it's a third the size of my Nikon D2x's battery which gets around 1500.
 
I've had the M8 for one week, and have been using Leica's for 8 years. I'm an avid user of most classic equipment for all manufacturers.

The Leica is a great camera, the M8 is really nice. The M9 is even better, and solves the IR problem. Stick a Hot Mirror filter over the lens, IR problem solved on the M8.

I get tired of all the Leica-Bashing, Nikon Bashing, and Canon Bashing.

People can bash the Voigtlander Prominent, I'm okay with that. But I'll still use mine.

SO: Thought Police, Voigtlander Prominent Bashing is Okay at RFF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom