Anyone else lost w/Leica digital M cameras names??

[JOCO34]

At first I thought that the number 240 may refere to the number of mpixels of the sensor, ie 24 and the body was an M. But then does the 262 have 26.2 mpixels? Nope. Back to the drawing board from hell. I really think that Leica missed out by not namimg the "M" the M10 and therefore showing the continuing tradtion of classic rangefinder cameras into the Digital age. Afterall the "M" is not revolutionary but just an improvement on the M9. If anything the differences from the M8 to the M9/M240 was a much greater improvement with the full size sensor though I am sure some would say not so much with the use of a CMOS over the older more film like CCD. If Leica stays to form the next iteration of the Rangefinder Digital will be named the M10 similar to the M3-M2-M4.

 

[nasmformyzombie]

There sure isn't any conspiracy theory to 'confuse' buyers. Utter nonsense.

Or maybe there is something to it. Was the M film body naming convention all that consistent and easy to understand either?

First M: M3. Named for three frame lines, 50-90-135.
Next: M2. Does this mean second M body, if so why was the first one named M3 and not M1? Does M2 mean only two frame lines? No.
Next: MP, released concurrently with the M2. Why a letter now after the 'M' and not a number? What does 'P' represent?
Next: M1. Why 1? In this case, no rangefinder. Why not call it an M0?
Next: MD. Back to letters; what does the 'D' represent? Apparently, no rangefinder, no viewfinder.
Next: MD-a. Why a small letter 'a'? Why the introduction of a dash after the 'D'?
Next: M4. Four frame lines, 35-50-90-135. Now we're back in business, picking where the M3 left off. But why so much confusion after M3?
Next: M5. Five frame lines? No, four. But the first M with an in camera meter. Why not call it an MM? Or MM5? Or MM1?
Next: M4-2. Canadian version of M4. Why a dash between the '4' and the '2'? Why not use a small letter 'a' after M4 as with the MD-a? OK, M4-2, second version of the M4.
Next: MD-2. Second version of MD. Now consistent with convention of M4 and M4-2. But again what does 'D' represent? Dummy?
Next: M4-P. Back to the inclusion of the mysterious letter 'P'. But the 'P' doesn't directly follow the 'M' any longer.
Next: M6. Follows the M5. OK.
Next: M6TTL: M6 with through-the-lens metering. Starting to make sense again. However, in addition to new metering, the shutter speed selector now turns in the opposite direction of its predecessors. With these changes it's not really an updated M6. Why not call it an M7?
Next: M7. Follows the M6. Leica is starting to get it right, except this camera should have been M8 as the M6TTL should have been M7.
Next: MP. Oh wait, Leica used this over 40 years ago. Reintroduction? No. Apparently 'MP' stands for 'mechanical perfection'. But what about the 1950's MP? Perfection by definition is unsurpassed. But Leica apparently surpassed its first perfection with the new MP.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

 

[Darthfeeble]

I would think a knowledge of German would be handy in figuring out the letter meanings. My thought is that it keeps people talking about their camera. Like Stephen said, it's a marketing tool.

 

[Timmyjoe]

The final straw for me was an email I got from Leica today. Pushing the new M-D (Typ 262). And I'm thinking, 262, I thought that camera had been out for a while. Then I saw the ISO dial on the back instead of an LCD, and I thought, no, that's that limited edition 60 thing. So I went to the B&H web site to see what this new camera was selling for, and I couldn't find it in the twelve Leica digital cameras they had listed. But there were an awful lot of M bodied digitals, all with these weird "Typ" numbers, and I was like, "How does anyone keep this straight?"

 

[Keith]

The only one that matters is the one you have! 😀

 

[benmacphoto]

I don't think it's hard to understand.
The Typ number is similar to a "class" of features.

You have the M 240, the digital M with a CMOS sensor.
And the M-P 240, which is the "P" version of the M 240.

Then the M 262, stripped down M with no live view or video.
And the new M-D 262, which is a stripped down M with no live view, no video and no LCD.

The M Monochrom 246, monochrome sensor.

These M's all use the same sensor and processor, which is why they are still known first as an M.
But have different features and designs, which is where they get the Typ number.

 

[Archlich]

Always remind me of my JOBO system and Gardena equipments. Maybe being counter-intuitive is a German engineering tradition?

 

[Leica All Day]

I sometimes joke with my friends when they have "problems" with their SL.... I joke with them and tell them what SL stands for....lol

 

[user237428934]

If I have a problem in understanding something I typically try to find some information on the internet. What company are you talking about? LEICA? Let's have a look.....Oh this company has a homepage.

https://en.leica-camera.com

Two clicks and I found this

https://en.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/See-the-bigger-picture

On the bottom you find a nice overview of the products you are discussing. Long live the internet.

🙂

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

It's best not to ask about Leica's too much.

I can make sense of M3 (3 frame lines) but why not M3P instead of MP? Then M2 doesn't mean 2 frame lines and so on.

And someone thought it should have been M3P because the M4-P came along...

I've also often wondered why the IIIc wasn't called the IV as it was a new design with a wider body and die cast as well but there you are...

Regards, David

 

[David Hughes]

If I have a problem in understanding something I typically try to find some information on the internet. What company are you talking about? LEICA? Let's have a look.....Oh this company has a homepage.

https://en.leica-camera.com

Two clicks and I found this

https://en.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/See-the-bigger-picture

On the bottom you find a nice overview of the products you are discussing. Long live the internet.

🙂

Hmmm, it starts like this

"M – as in ‘Messsuchersystem’
‘Messsucher’, the German term for a combined rangefinder and viewfinder, found in every Leica M..."

and then I thought of the M1, MD and MDa...

Regards, David

 

[Brian Atherton]

In answer to Tim's question; yes, me!

No doubt it's a marketing tool, but it has failed on me... but then, probably, I'm not Leica's intended target, having been around the block a few times.

To me the current model numbering follows little logical pattern, and has more in common with washing machine designations. 🙄

 

[user237428934]

"M – as in ‘Messsuchersystem’
‘Messsucher’, the German term for a combined rangefinder and viewfinder, found in every Leica M..."

and then I thought of the M1, MD and MDa...

Regards, David

If you look back in the M-history, these cameras without rangefinder are sidepaths and accidents that don't define the M. For me the definition of the M is the rangefinder and in this case the marketing fits perfectly to my point of view.

 

[jarski]

so, now there are two 262's? :bang:

 

[David Hughes]

If you look back in the M-history, these cameras without rangefinder are sidepaths and accidents that don't define the M. For me the definition of the M is the rangefinder and in this case the marketing fits perfectly to my point of view.

Yes, they are for me too but still not logically named. And saying all M are coupled RF's is pointless when some aren't.

In fairness, they are not the only ones to do strange things, there's the Canon 'Kiss' range of cameras, aka 'EOS' and Olympus did the μ-I, μ-II, μ-III and μ-V but no μ-IV. OTOH, they did the OM-1, OM-2, OM-3 and OM-4 which knocks on the head the idea that the figure four is unlucky in Japanese culture. (Or perhaps they thought pro's ignore such things and P&S users are superstitious... )

It's all good fun, isn't it?

Regards, David

 

[user237428934]

I'm astonished that people give the the name of the product such an important role.

Once I read a strange argument that the new names make it so hard to find a product on ebay. As if a company chooses a product name with the idea in mind, that it might be easier for people, who can't afford a new product, to find it used on ebay.

 

[user237428934]

It's all good fun, isn't it?

Regards, David

It is...........

 

[Pherdinand]

It just proves that a company that has great engineers to build stuff uses marketin dumbasses to come up with dumbass names coz that's what they can do...

 

[splitimageview]

"What Porsche 911 do you have?"

"I have a 993. What about you?"

"Mine is a 991. One day I plan to pick up and old 964 and restore it, I just love those older 3.6 liter models."

"I have a 997 on order!"

 

[sevo]

Back in the days naming was, like in most German companies, engineer driven, what little marketing there was could not root out the internal numbering that had already been in use at all levels (including the management which usually grew out of engineering) for years. Accordingly people have grown to associate products called by type catalogue numbers with good engineering and good value for money (as a consequence of a engineering-over-marketing attitude). But these days every product (and Leica no exception) is utterly marketing driven, with some marketing agents thinking up faux names that sound like the internal development numbers of the past...