Celebrating the Leica’s 100th Birthday: Here’s how to do it yourself! What an EVF Leica M should look like and why it may not be made now.

Celebrating the Leica’s 100th Birthday: Here’s how to do it yourself!
What an EVF Leica M should look like and why it may not be made now.

By Jason Schneider

As a lifelong Leica fanatic (I bought my first Leica, a “new” store display model IIIg with 50mm f/2.8 Elmar lens, when I was 18) I fervently hoped Leica would mark the centenary of the Leica I (Model A) of 1925 by offering a special 2025 edition of that very same camera, possibly fitted with an upgraded, coated version of the collapsible 50mm f/3.5 Elmar like the one used on the 2000 or 2004 versions of the special edition Null-Series (0-series )replicas . Alas that was not to be, and neither were the “full-frame digital Leica I (Model A)” or the “new upgraded Leica M3” proffered by some as possible alternatives.

The most obvious solution: Celebrate the 100th anniversary yourself by acquiring an actual vintage rangefinder-less, scale focusing Leica of your very own. The most obvious candidate is the Leica I (Model A) itself, which, according to Leica Wiki, was manufactured from 1925 to 1936, with a total production of 58,735 units. Very early models fitted with 50mm f/3.5 Leitz Anastigmat or Elmax lenses are stratospherically priced museum pieces, examples fitted with 50mm f/2.5 Hektor lenses are ultra-rare and very pricey, and models with 3-digit, 4-digit, and even 5-digit serial numbers are coveted by collectors and priced accordingly.

_DSC8483 Leica A 22245.jpg
Leica I (Model A) No. 22245 with 50mm f/3.5 Elmar. You can now snag a later example than this in clean working shape for $1,200 to $1,500.

009 img078 Anastigmat 199 .jpg
Unobtanium: Here's museum piece Leica I (Model A) No.199 with super-rare 50mm f/3.5 Leitz Anastigmat lens. You could call it priceless.

However, later examples of “ordinary” Leica I (Model A) cameras in clean working condition are readily available at online auction sites or from specialist Leica dealers at prices within the range of many Leica enthusiasts. As this writing, there are 4 such Leica 1 (Model A) cameras listed on eBay at prices ranging from $1,200 to $1,500 and others with cases, caps, FODIS rangefinders etc. at prices in the $1,700-$2,500 range. Granted, that’s not cheap but IMHO these are fair prices for timeless classics that are among the nicest, most elegant, minimalist walk-around cameras ever made.

_DSC7869.JPG
Flyer announcing the Limited Edition reissue of the Null Series Leica in 2000. Only 4000 were made, offered at a list price of $2,795.00.

If picture taking is not your priority, but you still hanker for suitable Leica for your personal celebration of the Leica’s centenary, consider the Leica Null-Series ( O-Series ) Replica of 2000 (with flip-up military style optical viewfinder) or the rare 2004 version, which sports a “tubular’ viewfinder similar to the one on the Leica I (Model A). Leica produced 4,000 of the first version, then listed at $2,795.00, complete with leather case, special packaging, and certificate of authenticity. They’re still available used in pristine condition at the leading online auction site at prices in the $2,000-$3,000 range.

The Null-Series Replica (not to be confused with the non-working Ur-Leica Replica if 1975) takes standard 35mm cartridges, but the shutter dial is calibrated in slit widths (50mm corresponds to 1/20 sec, 2mm to 1/500 sec), and the shutter is not self-capping (like the one on the Leica I (Model A), so you have to place the (included) tethered lens cap over the lens while winding the film to the next exposure and re-cocking the shutter to prevent light-struck frames. This is a major PIA, which is why so few Null-Series Replica owners take lots if pictures with their treasures. It’s really a shame because the lens, marked 50mm f/3.5 Leitz Anastigmat, is really a recomputed, upgraded, multicoated version of the 4-element, 3-group Leitz Elmar that delivers exceptional imaging performance

Another good option for commemorating the Leica’s 100th birthday is acquiring a Leica Standard, aka Model E, the last of the screw-mount bodies with a top-set optical viewfinder and without a coupled rangefinder. Basically, it’s a Leica I (Model A) with a standardized 39mm Leica screw mount, and it was officially made in black lacquer and chrome finished versions from 1932 to 1950. Leica Wiki’s production stats indicate that 13,545 units were produced in black and 13,680 in chrome, but this doesn’t jibe with the total yearly production figures showing that a total 35,706 Model E cameras were made between 1930 and 1948. Some also had a nickel-plated brass top plate (these are prized by collectors) and all had a single top-mounted shutter speed dial with speeds of 1/20 to 1/500 sec plus Z (“Zeit’ or Time).

050 _DSC2670.JPG
Vintage '30s Leitz Wetzlar ad for the Leica Standard (Model E) a rangefinder-less "economy model" that's now a collector's prize.

4x6 Postwar Leica E 355039_DSC3401.jpg
Postwar Leica Standard (Model E) in chrome with 50mm f/3.5 Wollensak Velostigmat lens supplied by Leitz New York in the World War II era.

The Leica Standard (Model E) is an elegant minimalist camera that qualifies as a limited production Leica and the fact that it accepts screw-mount Leuca lenses makes it a more flexible shooter than the Leica I (Model A) or the Null Series Replica. Fitted with a period appropriate lens like a 35mm f/3.5 Elmar, it’s an awesome walk-around camera for street or travel photography. The bad news: 20 years ago you could snag one if these gems for 100 bucks or so—now they fetch prices in the $500 to $750 range in black or chrome, and up to $1,000 with original 50mm f/3.5 Elmar lens.

There are of course many other vintage Leica models that can be pressed into service as your personal “100th Anniversary commemorative.” All I-series Leica including the Ic, If, and Ig surely qualify but these “two-shoe” models all require separate viewfinders. The message: If Leica didn’t offer the 100th birthday model of your dreams, create your own—and run some film through it!

When will we see the “Leica M11-V?” Does never work for you?

In response to my recent RFF piece on the rumored “Leica M11-V,” reportedly with an all-electronic or hybrid electronic range/viewfinder, several readers opined that it would never see the light of day, that any attempt to “gild the lily” by “upgrading” the traditional optical/mechanical Leica M range/viewfinder with its multiple, auto indexing, projected, parallax-compensating frame lines was doomed to failure. Purely in terms of technology these folks are probably overstating their case, but when it comes to marketing, they may be onto something. Perhaps the right question to ask is not whether it’s possible to design a “Leica M11-V” but whether there would be a robust market for such a camera that would likely be priced in the $10k to $12k range? If Leica’s marketing mavens decide the answer is no, we may have to await the widely anticipated Leica M12, which is not expected to arrive until 2027.

How can the iconic Leica M “Messucher” (range/viewfinder) be electronically upgraded to result in a marketable new breed of Leica M? Basically, by retaining all the features Leica fans love and only improving only those things that will bring added benefits to users. Everybody loves the clear, bright optical viewfinder and the crisply defined rangefinder patch that’s so precisely aligned that it can be used either as a coincident (superimposed image) rangefinder or a more accurate split-image rangefinder, so these features should be retained.

CF9CAB2B-6BD7-4494-9BC4-B1B5DE5E1B47.jpeg
Hard to beat: Here are the 3 frame lines of the magnificent M3 viewfinder and the frame selector lever. Crisp rangefinder patch is not shown.

Ideally, here’s what should be added, improved, or refined”

Electronically displayed and illuminated parallax compensating frame lines should show a greater percentage of the captured image, provide more accurate parallax compensation, and contract slightly as you focus closer to correct for field frame size (reduced angular coverage due to the increase in Effective Focal Length or EFL).

A focus conformation feature (e.g. with red LED arrows and a central green “focus OK” LED could be provided at the bottom of the field.

A limited amount of additional information such as ISO, exposure mode, etc. could be displayed in the finder field in a non-intrusive way.

In short, the basic identity and character of any new Leica M as a system rangefinder camera should be retained, and the user experience should be essentially the same as it has been for over 70 years.
 
Last edited:
Great post and I agree with shooting the old simple ones. I am shooting my Leica I (A) heavily this year and backing it up with my I (C). With Zone focusing and Sunny 16 exposure, both are quick to shoot and the compact size is wonderful with the collapsible Elmar. It is nice just to drop it into my pants pocket when I want to park it.
 
This is spooky - I was just searching for Null-Series and other early Leica threads here when your post popped up. I’ve had the urge for a user grade black Standard with Elmar for years now.
It’s a great camera—go for it! I hope you can find a nice one at a decent price-good hunting!
 
Great post and I agree with shooting the old simple ones. I am shooting my Leica I (A) heavily this year and backing it up with my I (C). With Zone focusing and Sunny 16 exposure, both are quick to shoot and the compact size is wonderful with the collapsible Elmar. It is nice just to drop it into my pants pocket when I want to park it.
Thanks for your input. I bought my Leica I ( Model A) decades ago in near mint condition for the grand sum of $60! It’s one of my all-time favorite shooters and I’ve run about 400 rolls through it so far with (mostly) excellent results. The shutter works perfectly and when I tried to get it serviced my ace repairman examined it and said that wasn’t necessary. I’m sure that camera will outlast me and may well be working 100 years hence.
 
The question of how well an EVF Leica would sell has been answered. The Q series. These are not perfect cameras but the do bring a lot to the picnic. From full manual to full auto and all in between with a good lens. But the lens is not changeable. So, does Leica build a Q with changeable lenses or transfer the tech to an M body? But, the Q is pretty much an M body. So just add lens changeability and the problem is solved. The M body folks will not be miffed and the the folks who are not all that thrilled with RF focus will be happy.
 
0-series replica user here ; Leica’s surprising bargain priced special edition.
The Anastigmat ‘reissue’ is a great lens. Shutter capping soon becomes second nature.

I have a suspicion that the M11-V will be launched alongside a very compact, for a Noctilux, 43mm f/1.2. Electronic viewfinder has no issues with frame lines for this gap between 35 and 50mm focal length.
With the Q3-43, 43mm awareness has recently been rediscovered by Leica - the are also direct ties back to the Ur-Leica.
43mm is also a goldilocks focal length that yields physically smaller fast lenses, for 36x24mm coverage, than either the 35mm or 50mm ( Peter Karbe has recently talked around the issue of a design size gap ).

A 35/1.2 Noctilux has many technology challenges - so expect either large or expensive.

As for the Classic film MP, my wild guess is that its ‘discontinued’ status is in preparation for the launch of a revised model with 100-year branding, but also with inclusion of 43mm frame lines ( there is a big gap on the 50/75mm mask, so easy to do).

The M6/MP’s metering could be improved: tri-color LEDs for +/- 0.5 stops, then +/- 1 stop and finally > 1.5 stops; similar to the Pentax MX traffic lights. I don’t think this will happen - requires more investment than the simple change the frame-lines to create a new body.

Once 43mm happens on the MP, it would be logical for any new optical rangefinder M12 to follow; maybe eventually also a new 40/43mm Summicron-C .
 
I am beginning to perceive Leica as the Microsoft of the camera world: a marketing outfit with a pretty good but not best product. Like MS, their product is pretty good, pretty popular, though nowhere near the market share of MS, and well marketed. Does that mean the camera is bad? No. But I cannot shake the impression that this is not our father's Leica company, the one that the Leitz family ran.
 
Last edited:
0-series replica user here ; Leica’s surprising bargain priced special edition.
The Anastigmat ‘reissue’ is a great lens. Shutter capping soon becomes second nature.

I have a suspicion that the M11-V will be launched alongside a very compact, for a Noctilux, 43mm f/1.2. Electronic viewfinder has no issues with frame lines for this gap between 35 and 50mm focal length.
With the Q3-43, 43mm awareness has recently been rediscovered by Leica - the are also direct ties back to the Ur-Leica.
43mm is also a goldilocks focal length that yields physically smaller fast lenses, for 36x24mm coverage, than either the 35mm or 50mm ( Peter Karbe has recently talked around the issue of a design size gap ).

A 35/1.2 Noctilux has many technology challenges - so expect either large or expensive.

As for the Classic film MP, my wild guess is that its ‘discontinued’ status is in preparation for the launch of a revised model with 100-year branding, but also with inclusion of 43mm frame lines ( there is a big gap on the 50/75mm mask, so easy to do).

The M6/MP’s metering could be improved: tri-color LEDs for +/- 0.5 stops, then +/- 1 stop and finally > 1.5 stops; similar to the Pentax MX traffic lights. I don’t think this will happen - requires more investment than the simple change the frame-lines to create a new body.

Once 43mm happens on the MP, it would be logical for any new optical rangefinder M12 to follow; maybe eventually also a new 40/43mm Summicron-C .

A 43mm M mount lens is intriguing! I have more 40-45mm lenses in all mounts than 50s by quite a margin.
 
Hmm. I have no interest in an M that does not have a mechanical/optical rangefinder ... none at all. I had EVF cameras for years and went to the M to get away from them, because they don't work as well with my eyes now.

Regards a 43mm lens ... I have the SMC-Pentax-L 43mm f/1.9 Special (nominally an LTM lens but fitted with an LTM to M-Mount adapter). It is one of my most favorite lenses on the M ... all of them. It would be delightful if Leica offered a 40mm lens; doesn't have to be a Nocti, f/2 is fast enough.

G
 
0-series replica user here ; Leica’s surprising bargain priced special edition.
The Anastigmat ‘reissue’ is a great lens. Shutter capping soon becomes second nature.

I have a suspicion that the M11-V will be launched alongside a very compact, for a Noctilux, 43mm f/1.2. Electronic viewfinder has no issues with frame lines for this gap between 35 and 50mm focal length.
With the Q3-43, 43mm awareness has recently been rediscovered by Leica - the are also direct ties back to the Ur-Leica.
43mm is also a goldilocks focal length that yields physically smaller fast lenses, for 36x24mm coverage, than either the 35mm or 50mm ( Peter Karbe has recently talked around the issue of a design size gap ).

A 35/1.2 Noctilux has many technology challenges - so expect either large or expensive.

As for the Classic film MP, my wild guess is that its ‘discontinued’ status is in preparation for the launch of a revised model with 100-year branding, but also with inclusion of 43mm frame lines ( there is a big gap on the 50/75mm mask, so easy to do).

The M6/MP’s metering could be improved: tri-color LEDs for +/- 0.5 stops, then +/- 1 stop and finally > 1.5 stops; similar to the Pentax MX traffic lights. I don’t think this will happen - requires more investment than the simple change the frame-lines to create a new body.

Once 43mm happens on the MP, it would be logical for any new optical rangefinder M12 to follow; maybe eventually also a new 40/43mm Summicron-C .

As you know 43.3mm is the diagonal of the 24 x 36mm format, so it corresponds to the diameter of the image circle, the optical definition of a "normal" lens. The 50mm focal length was chosen as the normal lens for full frame 35mm still photography for two reasons: it was the standard lens used on early 18 x 24mm-format 35mm motion picture cameras, which were initially used for shooting short skits on a proscenium stage. The medium telephoto viewing angle of the 50mm made it easier to show the action on stage while cropping out any distracting elements (such as equipment) that was off to the sides. It was also easier to design lenses that delivered sharp, detailed imaging across the field if the angular coverage was slightly narrower. During the 1950s, a number of Japanese rangefinder 35s (Aries, Olympus, Petri, and others) were fitted with non-interchangeable 40-45mm standard lenses, some billed as semi-wide, and the Kodak Signet 35 sported a superb 44mm f/3.5 Ektar designed by the renowned Dr. Rudolph Kingslake, then Kodak's chief optical designer. There is thus ample precedent for Leica or anyone else to produce a 43mm lens that could be more compact than a comparable 50mm and easier to correct than a 35mm, but I'm not sure there's anyone is beating down the doors for a 43mm f/1.2 Noctilux or a 43mm frame line in a Leica M. Time will tell just how wild your guess is.
 
An updated Leica M to L-mount adapter could be a lot more than the current 18771, if only it incorporated a focus cam follower so that manual focus distance and movement information could be transferred to the L body, enabling auto magnification or PIP display etc.
However the lack of a nice compact EVF equipped L-mount body similar to an Xpro Fuji remains, so a dedicated EVF-M still seems like the most refined soultion.
 
A limited amount of additional information such as ISO, exposure mode, etc. could be displayed in the finder field in a non-intrusive way.
Yeah, maybe selectable (and turn-off-able) options for shutter speed, ISO, exposure compensation value, memory remaining, critical error messages, and maybe even a simplified bar-graph histogram... you know, like the Pixii Max already has... 😂
 
When people really buy into a brand's vision, they'll find ways to reframe a product's shortcomings as virtues. And in the case of Leica M, I think they want fewer, not more, options such as controls which only have a single or limited number of functions. But if only digital M-cameras felt more like Forever purchases than consumable items: Wouldn't it be something if the M11 was "eternal", with electronics easily replaced/upgraded by any number of service centers! But they could start more modestly by using fewer battery types, and sticking with them for longer periods of time. BP-SCL7 forever, maybe?

Q is Leica's statement on modernized rangefinder-style cameras, and the fixed-lens design solves a lot of tricky issues.
 
When people really buy into a brand's vision, they'll find ways to reframe a product's shortcomings as virtues. And in the case of Leica M, I think they want fewer, not more, options such as controls which only have a single or limited number of functions. But if only digital M-cameras felt more like Forever purchases than consumable items: Wouldn't it be something if the M11 was "eternal", with electronics easily replaced/upgraded by any number of service centers! But they could start more modestly by using fewer battery types, and sticking with them for longer periods of time. BP-SCL7 forever, maybe?

Q is Leica's statement on modernized rangefinder-style cameras, and the fixed-lens design solves a lot of tricky issues.
Our Canadian neighbor works for donate-resale organization.
He recovered several hundreds dollars watches. They were donated because... battery run out...

Nobody is interested in modular design allowing replacement of aged modules. It is doable with watches...

GASogilocs thinks M11 is best only until M12.
Manufacturers profit is almost totally based on consumerists.

This could be only leashed to reasonable levels if EU office rats will impose regulations to tax non refubrishable goods.

Q has absolutely nothing to do with rangefinders, BTW. It is perfect example of LCAG been morons who are jumping to new battery on almost every new generation of same camera.
While same batteries could be in use for Canon DSLRS and mirrorless.

Another reason for taxation to get this stupidity leashed. Using common battery - less tax.

To me Q original is very appealing because it is using common batteries.
I can't accept made in China batteries for insane price. Honestly it is ripoff and I would feel like a looser .
 
Back
Top Bottom