Fewer shipwrecks must be a good thing?

[macleoda]

OK, I'm new. Sorry. But the reference applies here to "heritage" versus "respectful advancement". Some RFF regulars will consider my question heresy, naivety or stupidity - apologies in advance - not trying to irreverend or dumb, just need some advice and hoping it will be of the erudite kind.

Having used a rented M9 for a while and absolutely loved it, I am considering the purchase of my first rangefinder (an M9 of course). Like most, it's a huge purchase decision. And as I have seen commented elsewhere, I don't want to end up "owning an expensive paperweight" or - to be fairer - owning the previous generation to what I think the M9 could be with modern technology. My key question: surely something comes next? I would rather wait than buy the soon-to-be-outgoing M9, I don't have the luxury of a multi-thousand-dollar upgrade twelve months from now (would rather soldier on with my 5D mkII).

Don't get me wrong. I am a post-modernist when it comes to technology: micro 4/3 doesn't interest me at all, I want manual focus, I don't want zoom, I don't care about movie mode, I love the whole retro experience of using a manual focus rangefinder in classy, heavy, 1930's style package... don't even care about live view. And of course the sharpness and delectable colour of the FF sensor with the 35mm Summilux are to die for. But would any of the following things REALLY somehow be heretic or destroy the legacy of the Leica rangefinder?

- A combined OVF/EVF (a-la X100), sure there will be more of these soon
- "Peaking" focus assist method for manual focus in EVF mode
- A current generation screen (OLED?), at least something of current dot count and maximum possible size
- An image processing capability which allows better than 2fps (when needed) and doesn't keep you waiting while it empties the buffer to the card
- ISO sensitivity a least a little closer to the best of today's SLRs (usable 3200 shouldn't be asking too much and it's not like low-light handheld shooting is against everything the M9 stands for)
- Weatherproofing

I notice that the usual answers to such things are analgous to why ships should still be navigating by sextant and the stars - we just like it the way it is, if you want 3200 ISO you're in the wrong hall... There is no good reason NOT to want better ISO performance, for example, so why argue against it? If as a user one were to opt for focusing using peaking on an EVF, would that really be trashing the legacy or just updating it in a respectful and valid manner, and one which completely protects every aspect of the magnificant machine whilst making use of technology available today.

Am I alone in this? (he asked, suspecting the answer to be yes)

And the bottom line: does anyone out there in RFF land think there will indeed be another generation of the M digital rangefinder - dare I utter it, an M10...?

From what I see of Leica, I think there WILL be one and I think it will be worthy of everything that is Leica and everything rangefinder and, in the end, it will only be the flat earth society who think advancement in keeping with history is a bad thing - the same folks who would rather sail onto the rocks than (say it quietly) make use of a GPS...

Thanks everyone in advance for your contributions, mild and informative or otherwise!

Alastair

 

[Steve Bellayr]

Actually, I just posted a new thread about the agreement of Leica to work with Magnum photographers on new products. I don't know what that means except that there will be...maybe...new products.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I certainly hope there will be an M10, and future generations of Leica cameras.

I sent in the check to pay for my M9 yesterday. It's the camera I want. I've had the M8 for a little over a year, and like it enough to add an M9. If an M10 comes out next year, or the year after- I would not upgrade for a while. I bought the camera with an extended warranty, brought it out to 5 years. I see nothing in a digital camera that I need that the M9 does not do. 16-bit uncompressed Raw, Manually selected lenses, no need for an IR cut filter, full-frame, more pixels than I need, and high-enough ISO for any shot that I need to get.

If you like the M9- get it. If it does what you want, be happy. If you fret about the next generation of Digital being improved over current generations- get used to it. I've seen 30 years of steady improvement in Digital Imaging.

 

[dave lackey]

OK, I'm new. Sorry. But the reference applies here to "heritage" versus "respectful advancement". Some RFF regulars will consider my question heresy, naivety or stupidity - apologies in advance - not trying to irreverend or dumb, just need some advice and hoping it will be of the erudite kind.

Having used a rented M9 for a while and absolutely loved it, I am considering the purchase of my first rangefinder (an M9 of course). Like most, it's a huge purchase decision. And as I have seen commented elsewhere, I don't want to end up "owning an expensive paperweight" or - to be fairer - owning the previous generation to what I think the M9 could be with modern technology. My key question: surely something comes next? I would rather wait than buy the soon-to-be-outgoing M9, I don't have the luxury of a multi-thousand-dollar upgrade twelve months from now (would rather soldier on with my 5D mkII).

Don't get me wrong. I am a post-modernist when it comes to technology: micro 4/3 doesn't interest me at all, I want manual focus, I don't want zoom, I don't care about movie mode, I love the whole retro experience of using a manual focus rangefinder in classy, heavy, 1930's style package... don't even care about live view. And of course the sharpness and delectable colour of the FF sensor with the 35mm Summilux are to die for. But would any of the following things REALLY somehow be heretic or destroy the legacy of the Leica rangefinder?

- A combined OVF/EVF (a-la X100), sure there will be more of these soon
- "Peaking" focus assist method for manual focus in EVF mode
- A current generation screen (OLED?), at least something of current dot count and maximum possible size
- An image processing capability which allows better than 2fps (when needed) and doesn't keep you waiting while it empties the buffer to the card
- ISO sensitivity a least a little closer to the best of today's SLRs (usable 3200 shouldn't be asking too much and it's not like low-light handheld shooting is against everything the M9 stands for)
- Weatherproofing

I notice that the usual answers to such things are analgous to why ships should still be navigating by sextant and the stars - we just like it the way it is, if you want 3200 ISO you're in the wrong hall... There is no good reason NOT to want better ISO performance, for example, so why argue against it? If as a user one were to opt for focusing using peaking on an EVF, would that really be trashing the legacy or just updating it in a respectful and valid manner, and one which completely protects every aspect of the magnificant machine whilst making use of technology available today.

Am I alone in this? (he asked, suspecting the answer to be yes)

And the bottom line: does anyone out there in RFF land think there will indeed be another generation of the M digital rangefinder - dare I utter it, an M10...?

From what I see of Leica, I think there WILL be one and I think it will be worthy of everything that is Leica and everything rangefinder and, in the end, it will only be the flat earth society who think advancement in keeping with history is a bad thing - the same folks who would rather sail onto the rocks than (say it quietly) make use of a GPS...

Thanks everyone in advance for your contributions, mild and informative or otherwise!

Alastair

Jeez, so you would rather wait 2-5 years for an M10? Life is short, and the M9 is so good that you will just cut off your nose to spite your face (that is the old saying or something like it right?😕). Why wait? If you buy it tomorrow and the M10 hits next year, sell the M9 and it will have been a hell of a lot cheaper than renting one.

I just don't understand the "gotta have the latest and greatest" mentality when the M9 replacement could be years off.😉

 

[dave lackey]

Actually, I just posted a new thread about the agreement of Leica to work with Magnum photographers on new products. I don't know what that means except that there will be...maybe...new products.

There will always be new products in the pipeline... Oops, gotta go make some photographs. Catch ya later.😛

 

[Fraser]

I like that 'would rather soldier on with my 5D mkII'.
There will always be something new coming out you will never keep up unless you want to spend a lot of money, camera makers love people who feel the need to upgrade all the time.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Upgrade all the time. I suppose it is true.

I sold a Leica IIIf and a Leica III to help pay for the M9. The newest camera that I sold to cover the cost was a Canonet Ql17 GIII. It was only 35 years old.

 

[Keith]

Soldiering on with my D700 ... which despite it's bulk and complexity prevents all thoughts (mostly 😀) of owning an M9. It's two years on from it's release and will probably out perform the next incarnation of the M9 (M10 ?) ... whenever that may be.

And I still have both my kidneys!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I have both kidney's and more cameras required to outfit a small photography school. And the M9 paid for out of selling a few cameras.

 

[peterm1]

Without trying to answer every aspect of your post let me just say this.

There certainly will be an M10 (one day - but when, I do not know).

I say this because like all camera companies, Leica must eventually keep coming up with new models to keep the buying public buying. The market for the M9 will eventually become "mature" (ie there will be not much room left to exploit it) at which time Leica will need to find new ways of separating members of the camera buying public from their cash. So it will begin marketing its M10, M11 etc.

Of course Leica is not so keen a player of this game as most of their competitors.

And most importantly I can say I am pretty sure of the following as a result of me being a 25 year Leica owner. Leica never was and almost certainly never will be a leader in new technology.

So don't hang out for the next model! The chances are it will not be too different from this model, maybe a better sensor, reflecting improvements in that technology, but if you expect new bells and whistles. I doubt that you will get it.

Its M cameras are always well behind the pack in terms of leading edge camera technologies. Of course they are beautifully built. But Leica is not an innovator so you will be disappointed if that is what you expect.

They are a small exclusive company. They cannot afford the high cost of innovation. (Which these days can cost hundreds of millions)

And besides which, most of their customers simply do not want it.

 

[eleskin]

M cameras were the low light choice once and should be again!

M cameras were the low light choice once and should be again!

One if the joys for me when I started using an M6 20 years ago was how well the camera handled for low light photography. The rangefinder was superior to any slr then and the fast superior Leica glass put the icing on the cake. Now with the M8/9 , many say dslr's are better for low light. To me, this is a sensor issue and not a rangefinder or lens issue. With lenses like the Noctilux , 35mm f1.2 Nokton, etc,,, the M should still have a place in the dark shadows. I use my M8 for everything including low light and am mostly happy with the results. I am of the opinion though that to fully exploit what M mount lenses can really do, much better high ISO's are absolutely necessary. With the new M8 and M9, there were technical issues that had to be solved because of how M lenses work with sensors , microlenses, etc,,, . Time has passed, and the time is right for vastly better higher iso more so than megapixels. The X100 is showing us what Fuji can do for $1199 USD and the high ISO samples are very impressive. For $7,000, Leica must do better and give us the great high ISO we need to unleash what our high speed lenses can really do!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I have to admit- I've never shot film with a rating higher than 1600. I find the M8 images at 1250 to be less "noisy" than Kodacolor 800. ISO 160 is fast compared to the ISO 25, ISO 32, and ISO 100 that i've used for the last 45 years.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sure there'll be an M10. When? Dunno. What will it do that an M9 doesn't? Nothing that I'm all that excited about.

Cheers,

R.

 

[jaapv]

One if the joys for me when I started using an M6 20 years ago was how well the camera handled for low light photography. The rangefinder was superior to any slr then and the fast superior Leica glass put the icing on the cake. Now with the M8/9 , many say dslr's are better for low light. To me, this is a sensor issue and not a rangefinder or lens issue. With lenses like the Noctilux , 35mm f1.2 Nokton, etc,,, the M should still have a place in the dark shadows. I use my M8 for everything including low light and am mostly happy with the results. I am of the opinion though that to fully exploit what M mount lenses can really do, much better high ISO's are absolutely necessary. With the new M8 and M9, there were technical issues that had to be solved because of how M lenses work with sensors , microlenses, etc,,, . Time has passed, and the time is right for vastly better higher iso more so than megapixels. The X100 is showing us what Fuji can do for $1199 USD and the high ISO samples are very impressive. For $7,000, Leica must do better and give us the great high ISO we need to unleash what our high speed lenses can really do!

Take a good look at those X100 high-ISO examples. The only word I can come up with is mush. They were the reason I finally decided against getting the camera (for my wife). The X1 is much better.

 

[bigeye]

try shopping a cell phone. dual-core cpu are coming out over the next few weeks and quad-core in november. the quad-core are 5x faster than the dual-core (that aren't released yet). Your phone is becoming your laptop. When do you buy?

the question is 'what do you need?' and you made a good list of basic needs. The M9 is the best thing out there by far, with only top end DSLRs for competition. Buy and be happy that what you bought does what you need, and will do so...for practically ever. Look at the M8, which has had a far rockier road. It still holds value for what it is and can do.

- Charlie