Finally! This is what we needed: Leica Video!

No thanks, DSLR or wait for Fuji to produce something relibile and cost effective. You can get a 4 Nikon D5100 cameras + lenses and a plane ticket for the cost of one M10 and not have to worry about comming back without footage (digital footage).

BTW, the recently released D3200 is 24MP, ISO to 12800, 1080p! HD video and $699 with zoom. (Come and compete against such a price..)
 
I have no interest in video, but as mentioned above, this means it has live view, and sufficient processing power for video, which makes it even faster for stills. This also means it must have a good LCD, and perhaps an accessory EVF. All this is good news. The M10 will most probably be my first digital Leica.
 
Oh friends, Video would be a gift, something you can use, but you don't have to use it. I guess the M10 can still photographs. And the menu won't be cluttered I gues...

Going by this logic will leads to M11 which has... Auto Focus!

Y'know, you don't *have* to use it. :p
 
EdwardKaraa said:
I have no interest in video, but as mentioned above, this means it has live view, and sufficient processing power for video, which makes it even faster for stills. This also means it must have a good LCD, and perhaps an accessory EVF. All this is good news. The M10 will most probably be my first digital Leica.

Great post +++
 
not just scale focusing anymore with non-RF lenses, nice. but this (live view) kind of makes rangefinder redundant a little, not nice.
 
Nope

Nope

If it is good videographers will be all over it and you know what that means to the cost of M lenses.

It won't, and we won't.

Video isn't easy to implement well, and has no real use to Leica anyway considering their target market. My guess is that they will include it, because their manufacturers can include it. It won't be a serious video tool, just your occasional (very shaky) family flick.

Think Fuji X100/Xpro style implementation.
 
I have no want for video. But a faster buffer is a must. I just really hope this thing doesn't cost $8k. I miss when the M8 was $5300.
 
I think it will be really a stretch for them to do it well.
As well as stills with my M9, I took a short video yesterday with the E-M5 or the Tour of California Race.
Even Olympus with one of the fastest responding compact cameras out there struggles with 30fps action.http://vimeo.com/42101905

I also can't see them fitting microphones to a M11 - the video would be a lot less with out the sound of the cow bells.
 
I have no want for video. But a faster buffer is a must. I just really hope this thing doesn't cost $8k. I miss when the M8 was $5300.


And if you looked you could probably find a Noctilux for under four grand! :D
 
I agree with a couple of the comments above, if the M10 had decent video at 24fps, decent codec, minimal aliasing/moire, this would be it for me. I'd sell my Canon.
 
I miss the M8 when it was $4,700!!!

I miss the M8 when it was $4,700!!!

I miss the 07 M8 price of $4,700 USD! When you look at the Nikon D800 E for 3k you begin to ask if $4,700 was too much. Now I do not regret my M8 purchase, nor to I regret buying used Leica M lenses (I bought a Noctilux in O9 for $4k on EBay, a great buy then, but not now). What gets me is I love my lenses and feel Leica is squeezing us users (I have 80000 exposures on my M8 I shoot like crazy and I do so professionally) that faithfully bought into the M system years ago. Honestly, at $7k the M9 is the absolute limit most of us can spend, any more and many of us will say the he'll with it and sell off all of our stuff for the D800 and nice Zeiss glass. The new Summicron price is ridiculous to say the least! Any M 10 must be the same as the M9 and any M9 should have a significant price drop due to it's older technology. If they charge 10k for an M 10 (sounds catchy eh, but really dumb business wise) and do not lower the M9 price they will loose me and many others. I love the rangefinder experience mire than DSLR by far, but economics plays big for us mere mortals that are not the 1 percent. Is there some snobbery in the Leica world? Unfortunately there is, I hate to say. This attitude that the price is what it is and if you cannot afford it use a DSLR really irritates me. I fell in love with rangefinders, not Leica per say (I also own a Fuji GSW 690, Mamiya press) because of the rangefinder way of photography. The ability to see the subject directly without a screen in the way and great focus accuracy in low light as well as quiet operation and small size. Thank God Fuji gets it to some degree. I feel build wise, you do not need anything better made than the Xpro-1 because in a few years, technology changes too much. The digital M, although beautifully made, is overkill and does not make economic sense. Better made lenses make more sense because they are a long term investment, not the camera. This Is why what Fuji has done is exciting. Now if only Zeiss or Voigtlander would get off their butt and build us a full frame camera with great ISO for $3k! By the way, the more I. Read about Zeiss M mount lenses, the less interested I am in any Leica lens. Leica is loosing me along with many others that are not the 1 percent $$$$$$!!!!
 
I will be completely honest here - if the next Leica digital had a video mode, I would just leave my dSLR set up entirely. The only reason I feel I ought to get a 5D Mk.II+ is to have the option to shoot video if I'm needed to for a client. If the M10 had video in it, I wouldn't need to invest more into a system I just don't enjoy using as much.

That may depend on just how good this video mode is. If it's full fledged 1080p with user selectable framerates, using a decent codec like AVCHD or even 5D Mark II style avi, then you would have workable output for a client. But if it's some halfa$$ed implementation, or the quality of the output isn't good, then you'd have a M10 and still need the 5D.

The 5D Mark II produces video that is good enough for broadcast TV, indie films and even parts of The Avengers (Avengers Assemble for the British here). It's a reasonably affordable way to get a well tested video solution that has a huge user support network. Any video in a future M is going to be like trying to catch fish with your hands in a stream in the middle of the night. Well, okay, not that bad, but you get what I mean. I wouldn't give up the Canon, as tempting as the M video solution might seem.
 
Oh my! I have posted "This is what WE needed!" and I see nobody is interested in the video portion at the first rate :D . Actually I wanted to see what would the reaction be for the video..

Video or not, one thing is for sure: It's better to have a most recent CMOS sensor and Liveview too. Video is not that important for the majority however some features like hi-ISO, usability of almost any lenses are..
 
That may depend on just how good this video mode is. If it's full fledged 1080p with user selectable framerates, using a decent codec like AVCHD or even 5D Mark II style avi, then you would have workable output for a client. But if it's some halfa$$ed implementation, or the quality of the output isn't good, then you'd have a M10 and still need the 5D.

I was very very interested in the X-Pro1 and its video function but the aliaising/moire and no shutter control was a real turn off. It was so close, so close.

I'll be keeping an eye out for the M10 and its video function. If it has unuseable video, I'd be happy to upgrade to an M9 from my M8.2.
 
Back
Top Bottom