Is the ME ugly?

[CK Dexter Haven]

It's ugly in the way that Leica wants to be sure you understand you're paying a penalty for not ponying up the dough for 'the big boy.'

Same thing afflicts the Canon 5D series. It's in use by a lot of pros, but it still has that Idiot Dial like the cheap bodies. You'd think paying $2500 for a camera would entitle you to better aesthetics and a bit of self-esteem. But, no.

 

[hteasley]

It looks essentially no different to me than any of the other random special editions, or bespoke options, of other M cameras. No biggie.

I think people are mostly offended that there's a particular look to a camera that Leica has declared to be "the budget real Leica", and that "the budget real Leica" is every bit an M9. Folks can't get a new M9 without looking like they went for the budget camera.

Whatevs.

 

[bugmenot]

It is not even remotely an improvement over the existing M9.

If you found the M9 ugly, you find this ugly. The colour scheme is the only distinguishing feature other than what has been stripped away from the M9.

Given M9 was already relatively old tech in 2009, speaking from the perspective of the sensor and other electronics, I would have expected Leica to at least try to cut down on the size, make it closer to a film Leica body size, but no. All they wanted to do was extend the life of their production lines for the Leica M9.

 

[semilog]

All of the digital M's are ugly. The M3 and its lineal descendants have perfect, "just right" proportions. The digital M's have proportions that are "just wrong." It's like cropping a Picasso on one edge -- a small dimensional change that makes a huge aesthetic difference.

 

[crispy12]

I voted "strongly disagree". To my eye, the M-E does not look ugly at all. That does not mean that I find it pretty, by the way.

Let's make this a bit more informative. What do I like? Clean, classical M design, the color scheme is to my taste.

What do I not like? If you are asking, the top plate is a bit too high, slimming it down would make more space for a larger display. It looks, as if the design of the proportions centered a bit too much around the display than the other way round. The body is a bit too thick also, the upfront Leica logo, the "eye lid" like silver stripes at the viewfinder window. Compared to the film Ms it is all looking a tad unbalanced, but still no way bad looking.

This is exactly what I think as well. I'm thinking of getting one too.

 

[gavinlg]

I disagree. I like the body much more then the M(ilestone) but I don't really like the blue-grey paint very much. I would shoot/own one if I could, but i'd probably try and get a black m9 instead.

 

[ronnies]

Is that the Pentax ME? I prefer the MX myself.

Ronnie

 

[D.J.]

Ugly. It looks like one of those blue Bessa's from a few years ago.

Clearly I am not alone in being unable to understand the question.

Cheers,

R.

Eh?
That's not what you wrote in AP this week.

"The Final Frame

[FONT=Arial,Verdana,Helvetica,sans-serif]The aesthetics of cameras transcend mere functionality, says Roger Hicks, which is why we should care what they look like"[/FONT]​

 

[bugmenot]

Okay, now I am starting to seriously doubt the intelligence and observation skills of people here. The M-E looks almost exactly like the M9 ... It's just the colour scheme that's changed ... and a missing lever on the right side of the front plate ... I don't see many articles calling the M9 ugly ... Sure, there were a few back in 2009, but it is a universally liked camera here it seems.

 

[maggieo]

I find the top plate's color off-putting and the silver dials look misplaced. The M9 and especially the M9-P are, to my mind attractive cameras, but the combination on the ME looks ill-considered and ugly.

 

[IEDEI]

i absolutely LOVE the look of the M-E.....perhaps the best looking M camera i've ever seen! Really dig the dark grey/anthracite colour and the functional look of it. I think it looks brilliant with a black lens.

 

[grapejohnson]

Is the RF patch bigger, or is it an illusion?

 

[gho]

This is exactly what I think as well. I'm thinking of getting one too.

Oh well, that I do not find it ugly does not mean that I want to get one. And that I do not want to get one does not mean that it is a bad camera. Frankly speaking, I have too many cameras already and with time I learned that buying a new camera does not make me a better photographer. So since quite some time I am quite set.

 

[MikeAUS]

This is it - for people who had no idea what an M-E is - like me

 

[tekst]

One thing I do like about it is the fact both black and chrome lenses would look good on it, besides that, I think its pretty ugly. Having said that I'd be perfectly happy with it or any other m9 variant.

 

[Chyn]

Held an ME in my hands back when it was first unveiled in September, and it felt subjectively no different than my M8. The grey color scheme made it seem like it was a miniature warship.

 

[bumgardner]

I think it looks really cool. I like the color scheme.

 

[PatrickONeill]

how much does an M9-P top plate and bottom plate cost?...

 

[willie_901]

Of course it is in no way ugly. It kind of looks like a lot of other M bodies. It looks minimalist and functional compared to about a hundred other camera forms that have popped up in the past five years or so.

 

[denizg7]

honestly this is a step backward in leica history but not a bad one..

if it was up to me , I would make the Leica M9P in production instead of the ME but then again it is a unique look , either way the ME won't harm Leica it's a safe move on their part