Leica M( ) and M-E: first impressions

[Roger Hicks]

This question is for anyone who has in fact handled the M.

Does the EVF feel or seem fragile? It looks as though it is like the Olympus one (it may in fact be re-branded ehe?).
To me that one seems delicate. I would hope for something robust.

Also, is it just me or is an EVF really quite shaky for use with longer focal length lenses?
I've been comparing my f2.8/180mm sonnar on my 5Dii while using a f2.8/135mm Sonnar on my Xpro.
The EVF seems so jiggly compared to the SLR viewfinder.
What have others found?

Seemed as good as the best of other EVFs to me. Still jerky, but I'm rarely trying to use macro or very long lenses quickly. What do you mean by 'fragile'? And no, I don't think it's Olympus. But of course I could be wrong.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Godfrey]

This question is for anyone who has in fact handled the M.

Does the EVF feel or seem fragile? It looks as though it is like the Olympus one (it may in fact be re-branded ehe?).
To me that one seems delicate. I would hope for something robust.

Also, is it just me or is an EVF really quite shaky for use with longer focal length lenses?
I've been comparing my f2.8/180mm sonnar on my 5Dii while using a f2.8/135mm Sonnar on my Xpro.
The EVF seems so jiggly compared to the SLR viewfinder.
What have others found?

The same EVF is manufactured by Epson for Olympus, yes, and they are interchangeable.

I use it with the X2. It's a good EVF and feels plenty robust to me. It's not 'hewn of steel' but it fits precisely and works a treat.

At high magnifications, yes, the perception is that an EVF jitters more. This is because it is not a continuous stream of light .. It's a flicker frame like a computer display or movie film. You get used to it. For action work with long telephoto lenses, an SLR reflex optical VF provides a better view. For working at a slower pace, an EVF does fine.

(The Xpro1 EVF isn't as good as the Leica EVF2. Don't judge by that.)

I expect that I'll use the optical RF about 90% of the time, for me the EVF is a useful adjunct to the M for those odd moment when I might use a long lens or a macro lens. The other features and upgrades to the M over the M9 are what have my real attention. The EVF is the difference in being able to use my Nikkor 85/1.8 or Micro Nikkor 105 and 200 lenses at all on a Leica M.

 

[uhoh7]

The "M" is not what I expected or even wanted just a short time ago. But, even I can see that it will be a game changer for many. I think maybe it's the point in time on which we will be able to look back and say, "This camera finally let Leica catch up to the rest, even leapfrog the rest in certain ways and to stay in business." For sure, the classical rangefinder shooters (M8 owners and M9 owners) helped finance this. But I think the market for the M9 is actually too limited to allow Leica to stay in business long. Let's assume for the time being that the raw file quality is as good as what I got out of my M8 when it was working...

Congratulations to Leica. It looks to me like they made a very future oriented system available and for a larger market too. Not sure if I will buy one yet. I have to get back in touch with digital stuff with my working M8 again. 😀

Leica just stomped the whole show at photokina, which is no small achievement in this D800, RX-1 world.

For the most part the crusty crowd at RF is unimpressed (with the exception of a few like JPSuisse)

Is it because they hate any 7k camera? (that's the only thing about it I hate 😉 )

 

[Olsen]

I am very enthusiastic about the new M(10). With a SMOS sensor we can hope for far better high ISO performance. With 24 MP much higher resolution is secured. Which will do the fine Leica optics justice. - If it is not enough we will see. Nikon will face competition if it's D800/36 MP offers better performance. Which I doubt, really. Owners of R-glass are again part of the family; a sympathetic trait of Leica.

There is room for even more improvements. - This M (M-m-m) can't be the end of the road. Like a dust removal system or adjustable sensor, which will end sending cameras and optics to Solms to have it adjusted. Then we must hope for more 'solid state' solutions and less fine mechanics. Which will make the Leica M(X) cheaper to produce and more reliable. This EVF thing is smart. And the live view. That is the future way of taking pictures. Either with your cell phone or your M(M-m-). So is video. I had saved a lot of bagage and hassle had I had this possibility when going on this cruise earlier this year. ( http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/217188-off-cruise.html ) My M9 worked flawlessly through the trip while my Sony cam corder broke down several times.

I will certainly buy a M(M-m-m-m), but I will not be a Beta Tester. And this time I mean it.... I am tired of Red Lines and Italian Flags and hope strongly that no surprises pops up.

 

[Ben Z]

The depressing thing is that I think I'm going to buy one (depression is finding the money). Not to replace the M9. To use alongside. At least the M8 can go at that point.

Cheers,

R.

That was initially my plan also Roger, until I saw that the M has 2m framelines vs the 1m of the M9. It doens't matter that much to me how the framelines are calibrated, just that it would be an added thing to have to keep in mind while using the two together. Hopefully I'll have a chance to use an M at one of the LHSA functions, to see how well the two models work out in tandem. The M certainly has things to recommend it, and am pleasantly surprised it's priced the same as the M9 was when I got it. That said, the M9 does everything I need and want, with none of the irritations of the M8, and given what I'll likely get selling it, seems a pity to let it go. Anyway I just got the 1-yr extension on the warranty from Leica-AG, so definitely won't be parting with it for a year irregardless of whether I get an M in the interim or not.

 

[swoop]

That was initially my plan also Roger, until I saw that the M has 2m framelines vs the 1m of the M9.

Weren't the original framelines for the M8 spaced for 3m? And then Leica recalibrated them for 1m and called them the new "accurate framelines." And now Leica has spaced the Milestone at 2m?

 

[bumgardner]

The new announcements have me tempted to move to Leica. After the M9 was announced I considered it too. With the new M I am really tempted. I will have to see some actual shots from the new M before I make a decision though. I also want to handle the camera with the EVF and an R lens before I get too excited.

 

[Godfrey]

Weren't the original framelines for the M8 spaced for 3m? And then Leica recalibrated them for 1m and called them the new "accurate framelines." And now Leica has spaced the Milestone at 2m?

I never worry about it. No matter what optical viewfinder I've used, the framelines are only a guide ... I learn pretty quickly what a particular camera sees and shoot accordingly. Same for SLR viewfinders ... most are between 92 and 96% coverage, it's only the pro bodies that have 100% coverage, and that usually only with 50mm lenses..

Unless you're one of those "never crop a pixel or a thousandth of an inch off the negative" types, it's really not an issue at all. I shoot a bit loose, presuming I'm going to crop and adjust my framing to be what I want after the fact. 🙂

With an EVF or LCD Live View, though, you can be pixel for pixel precise about what you're capturing.

 

[Doug]

Weren't the original framelines for the M8 spaced for 3m? And then Leica recalibrated them for 1m and called them the new "accurate framelines." And now Leica has spaced the Milestone at 2m?

The original M8 framelines were set for a conservative 0.7m I believe, the M8.2 and viewfinder upgrade were accurate at 2m, and the M9 was set at 1m. So the new M, MM, and ME seem consistent now at 2m... Further, on the M, you have the option of an electronic live view either on the screen or EVF that should be quite accurate as to field size and also parallax.

 

[Ben Z]

The original M8 framelines were set for a conservative 0.7m I believe, the M8.2 and viewfinder upgrade were accurate at 2m, and the M9 was set at 1m. So the new M, MM, and ME seem consistent now at 1m...

No, the M are 2m like the M8.2 was. Like I said, matters not to me in that I adapt quickly. But also like I said, and was quoted out of context above, it is a problem if using an M alongside an M9, M-E, or MM in that you'd have one more thing to remember when shooting quickly, to avoid cutting things off at near range with the M, or having to crop a good deal later on the M9/M-E/MM. I have nothing against cropping if it's needed to make the image work, but otherwise I'd pretty much like to use as many of those pixels I paid for.

 

[Monochrom]

Great innovation....for sure...

The great fact live view, it renders the whole set of R lenses (zooms😱) usable again in contemporary (digital) means.

I hoped the RF was going to be a digital sort of RF...but it´s still optical...

I guess the video mode will atract a lage audience of new followers, because the image quality will be just astonishing....

So...my wife would be very pleased since the live iew mode...

About the M-E...well many of us will still wait for the mechanical advance, no screen digital M....

 

[jsrockit]

About the M-E...well many of us will still wait for the mechanical advance, no screen digital M....

I think you may be waiting a long time... 😀

 

[ray_g]

Assuming IQ will be better, or at least the same, with the new sensor, I can't see why someone willing to buy an M9 a few years back would not get the M10, with all the added flexibility it offers, for the same price. The M-E on the other hand, would have been in the correct ballpark price wise, IF it had the new 24mp sensor, being a dumb downed or streamlined M10. As it is, the M-E is the one that is overpriced between the two. Good news is that will drive used M9 prices down. That's good for folks who just want a FF rangefinder.

 

[eleskin]

M-E looks great but I hate the hideous color!

M-E looks great but I hate the hideous color!

The M-E is a great camera, but I really hate the color! I really wish they at least would have kept the black paint. Why not just stick to Black and Chrome? What gives? Oh well, it is a tool, and I use black electrical tape anyway for the street!

 

[ramosa]

I agree about the ME's look. Or couldn't they have made the dials and lugs, etc, the same dark color like the body? I don't like panda designs ...

 

[Rangefinderfreak]

I have used it and saw the videos in the "Das weisentliche" night. I think it is just as big step ahead as M3 was in 1954. The Action Video capability will bring lots of young snowboarders, paragliders etc as leica M users. With laptop attachment it will be a great studio tool, too. When stripped off all attachments it is still a great M rangefinder for street shooters ( with a video capability) It is just a new "toolbox"

 

[palmerfralick]

The new M is NOT an improved M9. It is a totally new camera. If you like the M9 buy one. To absolutely compare picture quality get an NEC monitor or high quality prints on paper. To expect to see fine quality for comparison on youtube or most any other online source is not going to happen.
I cannot afford it yet but I applaud Leica for extending the usefulness of a true rangefinder camera, no other manufacturer has done this.

 

[cosmonaut]

Leica digital will always be out of my budget. By the time I can afford one the technology is to old to fool with. There are so many cameras on the market that is better than the M8 and M9 it just don't make it logical for me to buy a camera that expensive and be limited to what I can do with it. The D800/600 or Sony a99 make better since to me.
I have bought a Leica 50mm Summicron 2.0 and converted it to fit my Sony. I also have a 90mm 2.8 on the way. Ken Rockwell says the 90mm is optically perfect. A cheaper way to use Leica glass. With the focus peaking of the a99 I should be set.

 

[Godfrey]

Cosmonaut,

Someday you'll come to the realization that, once past a certain threshold, how "obsolete" a particular camera might be means nothing.

Sure, later cameras have more capabilities and can produce even better results. And all my current digital cameras are 12 to 18 Mpixel machines that are faster, slicker, and have more dynamic range. But I'm still printing photos made with the Olympus E-1 and Pentax *ist DS that shocks me with its vibrant quality and detailing.

Even an M8, the first Leica digital RF, is still a very fine photo making machine. Using one is nothing like using an A99 or any other TTL electronic camera. They're just an entirely different kind of camera.

A M9 might be technically obsolete and amazingly sparse of 'features' by current digital camera standards. But it produces absolutely stunning image quality and will do so for many years to come. I haven't found much that compares to what I see coming out of it, regardless of the number of pixels or the proliferation of convenience features. ;-)

"Equipment often gets in the way of Photography.

G

 

[Godfrey]

Red Dot Forum posted a nice little article about the M-E, and some photos of their first "for sale" production example comparing it to the M9 directly.

http://www.reddotforum.com/content.php/290-The-Leica-M-E-Compared

The M-E's finish is actually quite attractive to my eye. The bluish 'anthracite gray' and silver accents reminds me of my Panasonic G1, which looked nice regardless of what lenses and such I threw on it. The only loss compared to an M9, for me, is the alternative viewfinder frame selector ... which I only use occasionally. I've never used the USB port on my M9.

I do still prefer the black M9, but if I were buying today and wanted just what the M9 gave me functionaly, I'd have no problem buying the M-E.