Benjamin Marks
Veteran
http://www.engadget.com/2016/05/02/leica-s-m-d-is-a-digital-camera-for-manual-purists/
MMMmmm. Would have to think hard about this. I see the logic of keeping it simple. But how do you do firmware updates with no way to interact with the camera? Maybe you have no firmware updates. Or maybe the interface is all on my computer?
I am thinking about how I actually use my M9. For all of its flexibility, I actually keep the thing on a set of settings and do most of my manipulation after the fact. For me:
RAW only
ISO 400, unless circumstances dictate otherwise.
Color space set to . . . I can't even remember. Adobe RGB?
Image size. Set to max.
Motor drive. 3 fps.
So what do I use the screen for? Well, I do have some lenses that back-focus, or for which the DOF changes unevenly as they are stopped down. The 50/1.5 Sonnar comes to mind. Checking focus is easy and has eliminated the little note cards I used to keep with each problematic lens back in my film days.
Also, I use some lenses -- like my 15mm and 21's without an aux finder, and have been checking what is actually in the frame using the M9's screen. So I'd have to change that part of the work-flow.
I also share the best of a series with the subject. . . sort of like: look how good you (or your child or your pet or whatever) look. Without the screen, the camera is less of a social device. OK for street, maybe. Say goodbye to the whole "But you weren't even in the picture" tension-diffuser with a mad member of the public, or a cop, or whatever. Also the "Is that a digital camera?" question/answer gets a little more nuanced. "Yeah, it is digital, but you'll have to trust me . . . ."
Ironically, and maybe this is why I have devoted any thought to a camera I can't afford and won't consider purchasing until I am looking at a used one in seven years. . . .This camera -- in terms of work flow -- is more or less what I imagined I would be using back in 2000. I thought -- insanely incorrectly, as it turns out -- that for our manual M's we would have a drop in focal-plane sensor with the "cassette" space taken up with a small battery, storage, and associated electronics. Ironically, the battery and storage pieces of this cockamamie idea are now "there" (have you seen the size of the storage chips most phones take? 16 MB on a chip the size of my little fingernail. . . and this is the "old" tech.). I just never imagined how quickly film would go "poof" as the medium of choice. Shows what I know.
I also imagine that by cutting out the screen and its battery requirements, all firmware except one preset set of settings, etc. that Leica may actually have a better profit margin on the M-D as a unit than their current M-of-the-year that has to have a team of engineers thinking about how all those pieces fit together. I will be listening for sales reports with a bemused sense of detachment.
MMMmmm. Would have to think hard about this. I see the logic of keeping it simple. But how do you do firmware updates with no way to interact with the camera? Maybe you have no firmware updates. Or maybe the interface is all on my computer?
I am thinking about how I actually use my M9. For all of its flexibility, I actually keep the thing on a set of settings and do most of my manipulation after the fact. For me:
RAW only
ISO 400, unless circumstances dictate otherwise.
Color space set to . . . I can't even remember. Adobe RGB?
Image size. Set to max.
Motor drive. 3 fps.
So what do I use the screen for? Well, I do have some lenses that back-focus, or for which the DOF changes unevenly as they are stopped down. The 50/1.5 Sonnar comes to mind. Checking focus is easy and has eliminated the little note cards I used to keep with each problematic lens back in my film days.
Also, I use some lenses -- like my 15mm and 21's without an aux finder, and have been checking what is actually in the frame using the M9's screen. So I'd have to change that part of the work-flow.
I also share the best of a series with the subject. . . sort of like: look how good you (or your child or your pet or whatever) look. Without the screen, the camera is less of a social device. OK for street, maybe. Say goodbye to the whole "But you weren't even in the picture" tension-diffuser with a mad member of the public, or a cop, or whatever. Also the "Is that a digital camera?" question/answer gets a little more nuanced. "Yeah, it is digital, but you'll have to trust me . . . ."
Ironically, and maybe this is why I have devoted any thought to a camera I can't afford and won't consider purchasing until I am looking at a used one in seven years. . . .This camera -- in terms of work flow -- is more or less what I imagined I would be using back in 2000. I thought -- insanely incorrectly, as it turns out -- that for our manual M's we would have a drop in focal-plane sensor with the "cassette" space taken up with a small battery, storage, and associated electronics. Ironically, the battery and storage pieces of this cockamamie idea are now "there" (have you seen the size of the storage chips most phones take? 16 MB on a chip the size of my little fingernail. . . and this is the "old" tech.). I just never imagined how quickly film would go "poof" as the medium of choice. Shows what I know.
I also imagine that by cutting out the screen and its battery requirements, all firmware except one preset set of settings, etc. that Leica may actually have a better profit margin on the M-D as a unit than their current M-of-the-year that has to have a team of engineers thinking about how all those pieces fit together. I will be listening for sales reports with a bemused sense of detachment.
There's a function key and LEDs inside the OVF for firmware updates.
willie_901
Veteran
Color space has no effect on the raw file. It could only affect an in-camera histogram or in-camera JPEG rendering.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I hate the whole "purity" meme. It's just marketing BS.
You work with an M-D the same way you work with an M7. Necessary functions like setting time/date, checking battery, checking storage, performing updates, etc all happen with the FN button and the viewfinder. You can check your exposures at any time by using a smartphone or tablet with an SD card reader ... just take the SD card out of the camera, and view its contents on your device (presumably with an app that knows how to process DNG files like PhotoRAW on iOS).
If you have needs for an LCD/EVF in your shooting workflow, this is not the correct model M for you. Leica makes several others...
You work with an M-D the same way you work with an M7. Necessary functions like setting time/date, checking battery, checking storage, performing updates, etc all happen with the FN button and the viewfinder. You can check your exposures at any time by using a smartphone or tablet with an SD card reader ... just take the SD card out of the camera, and view its contents on your device (presumably with an app that knows how to process DNG files like PhotoRAW on iOS).
If you have needs for an LCD/EVF in your shooting workflow, this is not the correct model M for you. Leica makes several others...
willie_901
Veteran
I surprised myself yesterday when I realized The M-D is the first Leica digital camera I am seriously considering owning.
The purpose of the M-D is not simplicity (I will explain later).
The purpose of the M-D is to simulate with the highest level of fidelity the experience of using film rangefinder camera with M/LTM lenses. A minor benefit is convenience.The camera has no other unique purpose.
One view would be the there are hundreds of digital cameras that can be operated exactly as one must operate the M-D. A smaller, but significant number of digital cameras can be used with M/LTM lenses. Only one, the ancient but noble, Epson RD-1 has an optical RF.
M-D focus often requires using focus and recompose (in some circumstances this is not simple ). There are only two exposure modes, M and AE. More relevant is the classic Leica center-weighted metering system. Using the optimum exposure is not simple with a center-weigted system. Simple would be the common matrix metering systems that even account for color and differently lit scenes. Obtaining optimal results using focus and recompose and center weighted metering requires thoughtfulness and experience. While these are considered straightforward for experienced photographers, they would not be simple for many.
Compared to using in-camera JPEGs, post-production rendering of raw files is not simple. Even the simplest raw work-flow requires more time, effort and experience. The photographer's investment in post-production is analogous to B&W film development and printing.
I reject the M-D provides simplicity.
The M-D certainly provides convenience. It takes no effort whatsoever to set the camera up to emulate operating a film camera. This is a luxury. But I'm not using the word luxury in the context of most Leica bashing (paying a huge premium for a brand name). In fact I'm not bashing Leica at all.
Like most of us, I find the user interface for digital cameras to be so out-of-date I don't know whether to laugh or cry. In many cases the manuals are very poorly written and produced. This makes setting a camera up to emulate the minimalistic film-camera experience frustrating. Even though the Leica M-D manual is excellent. Eliminating the user interface means no frustration.
However, I will speculate after a four hour investment in time (maximum) with either the X-Pro-2 or the SONY 7R line almost everyone here could select menu parameters that match the operational simplicity of the M-D. As annoying and unpleasant as these four hours might be, your per hour $$$ compensation would be very high. There is no reason short of lacking self-discipline, that would require anyone to change those parameters. One can even use M/LTM lenses. But one can not use an optical rangefinder.
As it turns out, the cost is not important for me. Even though I already operate a digital camera as if it were a film camera, returning to an optical RF and M/LTM lenses has an appeal. While though the Leica brand means nothing to me, I know I would enjoy using the M-D more than the cameras I use now. I'm in no rush to make a decision. But I am surprised I'm even thinking about it.
The purpose of the M-D is not simplicity (I will explain later).
The purpose of the M-D is to simulate with the highest level of fidelity the experience of using film rangefinder camera with M/LTM lenses. A minor benefit is convenience.The camera has no other unique purpose.
One view would be the there are hundreds of digital cameras that can be operated exactly as one must operate the M-D. A smaller, but significant number of digital cameras can be used with M/LTM lenses. Only one, the ancient but noble, Epson RD-1 has an optical RF.
M-D focus often requires using focus and recompose (in some circumstances this is not simple ). There are only two exposure modes, M and AE. More relevant is the classic Leica center-weighted metering system. Using the optimum exposure is not simple with a center-weigted system. Simple would be the common matrix metering systems that even account for color and differently lit scenes. Obtaining optimal results using focus and recompose and center weighted metering requires thoughtfulness and experience. While these are considered straightforward for experienced photographers, they would not be simple for many.
Compared to using in-camera JPEGs, post-production rendering of raw files is not simple. Even the simplest raw work-flow requires more time, effort and experience. The photographer's investment in post-production is analogous to B&W film development and printing.
I reject the M-D provides simplicity.
The M-D certainly provides convenience. It takes no effort whatsoever to set the camera up to emulate operating a film camera. This is a luxury. But I'm not using the word luxury in the context of most Leica bashing (paying a huge premium for a brand name). In fact I'm not bashing Leica at all.
Like most of us, I find the user interface for digital cameras to be so out-of-date I don't know whether to laugh or cry. In many cases the manuals are very poorly written and produced. This makes setting a camera up to emulate the minimalistic film-camera experience frustrating. Even though the Leica M-D manual is excellent. Eliminating the user interface means no frustration.
However, I will speculate after a four hour investment in time (maximum) with either the X-Pro-2 or the SONY 7R line almost everyone here could select menu parameters that match the operational simplicity of the M-D. As annoying and unpleasant as these four hours might be, your per hour $$$ compensation would be very high. There is no reason short of lacking self-discipline, that would require anyone to change those parameters. One can even use M/LTM lenses. But one can not use an optical rangefinder.
As it turns out, the cost is not important for me. Even though I already operate a digital camera as if it were a film camera, returning to an optical RF and M/LTM lenses has an appeal. While though the Leica brand means nothing to me, I know I would enjoy using the M-D more than the cameras I use now. I'm in no rush to make a decision. But I am surprised I'm even thinking about it.
BLKRCAT
75% Film
They will have to update it to shoot jpgs. Considering the latest bans from Reuters on RAW files they will end up forcing out those photojournalists who need to shoot jpgs.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
There is not a PJ on the planet who would choose this camera. Not one. Different target market.
I don't think this camera will make anyone change anything...
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
This camera is almost exactly what I want in a digital RF - the absolute minimum feature set. I would be even happier if they removed aperture priority automation and the back thumbwheel, but I could easily live with it like this.
Pity that there's almost zero chance of me justifying the expense. Yes, I could buy one right now if I really wanted to - but the value would be very poor for me at my current levels of activity. Leica hasn't exactly covered themselves in glory when it comes to the long term survival prospects of their digital cameras. I have my doubts that this would be a viable camera to use in ten years time.
Pity that there's almost zero chance of me justifying the expense. Yes, I could buy one right now if I really wanted to - but the value would be very poor for me at my current levels of activity. Leica hasn't exactly covered themselves in glory when it comes to the long term survival prospects of their digital cameras. I have my doubts that this would be a viable camera to use in ten years time.
Spanik
Well-known
If it would be an slr I'd order one this instant. But I want lenses wider than 35mm, longer than 90mm and shorter focus than 1m while still knowing what is in the frame.
And this is not for marketing BS, because it is Leica or fashion but this is the way I like to use a camera. This is the reason I still use a film camera: simplicity,.
And this is not for marketing BS, because it is Leica or fashion but this is the way I like to use a camera. This is the reason I still use a film camera: simplicity,.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
(bolded 1) I find this a bit funny. I've never used anything but CW (actually more like 'center area selected' with Leica Ms) pattern with the M-P, use it 90% of the time with the SL as well, and it's very very easy to get perfect exposures with it. That's why Nikon invented it back in 1969 (with the Nikon F Photomic FTn). With manual focus, I almost always center focus, then frame. Not hard at all. I just don't see the difficulty; this is simplicity itself.
(bolded 2) The M-D, just like all the other Leica cameras, comes with Lightroom. Processing raw files in LR is just about identical to processing JPEGs but you have much more processing overhead in your files to work with. You learn LR in a couple of days use and tune it to produce the results you want; after that, it's pretty much import pictures, tweak a couple to suit your druthers, export finished JPEGs. The only thing that takes some learning time is creating your 'druthers' in monochrome. That can take a bit of work to learn, mostly spent defining what your druthers actually are, but is a "learn once, create a template, apply to thousands in a second" effort. I spend less than 30 seconds per photo of actual adjustment and processing time nowadays; I used to cap it at 10 minutes with Photoshop. Most of my image processing time is spent selecting which photos I want to work on, not working on them.
(bolded 3) Not possible. I worked with the Sony A7 for a year and some trying to achieve the kind of simplicity of operation of the M-D. First off, the A7 simply cannot produce the same quality with wider focal length M lenses that the M cameras can. Secondly, no matter what you do, it remains a clunky, noisy, irritating camera to shoot with, with poorly positioned controls and brobdignagian complexity to its menu system, which you MUST access for some things. I sold it after I bought the M-P.
The M-P is FAR better performing with the same lenses and is a doddle to learn and set up; takes an hour or so to learn everything. The M-D's spare feature set can be set up in two minutes (basically, install battery and card, set the date and time, you're done) plus the time to charge the battery. The entire M-D manual, cover to cover, can be read in 15 minutes and, with two very minor exceptions, I could have figured out the whole camera without even opening it.
I think I want one of these M-Ds too. Because it's the simple digital camera I've been looking for.
G
sojournerphoto
Veteran
(bolded 1) I find this a bit funny. I've never used anything but CW (actually more like 'center area selected' with Leica Ms) pattern with the M-P, use it 90% of the time with the SL as well, and it's very very easy to get perfect exposures with it. That's why Nikon invented it back in 1969 (with the Nikon F Photomic FTn). With manual focus, I almost always center focus, then frame. Not hard at all. I just don't see the difficulty; this is simplicity itself.
(bolded 2) The M-D, just like all the other Leica cameras, comes with Lightroom. Processing raw files in LR is just about identical to processing JPEGs but you have much more processing overhead in your files to work with. You learn LR in a couple of days use and tune it to produce the results you want; after that, it's pretty much import pictures, tweak a couple to suit your druthers, export finished JPEGs. The only thing that takes some learning time is creating your 'druthers' in monochrome. That can take a bit of work to learn, mostly spent defining what your druthers actually are, but is a "learn once, create a template, apply to thousands in a second" effort. I spend less than 30 seconds per photo of actual adjustment and processing time nowadays; I used to cap it at 10 minutes with Photoshop. Most of my image processing time is spent selecting which photos I want to work on, not working on them.
(bolded 3) Not possible. I worked with the Sony A7 for a year and some trying to achieve the kind of simplicity of operation of the M-D. First off, the A7 simply cannot produce the same quality with wider focal length M lenses that the M cameras can. Secondly, no matter what you do, it remains a clunky, noisy, irritating camera to shoot with, with poorly positioned controls and brobdignagian complexity to its menu system, which you MUST access for some things. I sold it after I bought the M-P.
The M-P is FAR better performing with the same lenses and is a doddle to learn and set up; takes an hour or so to learn everything. The M-D's spare feature set can be set up in two minutes (basically, install battery and card, set the date and time, you're done) plus the time to charge the battery. The entire M-D manual, cover to cover, can be read in 15 minutes and, with two very minor exceptions, I could have figured out the whole camera without even opening it.
I think I want one of these M-Ds too. Because it's the simple digital camera I've been looking for.
G
I agree - I am coming around to the idea of the M-D, but just wanted to say that when I first ready your post I thought you had the other MP - that one is simple
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
(snipped) I think I want one of these M-Ds too. Because it's the simple digital camera I've been looking for.
G
You're not helping, dammit. :bang:
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I agree - I am coming around to the idea of the M-D, but just wanted to say that when I first ready your post I thought you had the other MP - that one is simple
I have an M4-2. Using it is slightly less simple than the M-D because I have to read a meter or estimate exposure, make those settings manually, then focus, frame, and shoot. (Never mind load film, advance film, rewind film, process film, and scan film, which adds a bit to the photo workflow compared to working with JPEGs or raw files.)
Simple is in the mind of the beholder.
I'm not helping myself either. I really don't need another camera... at all! :angel:
G
Copy the firmware file to the root of the SD card, put in card in the camera, turn the camera on while pressing the function button.
shimokita
白黒
FYI: the Leica M-D (type 262) user manual can be downloaded from the Leica site...
I'm just going to come out and say that I think it is really cool, but I can't buy it due to it not fitting the way I want to do photography (and I'm a cheapskate, so I'd buy a used M240). I rely on AF and shutter priority for the way I like to work in NYC. If I was in a different part of the country / world... this would be ideal.
willie_901
Veteran
Of course you don't see the difficulty with simple CW metering. You are a skilled experienced photographer who understands exposure (how to properly use a light meter). People who are used to letting the camera think for them would find using simple CW metering difficult and complex. You point is certainly valid if the M-D target market is limited to people who understand exposure, the limitations of simple light meters and how to use the meter's estimate to choose the optimum exposure. Going for a minute percentage of global new camera purchases may in fact be Leica's goal. We must keep in mind these double niche products (M9M and M-D) leverage existing technologies so Leica's the total cost per unit is lower than one might assume.
I agree completely with everything you wrote about raw vs JPEGs and also find raw rendering to be an essential step in the creative process. Yet I have read hundreds of posts (elsewhere) from new Fujifilm owners who are ecstatic the in-camera JPEG rendering enables them to abandon a raw workflow.
We will just have to agree to disagree that using these cameras as one would use a M-D is possible. I did not imply M lenses were part of that calculation. I was only addressing operating the camera as one would operate a decades old film camera.
I agree completely with everything you wrote about raw vs JPEGs and also find raw rendering to be an essential step in the creative process. Yet I have read hundreds of posts (elsewhere) from new Fujifilm owners who are ecstatic the in-camera JPEG rendering enables them to abandon a raw workflow.
We will just have to agree to disagree that using these cameras as one would use a M-D is possible. I did not imply M lenses were part of that calculation. I was only addressing operating the camera as one would operate a decades old film camera.
bmattock
Veteran
I am sure that Leica has a market for this camera. I am not that market. I will not make any further comment.
k__43
Registered Film User
I want one .. I doubt that I'll ever own one tho.
I only have an iPhone and a X100 as my digital options. I barely (like never) change anything on the x100 except ISO (it's mostly at 1250 cos it is mostly used inside). I switched off picture preview too so I don't get stopped when shooting. The M-D seems to do everything a digital camera needs to do for me.
(the only thing I miss is the illumination window. I kinda liked it design-wise)
I only have an iPhone and a X100 as my digital options. I barely (like never) change anything on the x100 except ISO (it's mostly at 1250 cos it is mostly used inside). I switched off picture preview too so I don't get stopped when shooting. The M-D seems to do everything a digital camera needs to do for me.
(the only thing I miss is the illumination window. I kinda liked it design-wise)