Kwesi
Well-known
I think you are in for a pleasant surprise.
With a bit of luck we should see a production M-60 replace the M-E .
No inside info- just my crystal ball.
JPSuisse
Well-known
Interesting "idea" here as others have pointed out. If it comes into mass production and has a frame lever, I might replace my M8. It would match my shooting style, force me to think about exposure like my MPs do and eliminate menus (which I hate.)
Another point that hasn't come up in this thread is the topic of obsolete components. One reason I have not replaced my M8 is that any digital camera one buys is simply not maintainable unless the maker owns the whole production chain.
This basically means digital cameras are expensive for amateurs on a per shot basis. Factoring in the forced hardware and software updates for the computers then is also expensive. When the camera fails at the wrong time and the components are EOL, everything needs upgrading...
So, if Leica can prove to me that they have as many components as possible under their control (maestro, own CMOS, etc.), I might buy another digital camera. For sure, eliminating the screen is eliminating another component that could just go EOL and is wasted on me.
Cheers, John
Another point that hasn't come up in this thread is the topic of obsolete components. One reason I have not replaced my M8 is that any digital camera one buys is simply not maintainable unless the maker owns the whole production chain.
This basically means digital cameras are expensive for amateurs on a per shot basis. Factoring in the forced hardware and software updates for the computers then is also expensive. When the camera fails at the wrong time and the components are EOL, everything needs upgrading...
So, if Leica can prove to me that they have as many components as possible under their control (maestro, own CMOS, etc.), I might buy another digital camera. For sure, eliminating the screen is eliminating another component that could just go EOL and is wasted on me.
Cheers, John
airfrogusmc
Veteran
That's what I'm hope'n for.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Plenty of film cameras, even Leica film cameras, have obsolete components that make them unrepairable. Leica film cameras are better than most in this regard, but there are some bits that are simply no longer available and which cannot be economically manufactured.
Even if Leica owned the entirety of the sensor manufacturing facility, it would be financially impossible for them to continue manufacture of sensors past a certain point in time. Just like it is financially impossible for them to continue to stock every individual bit and piece for a 1980 M4-2.
Cameras are not intended to be "forever" purchases, by any manufacturer. That's the bottom line. Leica digital cameras do better than most, just like Leica film cameras do better than most, but camera equipment evolves quickly ...
I have no idea why people love the film advance (or shutter recock) lever so much. If there's any one thing that annoys the cr@p out of me when I go from my M9 to my M4-2 it's that I have to remember to wind the film again. I'd buy the winder for the M4-2 (just like I have for the R8) but the motor winder for the M4-2 is just too bulky and heavy. (The one for the R8 is beautifully slim and well integrated into the camera when in place ... so much nicer than having to wind on manually!)
G
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Clark.EE
Well-known
JPSuisse
Well-known
Godfrey, what would you say is a reasonable lifespan for an electronic tool that you pay USD 5'000.- for?
For almost anybody, it's more then 5 years, I'm guessing. I'm not convinced yet that consumer electronics manfacturers are in a position to manage even this.
For me personally, it's more like 10 expectation. The M8 shows that Leica could not achieve that then. Maybe now with there increased "fertigungstiefe" (Maestro, own CMOS design) they will be able to.
Remember, the obsolete components is big problem for Leica and even a risk to their business. I'm guessing they are actively trying to find ways to avoid the problem. As a low volume manufacturer they are 100% at the mercy of the big components manufacturers.
For almost anybody, it's more then 5 years, I'm guessing. I'm not convinced yet that consumer electronics manfacturers are in a position to manage even this.
For me personally, it's more like 10 expectation. The M8 shows that Leica could not achieve that then. Maybe now with there increased "fertigungstiefe" (Maestro, own CMOS design) they will be able to.
Remember, the obsolete components is big problem for Leica and even a risk to their business. I'm guessing they are actively trying to find ways to avoid the problem. As a low volume manufacturer they are 100% at the mercy of the big components manufacturers.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Koudelka's words, not mine. But yeah.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Metallic sodium. Imagine what a mint copy would bring on the collector's market, a decade out.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
The big manufacturers buy components from the same components manufacturers. They don't manufacture everything in-house. That would not be cost effective or profitable. This is true of even the largest manufacturers in the world nowadays.
What's my expectation of lifespan? I don't have one. I use a camera from when I buy it until when I move on to something else or when it breaks unrepairably. To date, shooting with Pentax, Canon, Nikon, Leica, Olympus, Panasonic, and Sony digital cameras, I've never had one break in over 300,000 exposures. My Olympus E-1 was made in October 2003. I acquired it in 2008, when it had 3200 exposures on it, and have since made another couple ten-thousand exposures with it. My M9 was purchased as a demo in 2012 and now has 17,000 exposures on it. My Pentaxes and other Olympus cameras have made up to 70,000 exposures each for me. None of these cameras have worn out or broken yet.
I don't worry about expected lifespan at all. I don't worry about the price of a camera except when I'm buying it or selling it either ... there's no point. The value (not price) of a camera is how well it suits your photography, how much you use it, and whether what it produces satisfies you—not its monetary value. Worrying about that stuff all the time puts a damper on making great photos, in my opinion, since you're always worried about how much money you're spending to do it. I don't care. I spend what it takes to get what I want and use it to the best of my (and its) ability.
G
airfrogusmc
Veteran
Yes I agree. Finding equipment that matched the way you see and work-----PRICELESS.
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
Would be a real swine when it rains.
I really don't know much of anything about the M-60, but as it has no display and therefore no menus, and almost no knobs, it looks like the only things settable are the shutter and film speed. As it does include a film speed dial, it must have a meter. Does it include an auto-exposure function, or does it go even further down the less-costs-more road with only a match-diode metering system?
Cheers,
Dez
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Godfrey
somewhat colored
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
jschrader
Well-known
yesterday I had my first look into a Fuji X-E1 EVF. Compared to a good optical finder, it is lightyears behind (in my opinion).
But digital Leicas are unaffordable for an amateur. To skip all the unneeded things from a digital Leica to 1) give it less that can break and make the camera unusable and 2) to make it cheaper would be so welcome.
Give us the equivalent to an M6 with a b&w film!!!!!
But not to make it more exclusive but more affordable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:bang:
EDIT: I do not mean I cannot afford if. It is only that I end up with a price of 10 Euro per printable photo in the long run, calculating my number of shots per year, success rate, and the durability of a digital device
But digital Leicas are unaffordable for an amateur. To skip all the unneeded things from a digital Leica to 1) give it less that can break and make the camera unusable and 2) to make it cheaper would be so welcome.
Give us the equivalent to an M6 with a b&w film!!!!!
But not to make it more exclusive but more affordable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:bang:
EDIT: I do not mean I cannot afford if. It is only that I end up with a price of 10 Euro per printable photo in the long run, calculating my number of shots per year, success rate, and the durability of a digital device
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
It does but, interestingly, it doesn't seem to allow for any way of setting exposure compensation (eg. by way of an exposure compensation control surrounding the ISO setting dial; a la the M7). This may or may not be of significance to anyone wanting to take a photo with the camera
eek but might be something to re-consider if a "production" version of a screenless digital were being contemplated....Mike
ian_watts
Ian Watts
It does but, interestingly, it doesn't seem to allow for any way of setting exposure compensation (eg. by way of an exposure compensation control surrounding the ISO setting dial; a la the M7). This may or may not be of significance to anyone wanting to take a photo with the camera
Surely the shutter speed dial and the aperture ring are what you use to make an exposure "compensation"? At least that's how I've been doing it all these years.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
And thereby not using aperture priority autoexposure mode, the feature to which I was referring.
If the "concept" says that people should use manual exposure only then why not follow through on that and provide no AE mode at all? That might suit you better. If you don't use autoexposure, then that feature should not be present. After all, isn't the whole design concept behind the camera to force people to not use "superfluous" controls by simply not providing them?
But if an AE mode is provided, why not do it properly and include an exposure compensation control? Either not do it at all, or do it right.
...Mike
gavinlg
Veteran
You should try an Olympus E-m1 or Fujifilm xt-1 EVF. They are much much better. The XE1 was very much a first generation product in terms of EVF