Leica M240 w/o Screen

Samouraï

Samouraï

Well-known
Local time
5:41 PM
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
520
Great!

Now my question is about depth of the body, will it be close to a regular m film camera?

If so i´ll go for it!
 
Rumored to be the same size as the 240, sold in limited quantity (which means higher price), and will be a different model than the M-P.
 
I would be interested for a lower price and smaller size. I have no love of a rear screen, but I don't fetishize the lack thereof.
 
Just a regular M with a few embellishments, the expected facelift like Leica always does after two years of production. Announced yesterday.
 
I probably shouldn't be jumping into the rumor mill, but why would not having a screen be a good thing? I understand the concern about added thickness, but is that the only drawback?
 
  • Apparently some LCD screen vendors are unreliable and suddenly refuse to supply replacement parts. So if you don't have a screen to begin with, you don't have to worry about what happens if the screen fails or becomes damaged by accident. On the other hand, this could be credible excuse to upgrade to a newer camera.
  • LCD screens are perceived as evil because one can actually view the results immediately. Oddly this is considered a weakness despite a long history of professional photographers using Polaroid backs (not on M bodies obviously) to check lighting, exposure and composition before switching to negative or transparency film for the final shot(s). Somehow performing the same function quickly is just not right.
  • LCD screens are the gateway to the ill-designed, user-hostile, assembly language user interfaces present in all digital cameras. No screen means no menus; so life is good.
  • Even worse, no LCD screen means the camera's parameters could be controlled by a much more sinister means... the smart phone. With a smart phone/tablet the user interface to set and menu parameters could be significantly improved and even customized. Many sets of menu parameters could be saved. Unfortunately, there is nothing worse than having to use a smart phone/tablet. And even if you already use a smart phone, your risk of disappointment doubles because you now have to two batteries that could expire unexpectedly.
  • Besides playing jokes on your peers, you can also deceive strangers. If you are working and someone says, "Hey did you take my picture? I hope not 'cause I don't wanna be in the internet." You can show them the back of the camera and reply, "Chill dude, its just an old film camera and film can't be on the internet. Have you ever seen film on the internet?" This strategy might even work with dim-witted rent-a-cops.
 
KoNickon said:
I probably shouldn't be jumping into the rumor mill, but why would not having a screen be a good thing? I understand the concern about added thickness, but is that the only drawback?
Click to expand...

Some people are just purists. I think many of us can relate to the fact that most digital cameras just do not feel as nice as their film counterparts.
 
willie_901 said:
...the camera's parameters could be controlled by a much more sinister means... the smart phone. While the user interface to set and store menu parameters could be significantly improved and even customized....
Click to expand...

You just hit your head on a nail. Not to go off topic too far, but this, or some semblance of it is the near future. Everything done on a handheld: setup, review, FW updates etc.
 
If you don't like the screen, set the camera to full manual and tape it over. Even better, order a nice leather case which covers the screen.

I don't see why anyone absolutely needs a camera without one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom