"M (Typ 262)"

I would love the live view if it came as part of a hybrid viewfinder, à la the X-Pro1, but the giant accessory EVF looks and feels awkward to me on an M. Content to use an A7 when live view is needed and save the Leicas for the pure, unadulterated, intentionally compromised pleasures of 1953.
 
So people are happy that they slapped on an inaccurate rangefinder onto a camera and removed the EVF with enough pixels to tell you whether you are off-focused or not? Might as well go back to the 18MP M instead.
 
NazgulKing said:
So people are happy that they slapped on an inaccurate rangefinder onto a camera and removed the EVF with enough pixels to tell you whether you are off-focused or not? Might as well go back to the 18MP M instead.
Click to expand...

Well, we are on the rangefinderforum...
 
i wonder if a software hack could add or activate live view, or if there is a hardware change that precludes that possibility....
 
More a reduced M240 than a CMOS-fied M9
I do have to say I miss the frameline illumination window
 
+1 what Dante_Stella said. Losing LV isn't a bonus, IMHO. For me, using legacy glass on the M 240 is creative and interesting -- without LV the M 262 will be less versatile than the M 240. How else can you focus a wobbly $30 Jupiter-8 on a $5000 camera? :)
 
Not sure how much I'm interested in this camera but to have a cheaper simpler alternative to the 240 type for the ones (me? maybe) enjoying RF photography is not bad.

Of course LV and EVF are very useful if you plan to use other lenses, in this case the 240 is your camera.

Just thinking, now the price delta could be a little bit more...:)

robert
 
I just got a Q and LV is definitely a very useful tool when your can't comfortably get behind the RF. Who needed video anyway ...
 
If I didn't already have a M240, this is the one to go with.

I have always thought that Leica does not want to produce a more pure camera below M240, because they know, photographers who just want a 'camera' will flock to this lower price point version instead of the one with video and other functionality.

Imagine the special edition without LCD and without video and sell for 4000. I think most people who currently uses rangefinder or coming from film will be more than happy to pick that up and spend less money.
 
Reading the above, I think my recent $ 4,000 investment in a new M-E was a good one. It has, more or less the same features, except for the smaller screen.
 
Dante_Stella said:
This is a graceful way to reduce the price: decontenting via removing video, Live View the frameline preview lever, and the brass top plate (which actually adds a ton of weight and adds no value to black or silver chrome).
Dante
Click to expand...

Exactly. And you are right about the EVF, too.

The real question is when will Leica muster the courage and vision to make a move like they did going from Barnack to M?

It's time to throw out the M design as a M6 look-alike and make a modern camera with the same priorites as the lenses, which are really the only reason Leica is still going. The lenses are as small as possible and even sacrifice performance to some degree, to this end.

Many of us want the smallest, lightest body possible. The Sony A7 is thinner than the M6 at the LCD. Forget the squareness. Make some humps where you need to, but try to make them ergonomic, small and light.

Next get this: RF is not about tradition, for many of us. We like RF because of performance: it's clear, it's fast, and you see alot. So give us that with a EVF alongside, built in. Inboard.

So you, Leica, make three basic cameras:

1)M6 knockoff, with 240 features but smaller and lighter.
2) the MN. N is for new, and this is the camera I describe above.
3) same as above but without RF, EVF only, but a really good one. This is the interchangeable Q.

Oh Charlie, you say, too many models, you are dreaming!

Count the models today. Three options for M is fine and you add monochrome versions at least for one.

Oh and one more thing: when you make the MN add the potential to control an AF lens. Then make some. Not for me. But others like them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom