k__43
Registered Film User
wow! finally a digital M as thin as the M2/3/4/6 it seems .. good idea moving the flange like this to achieve the clearance for the sensor thickness!
M10 images leak
- Thread starter FrozenInTime
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 629
- Views 59K
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Exactly. And the reason the framelever is positioned so strangely.
kxl
Social Documentary
The M10 on the photo might be a hoax but Leica did file for a product (FCC# N5A3656), and it does say Medium format SLR -- THAT comes directly form the FCC website.
DougFord
on the good foot
The ubiquity of lens mount adapters of every sort makes the slightly extended flange of the new M seem like not such a big deal.
B-9
Devin Bro
So maybe Leica is planning a mirrorless medium format camera to compete with the new Fuji/Hasselblad offerings? Or possibly just an update to the S line.
Landberg
Well-known
Why would Leica go back to numbers in camera names?
uhoh7
Veteran
Body Appears thinner. The extruded lens flange shows this and also implies the image is genuine.
If it's a fake image, somebody knows this would have to be the case. 🙂
If this is true, it's going to boost sales considerably.
If it's a fake image, somebody knows this would have to be the case. 🙂
If this is true, it's going to boost sales considerably.
______
Well-known
Without more, I don't think it being a few mm thinner will have hoards of existing Leica digital owners abandoning their existing cameras in favor of the M10, nor do I see it tipping the balance in favor of those sitting on the fence about acquiring a digital M.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Lss
Well-known
If the photo (the bottom plate one) is a fake, the new product may be S line.
But if the photo is real, then the SLR part is obviously a mistake. Have previous M bodies been called SLR by FCC?
Anyway, medium format would probably mean that Leica has put that new CMOSIS sensor in there. That would be pretty interesting. While the sensor may be slightly too large for M (I did not check any facts), this may at least allow for various aspect ratios with as much sensor area as possible, potentially driven by 6-bit coding for a lens-specific selection. Leica must have at least toyed with such ideas in their research department. Of course, various digital corrections may also be done, but so far the M line in-camera fixes have been rather minimal concentrating only on the vignetting and colour shift issues.
Harry Caul
Well-known
How much bigger than FF is the sensor? Maybe it could be used to emulate a digital RFF with visible area outside the 'frame lines'?
Brooklynguy
Established
You may be right, but just as the cumulative improvements and additions in the Nikon D810 resulted in many D800 being traded in, Leica hopefully has addressed small issues with the M240, such as start-up time, body thickness (check), weight, improved ISO/DR, return of preview lever, direct ISO control, LV refresh rates, video performance, improved handling (bigger buttons and relocating that rear "LV" button somewhere else). Maybe Leica has added features such as sensor cleaner, 4K, Solitaire, Facebook, espresso maker, laser gun, etc. I'm keeping my mind open, but my wallet closed (for now).
______
Well-known
Like I said... "without more". Actually, it's good for some of us when others trade-up. Used bodies become available at lower prices. 🙂
Fotobot
Established
I hope it is an ISO dial. I think that exposure compensation should be on the thumbwheel so that you can focus with your left hand and simultaneously adjust exposure with your right hand.
uhoh7
Veteran
I disagree 😉
I never heard of "hoards" of Leica users, in any context.
A thinner, lighter body would be attractive to many, I know that. Look at how the Barnack lives on. Why?
Smaller, if well designed, and equally powerful, is better 🙂
Now, I'm shooting a loaner Sony Rx1r2 alot right now, and it's tiny, and it makes unbelievable images. I'll never buy one though, because the design is so unfriendly, in so many ways. Smaller is not always "better", but done right....
willie_901
Veteran
The extended lens-mount flange will annoy some people. I think it is an interesting and useful compromise way to make the body thinner.
You can have either a thicker body or an extended lens flange... but you have to pick one.
The total distance remains constant and is mandated by the 27.80 mm flange focal distance (a.k.a lens register) of the circa 1954 M mount. 😛
You can have either a thicker body or an extended lens flange... but you have to pick one.
The total distance remains constant and is mandated by the 27.80 mm flange focal distance (a.k.a lens register) of the circa 1954 M mount. 😛
Lss
Well-known
Ok, checked the CMOSIS sensor size. It's not that much bigger at 36.43mm x 27.62mm, but it would at least allow for an improved square mode over any standard fullframe sensor. There may be a small advantage for various other crops, too, where the 6-bit coding could be utilized if they wish to push it.
Rethinking of the frameline masks or even the projection solution may also be needed to provide a good user experience.
jsrockit
Moderator
I hope it makes the fat models a lot cheaper... 😉
______
Well-known
You're right. It does kind of conjure up an image of the villagers storming Dr. Frankenstein's castle, doesn't it.
Can't disagree with you there either.
Perhaps you are correct, and there is a large subset of Leica owners that would trade in their 240 for the M10 just because it is 5mm thinner.
radi(c)al_cam
Well-known
Similar threads
