Harry, put briefly, your traditional design doesn’t really address what I perceive to be the range of operational deficiencies of the M8 (or more accurately, what has driven me up the wall for the past two years). My list would be significantly different. It also could be done (presumably) without any massive re-engineering of the camera.
It was an evolutionary approach. I have ideas for a whole new camera, but people were already firing up the torches and getting out the pitchforks, because I added two buttons to the camera.
Kill the metering and flash-ready “lag.”
Sure, why not.
Speed up the shutter recycling, even if it makes the camera louder. If you need to make it quiet, do it like Konica did with the Hexar AF and have a mode where you can slow down the motors.
Sure, that would be nice, but only if they can keep the camera silent. I think most M shooters take single or a few measured shots at a time and silence is very important to them. It sure is to me. 5fps would be nice for certain type of work, when noise is not an issue, so multiple shooting modes would probably be the solution.
Admit defeat with Metz’s kludgy and slow (pop-pop) M-TTL and license Nikon’s D-TTL flash system (not i-TTL or CLS, which would actually cost money to license). While they’re at it, add an SC-18 style plug to the side of the camera. When you need to use an external finder to see a 28mm field of view (on a 21m lens), it’s obnoxious that you can’t connect a flash. I love the fact that the $950 Universal Wideangle Finder M doesn't have a pass-through for a flash signal.
Sure.
Add an audible (or vibratory) clipping indicator to eliminate the need to check histograms all the time.
Good idea. Another one would be an exposure mode that doesn't clip the highlights in the first place.
Eliminate the self-timer setting from the top deck. This isn't a super telephoto camera, it isn't a macro camera, and people who take self-timer pictures of themselves can learn to live with using a menu so the rest of us don't miss the moment.
I'm neither here nor there on this one. I think a bigger probem is the half-assed selecter switch, that will move if you look at it cockeyed.
Add an exposure compensation dial to the outside of the camera and move the shutter speed dial to the front right corner. Using buttons for compensation doesn’t tell you anything about the setting unless the screen is turned on.
Dials are no good for fast shooting. You have to slow down and concentrate on counting clicks or watch the readout change in the viewfinder / display. When you press a button you know exactly how much you have adjusted the EV compensation by (it should also show up in the viewfinder). Every push equals -/+ a fixed amount. Buttons are also easier to manipulate, without having to devote a lot of attention to them.
Put a center button on the jog wheel for doing a 100% blowup immediately to check critical focus.
sure.
Add more steps to the LCD contrast settings.
Check
Uncompress the RAW files (we have SDHD now) and allocate more data to highlights for better recoverability. Adopt Kodak’s Digital Exposure Correction for in-camera JPGs.
Agreed. There is no reason why Leica shouldn't allow you to write an uncompressed file if you wanted to.
Yes. Professional level protection against dust and moisture. A $6,500 dollar digital camera without this is a bad joke.
Have manual lens selection and auto-calibration.
Yes, if possible.
Ditch the absurd bottom-plate loading.
I like the baseplate.
Click white balance (eyedropper).
Good idea.
Some things on your list for the traditional spec, like a full-frame sensor and Matrix meter are beyond Leica’s R&D capabilities.
Leica isn't developing their own chip, so it's not a problem of their internal R&D department. If someone in the market comes up with the technology to make this possible, Leica would order one.
There is no reason why Leica couldn't develop a good matrix metering system. It's not rocket science.
Making it 16-21Mp would exceed the focusing accuracy of the RF system and lenses as collimated.
You could say the same about most AF systems. Focusing accuracy would not be an issue, unless you were shooting wide open, but stopped down you should be ok. You certainly would see the benefits of 21MP when shooting at something like f8.
If one thing were changed about the sensor, it should be increasing the dynamic range.
Agreed. DR ueber alles. I want a sensor that delivers a solid 12 stops of real range @ 32bit color. Probably not possible for several reason, but that's a different story.
Other things you suggest (auto ISO, no AA filter, AE lock) are features of the existing M8 (maybe it is an explicit statement that you would keep them)?
Keep them.
The modern spec camera? Well, nothing should make this camera any heavier, any bigger, any uglier or any more like a DSLR in controls – because at that point, a D700 (especially with the AA filter removed) is going to be better in most ways. If you really want to go modern, add these to the list above:
(a)
Go to an ERF that can actually compensate for the focus shift of fast lenses. The ERF could also drive ultrasonic AF lenses. The prism RF is out of its depth in focusing the 75mm Summilux (among others) due to these forward-backward shifts.
Sure, but at that point you longer have a Leica M, but a Contax G2 or Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1.
My suggestion would be to increase the length of the optomechanical RF and learn to live with a little slack in the system.
Being a rangefinder the M series has always been about compromises. It's never been very good at using long lenses and very wides need brightline finders. The results from the camera have always been something of a compromise in terms of focus and framing accuracy. Using an RF camera is not an exact science. If you examine prints from negatives that have been made with Leicas over the past 75 odd years you will notice that the vast majority of them where focus could be deemed critical are off just ever so much, yet we are talking about some of the most famous pictures in history. An RF is more about making a sketch, than a detailed rendering. Absolute accuracy is not a rangefinders raison d'être. That's what an SLR is for.
Ditch the loud and bulky mechanical shutter – go to one like on the D1x.
It's been many years since I shot a 1Dx, so I'm a little fuzzy on how loud it was. I think it also used the sensor as the shutter at very high speeds. I can't remember what the trade off was for going this route.
Use RFID chips in the lenses instead of 6-bit coding. If I were Leica, I would use this to eliminate 6-bit “hacking.” Better yet, have the lens transmit the set aperture into the camera for recording.
How about a simple chip, like in Nikkor lenses? RFID takes a lot more juice to run. It could also increase electronic interference etc.
Use plastic covers. The brass covers on the M8 comprise 25% of its weight.
Sorry, but you lost me on this one.
I’m not holding my breath.
Me neither.
