Repost: The end of the M?

Brian Sweeney said:
I still do not "buy" the story that a digital camera "must" have a vertical travel shutter. Kodak made a Digital version of the F3.
Click to expand...

Well, it might be that a digital sensor wouldn't be able to hold its charge over the longer travel time of a horizontal-travel shutter or something like that. (The F3 shutter has a higher curtain speed than the M shutter.)

But I suspect it's more a matter that Leica's particular horizontal shutter, with its fabric curtains, wouldn't provide enough protection for a digital sensor. We've already had a thread about how quickly the sun can burn through fabric curtains. If it then burned through the sensor, you'd have a very expensive accident!

This argument wouldn't apply to the F3 shutter, which has titanium curtains (and a reflex mirror hanging down in front to protect it.) But re-engineering the Leica shutter to accept titanium curtains would likely be a somewhat expensive proposition -- at least, expensive enough to give them a rationale to use a modular vertical shutter instead. This type of shutter has been used in many Leica reflexes, so it's not as if it would be an unprecedented departure for them.

As to the height issue -- the modular blade-type vertical shutters ARE taller in overall height, because of the clearance required to give the blades someplace to retract into. I'm sure it would be possible to design a new RF mechanism that would allow for this extra height AND still work with "goggle" lenses -- but again, it would be an expensive proposition.

I'd say that if there's one thing that makes a Leica M a Leica M, it's that range/viewfinder module, which is the single most highly developed, most complicated and most expensive part of the camera. If Leica were to switch to a modular vertical shutter, I think it would make more sense for them to preserve the design of the RF/VF module at the expense of obsoleting the "goggle" lenses, rather than vice-versa. (After all, they don't have any incentive to encourage you to keep using your old Leica lenses... they want you to buy new Leica lenses!)


Overall, if I were in Leica's shoes, I'd conclude that the most effective way of reducing the manufacturing cost of my M camera line while preserving its identity AND creating a path to a digital M would be to replace my current in-house-made, hand-assembled main casting and shutter with an outsourced main casting and modular vertical shutter assembly (something, ahem, very much like the inner guts of a Bessa R3a/Epson R-D 1.)

I'd put my crown-jewel rangefinder module on top of this, fit it into my usual beautifully finished outer casing, and add my usual smooth, beautifully finished controls. The resulting camera would look, handle, and shoot just like Leicas of yore, except that it would be a little taller and a little noisier (because of the modular vertical shutter) but would have a higher X-sync speed (ditto.) It would cost quite a bit less to manufacture and require less highly-skilled labor in my factory, while still letting me sell a la carté customized versions, since these involve only the outer "skin."

In this hypothetical future, our 35mm rangefinder camera universe would consist of three price levels of camera on the same Cosina-sourced inner chassis: the Bessa, the Zeiss Ikon, and the putative Leica M-whatever. They'd be differentiated by rangefinder base length, framelines, metering system features, and general appearance and finish -- but the generic "guts" would be the same on all, making them more economical to manufacture.

That may not be the future we'd like to see for Leica -- but as opposed to no future at all, it doesn't sound so bad...
 
If I understand, a horizontal titanium shutter is a possibility for the digital M.

Leica is re-engineering its M cameras for electronic sensors. Expensive! I doubt that re-engineering the shutter as part of that project would overwhelm it.

Leica worked hard to maintain backward compatability with its DMR. I hope they will do the same with the digital M's. I'm lobbying for a digital M that will mount a visoflex and goggle lenses.
 
the last ceo said it would be a metal vertical blade shutter, i.e. the copal shutter, in a recent issue of lfi.
 
zeos 386sx said:
If I understand, a horizontal titanium shutter is a possibility for the digital M.

Leica is re-engineering its M cameras for electronic sensors. Expensive! I doubt that re-engineering the shutter as part of that project would overwhelm it.

Leica worked hard to maintain backward compatability with its DMR. I hope they will do the same with the digital M's. I'm lobbying for a digital M that will mount a visoflex and goggle lenses.
Click to expand...

It is the stated purpose of Leica to maintain full compatabilty with earlier lenses. Visoflex and goggle lenses are something else. It is mainly dependent on the shape of the camera. I doubt that they can maintain the current configuration of the windows or the shape of the top.....
 
The following are quotes in LFI by the last CEOs of Leica..

"We thought it reasonable to inform M customers sooner, rather than later, that the Msystem - lenses, cameras and accessories - remains capable of development, offering further alternatives beyond analogue technology - namely digital technology." - Hanns-Peter Cohn

"We want to safeguard our customers’investments." - Ralf Coenen

"People have different ways of getting into Leica. But to provide a half-hearted introductory tool is a bad idea. And just how does one trim down the component list of a purist product like the Leica M? By replacing the cloth shutter with a standard? By using an off-the-rackmagnesium body rather than milling it from a solid metal block? Indeed, there are many possibilities, but in the end we wouldn’t really be looking at a real Leica." - Ralf Coenen

I re-read the LFI interviews and I don't see where Cohn or Coenen says Leica plans to use a vertical shutter for the digital M. I still have hope.
 
I read the Leica World News interview with Cohn. All he said was, "It (the digital M) will be equipped with a blade shutter, because the traditional cloth focal plane shutter cannot be used in conjunction with the digital feature." He did not say what direction the blade shutter would travel.

Did the 14 frames-per second blade shutter used by Canon in its F-1 High Speed Motor Drive Camera run horizontally or vertically?

Given the reduced size of the CCD/CMOS frame it should be easy to produce a very rapid blade shutter that runs horizontally. Is that possible?
 
jlw said:
But I suspect it's more a matter that Leica's particular horizontal shutter, with its fabric curtains, wouldn't provide enough protection for a digital sensor. We've already had a thread about how quickly the sun can burn through fabric curtains. If it then burned through the sensor, you'd have a very expensive accident!
Click to expand...

The thin titanium blades are as sensitive to burning holes in them as fabric-maybe even more so. As you say, the mirror is the main block-but at the expense of deflecting the solar energy upwards to the plastic focussing screen, causing it to sag. Strange as it may seem, the sensor is the least sensitive part, due to the (glass) IR filter in front of it.
 
Couldn't the explanation a lot simpler. The digital mock-up at the top of the article shows a MP sized camera (without frame-selection lever!) That means they will have to accomodate the battery in a very small space indeed. The simplest solution would be to replace the most bulky mechanical part i.e. the cloth shutter with a far more compact unit. There are obvious photographical advantages like very short shutter times, high-speed sync. The main drawback would be the sound.The same volume but a different quality; not dzunk but tsjick. It seems a small thing but there is a reason that car manufacturers spend tens of millions to sound-engineer their products, from the exhaust though the closing of doors to the click of the smallest switch. Sound and feel are very important marketing factors for high-level equipment. To be fair, everybody is sensitive to that. I would not like the door of my Jaguar to sound the same as my wife's Suzuki, nor would I be pleased to have my M camera to sound like a Canon Rebel......
 
It was stated quite clearly " a module is not an option" The camera will be as close as possible to the current MP in size and shape. I feel it may be 5 mm thicker to accomodate the LCD. But looking at the mockup seems to suggest that a Visoflex may still be usable. Given the difficulties of building a rangfinder for a 1.3 crop sensor up 135 mm it may well be that the windows will have to be moved further apart, making it impossible to use earlier goggled lenses. I suspect that in that case a seperate Macro-adapter will be offered for the digital camera. Maybe even an upgrade service for older lenses???Shouldn't be too hard, just one metal plate.
 
Last edited:
That is just Leica's point: Leica M is a photographic philosophy and the design has to fit into that philosophy for digital M to make sense. Otherwise one gets the effect of the not-too-much lamented Kodak DSLR's: digitronics stuck into a body designed for film, combining the disadvantages of both.
 
Well, I hope Brian is right. I don't see any reason a digital imager couldn't be incorporated into a traditional-style Leica M, given enough design effort and money.

I'm just afraid that with investment bankers basically in charge, it's going to seem a lot more sensible to "rationalize" the product by using as many off-the-shelf components as possible.

The tricky business then will become deciding where to draw the line between features which are essential parts of the "Leica mystique" and which are subject to alteration. I'm sure a lot of people would be inclined to think that "a shutter is a shutter," but it's evident from this thread that for many Leica admirers, the shutter is a big deal!

Then it gets tricky. The question becomes: "If we retain traditional feature A, the camera will cost higher price X; if we rationalize it, the camera will cost lower price Y. At what values of X and Y does it become more profitable to sell fewer cameras at the higher price, vs. more cameras at the lower price?" It's a difficult question to answer, but the product's commercial success depends on it. This is why marketers get gray!
 
I consider the Leica M cameras to be "system" cameras. With the addition of accessories, like the Visoflex, they can do anything. I think Leica should design their digital M with that in mind. What a waste it will be if they all they do is bring out a Digilux 2 with better focusing.

If a blade shutter adds to the camera's usefulness then Leica should use a blade. The difference in sound made by a blade shutter will not bother me if I get high speed flash sync. However, I don't want a cheap blade. I want the best blade that Leica can make.

Wouldn't a light, titanium blade shutter hold up better than a cloth shutter for multiple-frames-per-second shooting?
 
even if they use a metal copal shutter, they're still going to say "silent shutter" this, "discreet shooting" that, because it still is, even if they don't dampen it to the extreme, which is an option.
 
Well, let's see what they come up with. If the R-module is anything to judge by it might be quite good and "real Leica"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom