The future of the M-mount

[HSI]

^^^
Sounds good.
But what would you be asking in the sensor department? (Crop / Full)
A monochrome sensor would be an intresting idea though, seems you could pull off a highend sensor with more resolving power at a cheaper price. You would be saving money theorecticly by have a B&W sensor, allowing it to be more affordable.
Drop a screen, soundeffects, and other useless features and throw a B&W sensor in and you might have an affordable camera.

 

[Rob-F]

Well, if it doesn't have a screen, I won't buy it. Someone above said they would like digital CL. Well, I have one. OK it's a lot bulkier than a CL with 40mm Summicron. It's a Digilux 2. But it's very handy, and it gives me a lot of freedom in shooting. I can experiment and try again until I get the shot I really want. If they made an upgraded version with maybe 8MP and if the lens zoomed out to around 24mm, I would have the camera I want and would not be looking anymore. I even like the electronic viewfinder-somewhat. (I like seeing the histogram in the finder.)

8MP
Manual shutter speeds
manual aperture control
Manual zoom
24-85 Zoom, Leica Aspherical quality
A screen
ISO 50-1600

But this is getting too far away from the original topic--M mount. OK I'll stop now.

 

[ZeissFan]

The real challenge is of course that everyone wants something different. And this forum represents just a small sample of users.

-- Some want a curved sensor

-- Some want a new sensor

-- Some want an LCD screen

-- Some don't want an LCD screen

-- Some want a monochrome-only sensor

-- Some would never want a monochrome-only sensor

Because Leica can't play the "18 month" game and constantly replace its lineup with new models offering incremental improvements, who knows when the next model will appear.

Maybe Leica will do the "a la carte" approach and let users pick and choose the features they want.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

Another question if the lenses can get any better from now on.

I don't like much these future threads but on this one I have a very precise idea. Maybe lenses can be improved (better resolution, more speed, whatever) but whateve that will be it will not take better pictures. The same for cameras, they might allow to miss less shots or make life easier but they will not take better pictures.

Have you ever seen the pictures taken during the expedition of the "Endurance" (I think the BBC gave a lengthy documentary about that sometimes)?

Taken with blue sensitive glass plates at the beginning of the previous century in harsh envoronment and with cameras most people of today would not even know how to load and they are perfect by any possible standard of today. Not just "great documents", really beautiful! Hard to make better with whatever technology (sure it would be easier to get out alive of a similar situation today but that's another story...and they come out alive).

In other words: camera is at the very best since almost a century, now is less cumbersome and maybe in the future it will be even easier to use, but great pictures did not start with Leica nor with any known brand of today...in my opinion at least.

GLF

 

[jarski]

...I'd completely forget about JPG's and go RAW only...

A black and white only model sounds interesting but too limited to a specific crowd. It'd be a dead duck.

very interesting.. they should build camera with only B&W sensor? normally you kind of get colors as a bonus, when in RAW 😀

 

[Tom A]

whatever we are wishing for and wanting will be determined by the market place.All of is possible at a price!
The modern lenses are wonders of computer design and manufacturing. The best of them outperforms film,even hig resloution film and certainly the sensors that are available today. How many of us shot at the edge of technology? In my case. I use medium speed films (400 asa) for 90% of the pictures I take and just about every lens I own is better than what I relly need.
For years I did medium and large format photography, mainly industrial photography. If I had to go back to this today, i would aim for the largest possible sensor, the highest resolution and all the gizmo's and gadgets that would give me a commercial advantage in a highly competitive market.
However, I quit all of that because it was not enjoyable anymore. Every shot was directed by some-one else or controlled down to felt marker outline on the ground glass!
For the last 20 years I have a true "amateur" - meaning. Doing it for the love of it!
The technology is important to master, but only to the point that you need - beyound that it becomes meaningless.
Digital at this stage only interest me as a function of this style of shooting. IF I could get a faster 'confirmation" via a digital set up and the learning curve was designed by an actual user, rather than a group of people who has never seen a
master print by Ansel Adams, Eugeen Smith, Jean Loup Sieff etc. I would switch in a heart beat. Neither the RD1 or the M8 met these criterias. The RD1 did have a smallish sensor and to pull a 16x20 in black/white would have been difficult, if not impossible. The M8 did adress that with the thinner IR filter and inherent higher resolution, but it is still not there. A 16 Mp,dedicated M8, using the same technology could do it. Theoretically, if you "colored" all the pixels in a M8 to only respond in graytones you should get 3x 10 MP. In real life 1/2 of that would be possible (at least for now).
If I wanted a snap shot Digital, it would be the Ricoh GRD. My wife Tuulikki has one and it is astounding in its quality. It has a fixed 28mm equivalent lens and as it has taken her handling for quite a while now, very well built. It does not have an optical zoom or excessive menu choices. You have some manual control, but can also leave it on A if you want.
Now, a small camera like that with a M-mount on it and limited range of frame lines in an optical finder and a price tag of $1000 would be attractive. One of the Golden Rules of design is the KISS rule "Keep It Simple Stupid" and I think we have lost that. There will always be a segement who wants and need the all the bells and whistles and most of the major players will be happy to supply that at a price.

 

[-kk-]

im curious and more than a little surprised to hear only about 6000 units of M8 have sold. this cant be right, can it?

its probably fair to say that the future direction of Leica as a company will be dictated in large parts by the success/failure of M8. i dont doubt that digital is the future, but Im also a little puzzled as to why/how leica has not done more to leverage their brand name in the premium- mass market segments (eg with 'cheaper' lines like CL). the gap is there, and with such a strong brand, the need can be filled.

i dont think for a second that a cheaper platform (eg made elsewhere, or made from less expensive/ labour intensive material) will canibalise the M-series. in fact it'll make them more valuable, as more people will be introduced to the Leica mystique. Leica's brand and history is something that money cant buy. any other camera company would kill for this, but strangely leica just sits on it.

On the digital front, perhaps Leica can steal a page from Canon's playbook. A lower cost/spec APSC sensor (350D) seem to complement well with the fully featured, full frame (5D). Far from eating into each others markets, the majority of 350D owners would love to someday acquire a 5D. I think this makes sense from a PnL point of view (diff products for diff segments), and also lays the fundation for future generation of Leica consumers (as much as the average photog may like to own a Leica, the M8 is just far too expensive, and hence prohibitive, as and introduction to the brand in the digital world).

 

[HSI]

Good point. As the world is today, its is easier to offer all the crap on something rather than add on to it. We have become lazy and technology is only reniforcing that. I love the fact that so many people have used the technology of the internet to reniforce the values of a good B&W development in D76 to me and the others viewing this site.
The M-Mount will last for as long as we as the community of photographers keep it in circulation. I have never bought a new camera, and I hope to never have to resort to buying into a new piece of equipment. The fact that almost anything can be had used renforces the M-Mount and its longevity in the right hands.

 

[Olsen]

To Tom A.

Let me be precise regarding what I mean is the way forward for Leica.

1)
Squeeze as much as possible out of the M8 design. Sooner or later the M8 sales will have peaked and will be falling. - This could be as early as this automn. By then, Leica must have a 's' version ready; practically the same design, but optimised regarding up-dates and refinements that can be included in the design package. (Better looking jpg's would be fine, thank you). A M8s should be on the market by Christmas.

2)
Develop (fast!) a cheaper 'compact' - 'junior' - 'CLD' version with one of these cheaper 1,5 crop factor sensors you find in just any compact SLR-cameras today. Why? Because the M8 price is a bit over the top for many young and new users. New users; future users! Then the Leica brand has a future and will not die out with us, the old'ies. To launch a compact wide angle 'CL' lense that is especially tuned for this sensor size could be smart.

3)
Launch a M9 when major breakthrough on sensor design allows 1)lower noice at higher ISO 2)more resolution 3)less crop factor. Say, two years from now.

Your wife's Ricoh GRD is an interesting camera. On a Hasselblad discussion list (HUG) I have suggested that the market needs a serious and professional 'Digital SWC' - like the Hasselblad SWC905 - a Carl Zeiss Biogon 'perfect wide angle' - but digital. Look up all the colourful magazines showing interiors, be it fashionable housing interiors or yachts; many of these photogs are still using analogue processes because there isn't a pro digital wide angle alternative. One camera that is close is the Ricoh GRD - but not quite there.

I see only a few names/brands that would make professional photographers look twice at such a camera; among them Hasselblad and Leica.

This could be a 16 million pixels (minimum), large sensor with a espescially designed 'Digital Biogon' or 'Digital Elmarit' with (about) 90 degrees field of view diagonally, sharp and bright corners and low noice at high ISO. A perfect 'blend' of camera and wide angle lense.

 

[Tom A]

I know someone who shoots top hotel interiors for a living. He uses Nikon D 100's with an automated bracketing system. Put the camera on a solid tripod, have the camera expose 7-8 or more frames and then in the computer it picks out the best shot of the interior and the best shot of the golf course/beach etc as seen through the windows and produces a perfectly matched set with a well lit interior and all the trimmings as well as a perfectly exposed view! I asked him about using a newer, higher Mp count camera. He said "you dont need it for brochures and publications" and as the whole set up is based on the D 100, which is available at heavy discount used, it makes far more economic sense to stock up on these bodies!
As for a Digital SWC, it would be a sweet camera. The only Hassy's that I miss are my SWC's. If I had to shoot commercial stuff again, that is the first thing that I would get and a high Mp back. To avoid the temptation to buy another SWC, I sold my Focomat 2C some years ago and only kept the Focomat 1C as it only can handle 35mm! So far it has worked and not a single Hassy or Rollie in my"stash"!