time for a redesign

Actually, I think the large speed dial of the M5 is about the only thing I really like about the camera, and I would like to see it on "real Leicas" too 😀

About the rest of the M5 ergonomics, I would love it if my nose were under my left eye, but it ain't (silly me).
 
ruby.monkey said:
Were I given the opportunity, I'd place the shutter speed dial round the shutter release and projecting over the front of the top plate so that I could turn it with my index finger (R8 style, but similar to the M2's frame-counter in size and position)
Click to expand...

Like on the M5 in other words, which has exactly this arrangement.

sanmich said:
Actually, I think the large speed dial of the M5 is about the only thing I really like about the camera, and I would like to see it on "real Leicas" too 😀

About the rest of the M5 ergonomics, I would love it if my nose were under my left eye, but it ain't (silly me).
Click to expand...

Left-eyed M5 shooter here, for me it doesn't make a difference nose-placement-wise, but the speed dial on the M5 (coupled with the in-viewfinder speed display), R8 and R9 is the best design on any Leica.
 
zvos1 said:
No need for change of design...just make digital M's same proportion as film M's and I'll be happy.
Click to expand...

jsrockit said:
This is the best idea in here. 🙂
Click to expand...

The M9 is already the smallest full frame digital camera on the market and that is by quite a margin.
How do you think they could miniaturize its components any further w/o compromising reliability? The thinner you make wires (and other components for that matter) the more you increase the chance that it will break. At some point there is no safety margin anymore.
Yes, right the M9 is a little bigger than a M6 or MP but it still fits my hands perfectly and it still feel like a M in my book, that's what counts and not a few 1/16 of an inch.
 
I like the idea of a variable magnified VF... Canon had it decades ago! .58, .72, 1.0 along with a two stage Framing device. possibly an EVF hybrid just for the frame lines.. an electronic overlay with 2 options.

  • 21/25/28/50
  • Or
  • 28/35/50/75/90/135
 
You don't think electronics can get smaller? Just remember your tv or a monitor from 10 years ago and compare it to today's screens.

I know it is only a small difference but it really matters as the size of my film Ms is perfect. When ever I grab one of them after handling M8 it puts a smile on my face.

icebear said:
The M9 is already the smallest full frame digital camera on the market and that is by quite a margin.
How do you think they could miniaturize its components any further w/o compromising reliability? The thinner you make wires (and other components for that matter) the more you increase the chance that it will break. At some point there is no safety margin anymore.
Yes, right the M9 is a little bigger than a M6 or MP but it still fits my hands perfectly and it still feel like a M in my book, that's what counts and not a few 1/16 of an inch.
Click to expand...
 
zvos1 said:
No need for change of design...just make digital M's same proportion as film M's and I'll be happy.
Click to expand...

Difficult to do though, as the sensor-to-front distance has to stay the same for obvious reasons, and the package "sensor package plus electronics plus back cover" is a lot thicker than the package "film plus back door", even if one left out the LCD. That's been pointed out a number of times.

The only thing they could do would be to have the lens mount stick out like it does on a NEX, and would that be a better design? I have serious doubts.
 
denizg7 said:
how about an m where the sensors are changeable for b and white and color and TO FILM
Click to expand...

Not going to happen; interchangeable sensor backs are big and expensive (compare an R8 to an R8 plus DMR), it's one of those things that everybody would like and nobody would buy.

And the latter TO FILM bit is useless anyway; why would anyone buy a new super-expensive digital Leica to use film in it, if you can buy a film M2 for $400? Who cares?
 
Roger Hicks said:
So... er... how are you defining 'better'? I know which I prefer.

Did you buy an M5 when they were new? I don't think I ever met anyone else who did.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Right: "Better" is a strong word. Let me rephrase. The M5 had several characteristics such as an internal (very precise) light meter, information in the viewfinder and ergonomics which made the camera faster to use to many and it would be reasonable from a designer standpoint to assume that it should have attracted at least a large part of the Leica market. Still this did not happen. A bit like saying that an F5 is "better" than a F. Many of us probably like better the F (I do) but it is reasonable to assume that the chance of missing a shot is lower with the F5 and that therefore may pros would prefer that (which is in fact what happened). I guess Leica market must be a bit unusual in that. Anyway, I am not a big Leica fan but in this case I really hope they just update sensor and software and don't turn the M10 into a NEX clone.

GLF
 
rxmd said:
Not going to happen; interchangeable sensor backs are big and expensive (compare an R8 to an R8 plus DMR), it's one of those things that everybody would like and nobody would buy.

And the latter TO FILM bit is useless anyway; why would anyone buy a new super-expensive digital Leica to use film in it, if you can buy a film M2 for $400? Who cares?
Click to expand...

well by the time m10 comes out the big question will be , how does it compare to the m9m in black and white in terms of noise performance , sharpness etc..
 
icebear said:
The M9 is already the smallest full frame digital camera on the market and that is by quite a margin. ...
Click to expand...

Not any longer. The new Sony RX1 takes that honor.

The M9 is now the smallest full frame, interchangeable lens digital camera. ;-)

That said, I don't want the M9 to be much smaller. I just want it to be the same size as the M4-2 ... it has to be a certain minimum size to fit the rangefinder baseline. The M9 feels a bit thick, it would be nice if it was slimmer.
 
Godfrey said:
Not any longer. The new Sony RX1 takes that honor.

The M9 is now the smallest full frame, interchangeable lens digital camera. ;-)

That said, I don't want the M9 to be much smaller. I just want it to be the same size as the M4-2 ... it has to be a certain minimum size to fit the rangefinder baseline. The M9 feels a bit thick, it would be nice if it was slimmer.
Click to expand...

i wished so hard for the rx1 to have a viewfinder
 
icebear said:
The M9 is already the smallest full frame digital camera on the market and that is by quite a margin. How do you think they could miniaturize its components any further w/o compromising reliability? The thinner you make wires (and other components for that matter) the more you increase the chance that it will break. At some point there is no safety margin anymore. Yes, right the M9 is a little bigger than a M6 or MP but it still fits my hands perfectly and it still feel like a M in my book, that's what counts and not a few 1/16 of an inch.
Click to expand...

A simple look into the history of electronics should tell you that miniturization always occurs.

I don't pretend to know the specifics behind what it would take, but you don't make cameras either right?
 
sevo said:
A simple look into the history of cars should tell you that everything gets bigger as it gets more electronic... 😉
Click to expand...

Well, true, but the electronics are "enhancements" added to an already existing mechanical device. If you add more it has to get bigger sometimes. However, when it comes to portable electonics, they always get smaller.
 
Leica should always have a flagship "M' digital camera that was built to look just like the classic M Leicas.

But what's stopping them from developing a range of other "M" mount cameras with vastly different designs, made of various materials, with other functions, etc?

Those that want a Classic M could always have one with the latest sensor and doo-dads, everyone else could just buy another M mount camera.

If Leica doesn't do it, other manufacturers will, eventually. Leica should do it, try to keep the prices within a sane level, and they would also sell a load of new lenses to go with them too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom