Why Does Leica Not Make AE M Lenses?

[shawn]

Yes, they went totally mirrorless. The sensor is always on, the shutter is open just to provide metering.

Interesting, when I had the M240 I typically used the classic mode to conserve battery and also because the shutter lag was greater on the M240 when using the sensor based metering or liveview. I assume the M11 is much faster in that regard.

 

[Godfrey]

I get it, but the latest digital Leica Ms have virtually nothing in common with any film M, except for the mechanical rangefinder, the general shape and size of the body, and the lens mount. I am just saying, why not just go all the way and make something loosely based on the Leica M philosophy (like the M10/M11) but with full capabilities, with the option of having a "nostalgia" mode if that is what floats people's boats. But I think the point is very good -- why does anyone even use the latest digital Ms given the cheaper alternatives that can all equally use Leica M glass as well?

They do: the SL and CL are/were that exactly. Of course, to get that full capability, you need a suite of lenses designed to take advantage of it, not the simple, mechanical, RF coupled lenses from the M legacy .. lenses that allow the body to control them with respect to lens opening and focus distance.

So what I hear is that you wish the SL2 were named the "M something". Or maybe the M11 is what you're looking for, since they've gone the route of the sensor doubling as the light metering tool, and they just haven't quite gotten to an electro-mechanically, body-controlled lens mount addition and lenses yet. Or they were as yet unwilling to just fit an L-mount to the M body and be done with it. Maybe that will happen, and they'll name the M11's successor the ML-12, and put a Fuji style combined optical RF and EVF into it.

I had both the SL and CL EVF cameras and found them to be excellent, delightful cameras; I made a whole lot of very satisfying photographs with them. But I prefer the M rangefinder camera and its simple, mechanical lenses, and have moved to the M10-R and M10 Monochrom now. They work the way I like a camera to work.

G

 

[JeffS7444]

In contrast to Leica's appeal to emotions and heritage with their M-system, consider this little number by another legendary maker:

I think most of us immediately recognize it as a portable radio via certain visual cues, including the slide-rule tuning dial, knobs, and speaker. But otherwise, the only feature which links it to the past is the Sony logo. This is an example of industrial design being used as a problem-solver, particularly for older folks whose eyesight isn't what it once was, and who were never really comfortable with digital displays or preset buttons (save for maybe the mechanical sorts which were once ubiquitous on car radios!). This is about as "retro" as Sony gets.

 

[ranger9]

I want digital M sanc mechanical shutter and no metering.

I want to go a step farther and have a digital M with no shutter, no metering, and no sensor. You'd just dictate a description of the picture you want into a little microphone on the back, and this (plus the 6-bit-coding and ambient light sensor data to indicate what angle of view and brightness to use) would be transmitted to MidJourney or DALL-E or whatever to generate a rendering and send it directly to your gallery to be marketed as NFTs. (Anybody remember NFTs?)

...okay, I'm just joking. In reality, once Nikon's exclusivity agreement expires on the stacked 36x24mm sensor they use in the Z8/Z9, there's no reason an electronic-shutter-only M camera couldn't be made, and it actually kind of makes sense... far fewer components to fail, soundless and vibration-free operation, and potentially lower cost (not that Leica cares about that...) Users would face less resolution than an M11 and a possible slight reduction in dynamic range, but it might be a good tradeoff for some users.

As for adding body-controlled aperture to the lenses: Count me among those who don't see the point, especially for an electronic-shutter-only camera. I won't mention the P*x** here except to say that with a top shutter speed of 1/32,000 and auto ISO, the aperture ring becomes basically a "bokeh selector" -- you can get workable exposures almost anywhere you set it, so you can just pick the aperture that gives you the look you like...

 

[Godfrey]

Yes, they went totally mirrorless. The sensor is always on, the shutter is open just to provide metering.

I guess that doesn't mean "mirrorless" to me. Mirrorless to me means that the viewfinder and focusing system are all electronic, and last I looked, the M11 still has a coupled optical-mechanical rangefinder as standard equipment and primary viewing/focusing system, and the eye-level EVF is an option.

Using the sensor for metering makes a good deal of sense since they can offer a number of useful enhancements to the metering system (multiple patterns, etc) that way with minimal change to the overall function of the camera. Plus the technology is there, well developed, and more accurate than the traditional M metering. It does change the shutter operation a bit, but I haven't heard that this has much in way of negative consequences for most users.

I'm not a traditionalist who doesn't accept that a good current M camera can be different from an M3. As long as the mechanical messucher is the primary focusing/viewing system, it's still an M.

G

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I want to go a step farther and have a digital M with no shutter, no metering, and no sensor. You'd just dictate a description of the picture you want into a little microphone on the back, and this (plus the 6-bit-coding and ambient light sensor data to indicate what angle of view and brightness to use) would be transmitted to MidJourney or DALL-E or whatever to generate a rendering and send it directly to your gallery to be marketed as NFTs. (Anybody remember NFTs?)

...okay, I'm just joking. In reality, once Nikon's exclusivity agreement expires on the stacked 36x24mm sensor they use in the Z8/Z9, there's no reason an electronic-shutter-only M camera couldn't be made, and it actually kind of makes sense... far fewer components to fail, soundless and vibration-free operation, and potentially lower cost (not that Leica cares about that...) Users would face less resolution than an M11 and a possible slight reduction in dynamic range, but it might be a good tradeoff for some users.

As for adding body-controlled aperture to the lenses: Count me among those who don't see the point, especially for an electronic-shutter-only camera. I won't mention the P*x** here except to say that with a top shutter speed of 1/32,000 and auto ISO, the aperture ring becomes basically a "bokeh selector" -- you can get workable exposures almost anywhere you set it, so you can just pick the aperture that gives you the look you like...

If we extend your whish of no sensor, but. whispering to camera, it is already implemented with even more reduction. Just whisper to AI image generator on the mobile phone🙂
I don't think they are changing for it Leica money.

But, if Leica could made premium materials whispering box with marketing it as Leica photography influenced, those with "I have to buy all Leica made" will buy it. With usual ten pages thread, which half-case is more expensive and off taste looking for it and black or silver.
Images it will spill will be handled by most crappiest application which will crap out at every firmware upgrade.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I guess that doesn't mean "mirrorless" to me. Mirrorless to me means that the viewfinder and focusing system are all electronic, and last I looked, the M11 still has a coupled optical-mechanical rangefinder as standard equipment and primary viewing/focusing system, and the eye-level EVF is an option.

Using the sensor for metering makes a good deal of sense since they can offer a number of useful enhancements to the metering system (multiple patterns, etc) that way with minimal change to the overall function of the camera. Plus the technology is there, well developed, and more accurate than the traditional M metering. It does change the shutter operation a bit, but I haven't heard that this has much in way of negative consequences for most users.

I'm not a traditionalist who doesn't accept that a good current M camera can be different from an M3. As long as the mechanical messucher is the primary focusing/viewing system, it's still an M.

G

It's a Mirrorless camera with an auxiliary rangefinder. Having the shutter open and sensor running all the time loses the advantage of a camera that primarily uses the rangefinder and viewfinder. Latency is increased and power draw is higher. The M11 has a very high Dynamic Range, so a traditional metering system is more than adequate. Most likely Leica had to use the Sensor, Support chips, and associated Firmware designed to implement a mirrorless camera. Stick that into an M body and keep the mechanical parts. The Screen on the back can be used for Liveview, and the camera is designed to be used with an attachable Electronic Viewfinder. If Leica would put out a Firmware update that turned the Metering Off and closed the Shutter, let me use my Weston Master II or Gossen Luna Pro, I would probably consider it if my M9 died and cannot be replaced. Or just setup my Darkroom again and use the M3. The two of us turn 66 this month, semi-retirement a few months off.

 

[shawn]

So what I hear is that you wish the SL2 were named the "M something". Or maybe the M11 is what you're looking for, since they've gone the route of the sensor doubling as the light metering tool, and they just haven't quite gotten to an electro-mechanically, body-controlled lens mount addition and lenses yet. Or they were as yet unwilling to just fit an L-mount to the M body and be done with it. Maybe that will happen, and they'll name the M11's successor the ML-12, and put a Fuji style combined optical RF and EVF into it.

Or go really dark and put an electronically driven rangefinder on L-Mount....

 

[JeffS7444]

I'm holding out for a non-electric digital Leica M camera.

 

[das]

I would think that if folks would desire a digital, meterless, mechanical shutter-only, non-liveview Leica M, it would probably make more sense to just spend the $8,000 on film.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Someone made a digital back for an M3, as a project. That was cool.

Rangefinder cameras have advantages, and disadvantages, compared with Mirrorless. Mirrorless cameras have increases latency when taking the photograph due to the shutter having to close when in live-view mode, and then make the exposure. This is similar to the shutter cycle of a Kodak Retina Reflex. SLR and DSLR cameras have increased latency for the mirror to flip up, compared with the rangefinder. The M11 loses this advantage to use the sensor as "just" a meter, essentially in Liveview mode all the time. Mirrorless cameras draw more power to keep the sensor and associated electronics running. Traditional metering systems draw less power than is required to operate the sensor. I would have rather seen Leica retain these advantages, rather than trade them for something so simple as metering.

 

[Darthfeeble]

Marketplace demands are what designed the M digital. I'm still surprised that Leica continues to do without sensor cleaning. Still I like my M10 better than I like my Fuji X's

 

[splitimageview]

Leica has a unique position in the marketplace. They essentially can define their own path. They seem to have no trouble selling cameras into this unique niche at relatively high prices, they simply don't have to add features to the M. Why bother? Just keep introducing limited editions, that's a lot cheaper. 😛

 

[das]

I like film Ms because they cannot get any more obsolete than they are now. And with all of these new Shoten rangefinder-coupled M adapters coming out (50mm M42 and Pentax K now, C/Y and Nikon F soon) film Ms are about to get alot more fun.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I don't include ability to focus in very low light as being an advantage of the rangefinder anymore, mirrorless cameras have caught up and surpassed them for this function. My hit rate with the Nikon Z5 used with the Canon 50/0.95 and Mitakon 90/1.5 M-Mount lens adapted to Z-mount is higher than with the M9 and M Monochrom. The latency from sensor to finder is low, and the "focus peaking" (edge detection) function is effective for focusing on any part of the frame. I can use over 250 lenses on the Z5 with adapters.
Even the Zeiss 21/4.5 Biogon works well with this camera. I use the camera in Aperture preferred mode, manual focus.

Canon 50/0.95, Canon 7 mount, using an Z-Mount Adapter. Wide-open, first time using the camera.


The 90/1.5 M-Mount, wide-open. Second time using the camera.



About 1/9th the cost of the M11. I read a lot of Youtuber's and Twitter generation using the M11, it has found a new market with the young generation getting into Leica photography for the first time. That's a good thing. Leica will be in business for a long time.
I'm in it for the classic lenses.

I'm tempted to put a shot of my Nikon F2Sb with the DS-1 Servo-motor on it. That's the other way of doing this.

 

[Godfrey]

It's a Mirrorless camera with an auxiliary rangefinder. Having the shutter open and sensor running all the time loses the advantage of a camera that primarily uses the rangefinder and viewfinder. Latency is increased and power draw is higher. The M11 has a very high Dynamic Range, so a traditional metering system is more than adequate. Most likely Leica had to use the Sensor, Support chips, and associated Firmware designed to implement a mirrorless camera. Stick that into an M body and keep the mechanical parts. The Screen on the back can be used for Liveview, and the camera is designed to be used with an attachable Electronic Viewfinder. If Leica would put out a Firmware update that turned the Metering Off and closed the Shutter, let me use my Weston Master II or Gossen Luna Pro, I would probably consider it if my M9 died and cannot be replaced. Or just setup my Darkroom again and use the M3. The two of us turn 66 this month, semi-retirement a few months off.

What advantage is that? From all I read, the M11 latency is only barely greater than the M10 (I haven't had the opportunity to use them side by side yet), and it seems just as efficient on battery life, again according to reports. You don't have to use the LCD as a viewfinder at all, and you don't need to buy the EVF (I have the Visoflex 020 for the M10, and use it when I'm doing macro and long tele work... same business.).

I see a lot of pushback and nay saying whenever Leica introduces any change to the M. I've had a lot of them, nearly all the models over the decades, and my feeling is that most of the changes have been a plus, and the rest a toss up.

I'm happy with my current Ms. They work well, the way I expect them to, and I see no good reason for me to change up for anything else. 😀

G

 

[splitimageview]

I have zero interest in a digital M. Let's say I use one of my brilliant Sweeneyfied Sonnars on a new M11 body...that's still $9000 outlay.

At $4.50 for a roll of film (bulk loaded Vision 3) that's 2000 freaking rolls...It's doubtful I've shot 2000 rolls combined in my 50 years of shooting 35mm.

@das do you have a link to Shoten C/Y and F adapters or is that just rumored?

 

[Godfrey]

I don't include ability to focus in very low light as being an advantage of the rangefinder anymore, mirrorless cameras have caught up and surpassed them for this function. ...

My issue, and the reason I returned to Leica M cameras, is that in bright sunlight my eyes do not adapt quickly enough to the EVF in any camera I've tried any more. This is not a problem with an M10-R or M10-M. Dim light... they all work well for me. 😀

G

 

[das]

I have zero interest in a digital M. Let's say I use one of my brilliant Sweeneyfied Sonnars on a new M11 body...that's still $9000 outlay.

At $4.50 for a roll of film (bulk loaded Vision 3) that's 2000 freaking rolls...It's doubtful I've shot 2000 rolls combined in my 50 years of shooting 35mm.

@das do you have a link to Shoten C/Y and F adapters or is that just rumored?

I saw it in a recent press release. Might have been on Shoten's Japanese website. They are apparently testing the C/Y and Nikon adapters now. There are some Japanese language YouTube videos on the current adapters. People seem to love them.

I actually bit the bullet and bought one of the m42 adapters (should have waited for the CY as M42 easily adapts to it). Should be here any day now. Will report back over on the dedicated thread.

 

[Godfrey]

I have zero interest in a digital M. Let's say I use one of my brilliant Sweeneyfied Sonnars on a new M11 body...that's still $9000 outlay.

At $4.50 for a roll of film (bulk loaded Vision 3) that's 2000 freaking rolls...It's doubtful I've shot 2000 rolls combined in my 50 years of shooting 35mm.
...

At one point in the 1990s, I was shooting 1800-2000 rolls of film per year. Cost of film plus processing in a year was as expensive as my M10-R was (bought secondhand @ ~$2500).

Diff'rent strokes for different folks. 😉
G