It is official! New product for Photokina 2000

<a href="http://www.leica-camera.com/index_e.html">

http://www.leica-camera.com/index_e.html</a><p>

<i>Made clickable...t</i>

The .58 mag M6 would make a great body for all the wide shooters,

especially if you wear glasses. I wonder if they even put 135 lines

on that version--the box would be about the size of the double image.

Nothing new I find I'm dying to go broke for. By the way, did you see

that Bronica came out with the exact medium format camera we were

hoping Leica would? Compact focal plne shutter camera with ttl

metering, three intertchangeable lenses(45, 65, 135).It should sell

like crazy-I'd rather buy one of those. (It cost way less money than

an M6 outfit).

I went the Leica way after owning a Bronica-C ! That #%&*

camera could fold,cut,mutilate,rip,tear and eject film.The store exchanged it for the Leica.That was 33 years ago.

I know the Brony is much improved BUT me no go near...

If the .72 mag finder is less accurate than the .85 finder... I

wonder what the limits will be for the wide angle finder? Forget the

135mm lens, it might not be able to focus a 90mm summicron or 50mm

Noct. It would be nice if you are 100% into wide angle lenses, but

it would kind of suck to have to have two bodies that you couldn't

share all the lenses in your bag.

 

<p>

 

Does anyone know the widest lens the new model can facilitate without

resorting to an external finder? A "usable", (meaning you can see

the whole frame in one glance), 24mm frame line would make it pretty

attractive. Love the focal length, hate the finder.

Never mind... I found the answer while surfing. No 24mm, only 28. I

cut and pasted the info for you all to look at:

 

<p>

 

 

There are three versions to choose from: The LEICA M6 TTL with 0.72x,

0.85x and the new 0.58x-viewfinder magnification.

With the development of the LEICA M6 TTL 0.58, Leica is satisfying

the wishes of all those photographers who want to have a better

overview of the 28 mm and 35 mm bright line frames without foregoing

the superb rangefinder system of the LEICA M6. The lower 0.58x

viewfinder magnification is particularly well suited for photography

with wide-angle lenses and, compared to the 0.72x viewfinder system,

it also brings an enormous improvement to eyeglass wearers. The

appropriate bright line frames are activated in pairs (28/90 mm and

50/75 mm), and there is a separate, single frame for the 35 mm focal

length.

Theoretically, the 24mm lens lines would be all the way out to the

corners like the 35 lines are in a .85 version, so it could have them.

(35/.85 ratio is almost identical to 24/.58 one)

By the way, my Minolta CLE is a .58 mag camera, and although it has

28mm lines as the widest, I can use itaccurately with the 25mm

Voigtlander lens without the finder by just framing out as far as I

can see. The CLE struggles with my 90mm 2.8 in the under 6 feet range

wide open--it is a better match for an f4.0 lens at that focal length.

OOPS, we must have been posting at the same time. No 24mm, but

probably useable in a pinch without the finder like on my CLE. It is

nice that 35mm line is by itself--I didn't care for the clutter on the

regular M6, and that is one of the most popular lenses to use on the

Leicas.

Bah humbug. I have no use for any of that stuff except maybe the new

wide 'cron, which, in that case, the .58 would be cool, but... I'll

just stick with my 50 and my Classic. And I'm using the only version

of Netscape Navigator that I actually bought... V 3 Gold. Not very

Javascript savy. Oh well. :-/

Here is an idea from lugger Tom A. for an effective 24 finder. On

the 0.58x cameras, both Leica and Hexar, just cover the

frameline illumination window with black tape. Now you have a

24 mm field of view with no distractions.

Andrew,

 

<p>

 

Where did you hear about the new Bronica? I am very interested. Is

there any web link you could let us know?

 

<p>

 

BTW did you see the "new" Leica M-Zero? I wonder how much that will

cost???

 

<p>

 

Thanks!

I had a link with photos of the Bronica and some basic info, but it

hasn't been working the past few days. I just checked it again, and

nothing. It showed a compact camera with some sort of a data back,

and the lenses were fairly inexpensive, even at the suggested list

price. ($500 to 600 range) The camera listed for about $1200 if I

remember. I thought it would be a nicer field camera than the Fuji

645 zoom AF with its tiny zoom range and slow AF. Also looks to have

real TTL metering, something they couldn't do with the Mamiya cameras

with the leaf shutters. It will be interesting to see how smooth the

focal plane shutter will be, and how nice of a job they did on the

finder. And of course if the lenses are up to modern 2/14 standards.

Sorry for so much "off topic" stuff here. Like I said earlier, Leica

could have built this camera and had a foot into the expanding medium

format market.

Off topic? You did mention Leica, right? :-)

Here is a working link to a bunch of photokina releases, including the

Bronica rangefinder http://www.genyosha.com/JCTN/DaylyJ/DayJCTN.html

The first thing that struck me was that, contrary to widespread

speculation, Leica didn't bother to respond to the Hexar RF with their

own electronic shutter M camera. My respect for Leica management has

gone up, as it certainly would have been a fools game to play "me too"

in response to either the Contax G or now, the Hexar RF.

 

<p>

 

Its too bad that the new wide-angle M didn't more closely resemble an

updated M2. It would have been neat to see this body built around the

non-TTL M6 chassis, at a reduced cost. A 24mm frameline would have

been nice, too. Nonetheless, the wide angle viewfinder seems like a

logical companion to either the new 28mm Summicron or the "new

improved" 28-35-50mm Tri-Elmar (The wide angle M6 and Tri-Elmar will

be a tempting alternative to the G3 with zoom lens).

 

<p>

 

The "O"-series is a good sign. I hope that additional Barnack-type

cameras will be produced, because that eventually implies a set of new

screw-mount lenses!

I agree with Joe. It is a shame that the new 0.58 does not have a

24mm frame. I think that maybe they could have dropped the 90mm frame

and included the 24mm frame with maybe edge of frame out to 21mm.

Perhaps they could have kept the 75mm frame. They might not have done

this because, presumably this would have meant making a new cam on

the 24mm w/a lenses to bring up the correct framelines - which would

bring down the ire of M users ("obsolete" lenses). I suppose when I

think about it they probably did a good thing with this w/a Leica.

Especially as most people love the 35mm lens (not me!). They will not

now drop the TTL function now that it has been introduced. Most of us

think it is not very useful, but perhaps it is nice to have it rather

than not. The Leica 0 is pretty useless and is really an item for

collectors along the lines of their gold cameras.

 

<p>

 

I think the 0.58 with the Tri-Elmar is a nice combination - I just

wish it was f2.8 - f4 really is too slow. Maybe the Tri-Elmar plus a

35 or 50 Summilux would be a nice set.

 

<p>

 

The new 28 f2.0 looks like a winner to me. I wish they had an R-

version.

Thanks for the site on the Bronica.I saw mention of Pentax 43mm lens with L-mount!! and special finder!!This sounds like a Leica mount lens with finder..I read somewhere that Pentax had patents for a rangefinder.I know here in the States its all C and N cameras.However elsewhere Pentax is really big and popular.If they were to build a rangefinder with electronic focus aid,auto exposure,finders illuminated by the individual lens,I think all of Leica would be in deep doo-doo.I wonder what possessed the directors at Solms

to mess up the M-series.I would look at a simplified finder like my 45 year old M2,not at the 0.58 !Solms has not been true to Barnak,Leitz and the guys that designed and built the M3.The lack of the name and serial number on the actual body is a disgrace.It looks cheap.Reverse snob appeal?Each new Leica M is a parody of its former self.Leica should have designed and built a modern RNGFDR.I do pro work and need all the help I can get;flash-fill at better than 50th,

auto-exposure.I am fast at taking photos BUT some of the new cameras are way faster than me.When the Leica Societies

suggest getting the older Leitz M3/2/4 rather than a M6 there is a problem.

Jason,

 

<p>

 

You state of Pentax: "If they were to build a rangefinder with

electronic focus aid,auto exposure,finders illuminated by the

individual lens,I think all of Leica would be in deep doo-doo."

 

<p>

 

Contax did this... twice with the G1 and G2. Even though the lenses

are reputed to be excellent... Leica users refuse to give up the

control offered by the simplicity of the "M". There are many entries

on web sites that had Leica users who bought into the Contax, only to

miss what made Leica special, and came back.

 

<p>

 

I do agree though... If Leica came out with a modern M2... three

framelines displayed alone, a 35,50 and 90... a rapid load spindle...

and a crank for rewind... and brought it in for $1000.00 Dollars,

they couldn't produce them fast enough to keep up with the demand.

And the Leica Societies tend also to be extreme navel-gazers,

obsessed with items that are of not a great deal of relevance to a

modern camera manufacturer. In my opinion, although Leica has made

its mistakes (the M5 is one - probably unfairly), the M6 is not one

of them. It is their most successful camera ever. Al may well have a

point about a "cheap" Leica, but from Leica's perspective they do not

wish to dilute their sales with items that bring in less money, as

this will reduce overall revenue. I am sceptical that many of these

new RF cameras will really expand the market anyway - I guess we will

wait and see. There is no rule that says that the 35-50-90 combo is

the one M-users prefer. I find little use for the 35mm lens for

example. To me a 28mm frame is much more useful, so I find the new

0.58 appealing, especially with a new 28 Summicron (not that I can

afford either at present).

All the usual sources are still saying that a M6-AE is in the works.

It is supposed to retain the same shutter but with electronic

timing controls. As Leica is a small company with fixed

resources it will take time for them to design it properly and work

out all the bugs. We will not see a rebadged Hexar. It will have

the same bottom loading system and rubberised shutter

curtains as the current M. At least that is what "the usual

sources" are saying.

 

<p>

 

Cheers

The M6 the most successful camera?With all due respect,the M3 is the winner and the M2 a close second.

Jason

 

<p>

 

Sorry, I should have added that the M6 is the most successful Leica

in the last 30-35 years. Or perhaps I should say "in the modern era".

The M3 and M2 were successful, of course, but the camera landscape

was very different then (reflexes had not really come into their

own).

Robin writes:

<p>

<i>

...Al may well have a point about a "cheap" Leica, but from Leica's

perspective they do not wish to dilute their sales with items that

bring in less money, as this will reduce overall revenue. </i>

<p>

That they offer OEM'ed d-photo and P&S' (AFAIK) indicates their

interest for market presence, at least, if not real market share.

<p>

<i>I am sceptical that many of these new RF cameras will really expand

the market anyway - I guess we will wait and see. </i>

<p>

I would agree. I tend to think that the differences among viewfinders

a bit arcane for the uninitiated RF user. It's not as if you can walk

to any camera store and handle one of these, and, if you're thinking of

investing in the system, say to yourself, "Gee, there's a Leica M6 for

me finally!" Even the Leica dealer in downtown San Francisco seems to

have new models rarely in stock. So it takes a bit of perseverence to

find out about them. Of course, whoever is thinking of plopping down

$600 for a Rebel kit with a 38-80 at Ritz while picking up their 4x6's

is hardly likely about spend 5x that for a new M6 body and single lens.

Then again, if you could lay your hands on an M6 as easily as an F5

even, things might be different.

 

<p>

<i>

There is no rule that says that the 35-50-90 combo is the one M-users

prefer. I find little use for the 35mm lens for example. To me a 28mm

frame is much more useful, so I find the new 0.58 appealing, especially

with a new 28 Summicron (not that I can afford either at present). </i>

<p>

I feel the same way, tho' I want to be able to use the longer focal

lengths. I almost think that, among M6ers, the 35mm is the 'standard'

lens, just as the 50mm is the standard for reflexers. Do M-users view

the 50 as a very very short telephoto I wonder...? That the 50mm is

the standard for SLRs may be due to economics- what camera maker

doesn't make a fast, sharp, cheap 50mm? That said, seems like the 50mm

Summicron comes out cheaper than its 35mm counterpart. As with all

things Leica, so much for economics.

<P>

I am new to Leica. With the new .58 viewfinder, is it impossible to

use a 135mm lens

Jack,

 

<p>

 

None of us have seen the new M6, but the Leica literature states that

it only goes up to a 90mm lens. You state that you are new to Leica,

so you might look through the posts that are in this section.

Everyone has their favorite lenses, but not too many people think

using a 135mm lens is too fun. The best camera was probably the M3,

which had almost a lifesized viewfinder. As the finders began being

reduced in scale, the tele lens frames got pretty small. I have

the .72 M6, and can't really embrace the 90mm much less the 135. The

f2.8 135, (now discontinued), had finder magnification "eyes", and

may be usable on the new camera, but that lens cancils out the "small

camera" philosophy of Leica. Save the longer lenses for the SLRs.