For Leica's next trick....

[andy_piper2]

Leica's done an amazing job of updating the lens line over the past decade, as well as doing some functional stuff with the M-cameras (motor, .58 finder). Essentially they've replaced every lens in the lineup except the 50s and the 90 Elmarit (and the Elmarit may really count as the first of the upgrades).

 

<p>

 

So my question is, if YOU could sit next to Herr Cohn in Solms and choose ONE new or revised product in the lens line or cameras, which would you vote for (you may choose an item not on the list below). Where's the biggest hole? Where should Leica concentrate their R&D now?

 

<p>

 

a. 75 f/2.8 APO-Tele-Elmarit (250 grams or less)

b. 90 f/2.8 APO-Tele-Elmarit (300 grams or less)

c. 50 f/3.5 APO-Elmar collapsible (sharper than 2.8)

d. 50 f/1.4 Summilux (new design ported from R-series lens)

e. 24 f/2.0 ASPH-Summicron (hey, they're on a roll!)

f. M6 1.00x body with life-size finder and 50-135 frames

(with or without: TTL, black paint, script engraving...)

g. M7 body (type 1. Hexar RF-style body; autowind, AE)

h. M7 body (type 2. Electronic shutter shoehorned into classic M oval metal body cavity, manual wind/rewind, aperture-priority AE)

i. M7 body (type 3. All-mechanical, but without bottom loading)

o. "0" product with interchangeable screw-mount lenses and integral rangefinder (sorry!, just being cute!)

n. other...

[geddert]

The number one thing I think they should concentrate on is reducing

costs without sacrificing quality. Since they won't do this (because

there are too many freaks - like me - still willing to pay for their

stuff) it would be nice if they worked on an M7. The most important

advances I would be looking for would be AE (thus necessitating an

electronic shutter - which i would hope would be even quieter than

the current one - if that is possible) and better film loading, i

like manual wind/rewind so I wouldn't want a motor for that. Reduced

size (if possible) would also be nice but definitely not very

important since these things are already pretty small.

[msitaraman]

The lenses are fine, but I too would like a small 75 or a small 90.

Weight reduction would be nice too (I can hear Bill Mitchell

suggesting that I get a Canon Rebel 2000) the newer lenses really are

kind of heavy, especially the chrome ones.

 

<p>

 

The body? I love my M6, but a standard film door back, DX coding, AE,

a quieter shutter (c'mon its not that quiet, especially if you have

heard a Rolleiflex leaf shutter), and a life-size high eyepoint

viewfinder would be nice. Isolated framelines and a larger baseline

would be nice too. And a lighter body.

 

<p>

 

Hmm... maybe I should get that Rebel body Canon EOS. Or maybe just a

Contax T3 to stave off the usual recurrent equipment madness.

[mark_wrathall]

Either - The functionality of the nikon FM3 (hybrid

electronic/mechanical shutter) aperture priority AE + manual, TTL

flash, 1/250 sync, back loading. Canon has had a hybrid shutter since

the F-1n so it is long overdue. This will probably not happen.

 

<p>

 

Or- Digital M! same rangefinder, full frame 6 megapixel sensor, back

LCD, CF II, similar energy consumption as Canon D30, Av AE + metered

manual, TTL Flash, sync at all speeds, same size as leica III. As

there are no linkage constraints here, except the rangefinder, and no

shutter required, you have the whole body to put the electronics. The

battery could easily fit in the space left by the film canister (this

could be bottom loading :)

[wilhelm]

Sorry to take so long to answer, but my keyboard is slippery from the

drool just thinking about a 50mm f:3.5 collapsable Elmar ASPH. In

LTM, of course. Ooooh, Ooooh, Oooh! Bill.

[jay_.]

Body: M7 similar to Hexar w. AE, motor and back-loading, but also

with manual wind/rewind (like R8) and hybrid shutter like Nikon

FM3A. (Actually I don't care about those last features but it would

appease the purists.) It would also have a variable-magnification

viewfinder that could be set so either the 28 or 90 framelines

occupied the full view, which would also now have a lengthy-enough

exit pupil so glasses-wearers could see the entire finder, plus a -2

to +2 diopter adjustment.

 

<p>

 

Lens: 75-90-135/4 Tri-Elmar

 

<p>

 

Accessory: Visoflex IV, with instant-return mirror, electrically-

coupled to the M7 shutter, with R-bayonet mount and auto-diaphragm

and the correct flange-to-film distance for R lenses to focus to

infinity.

 

<p>

 

That should just about do it.

[albert_smith]

I would love to be able to use my 75mm frame lines without suffering

the size, weight and cost of the only current true Leica lens in that

range. I am not an optical expert, but I wouldn't think you'd need

APO correction on such a short / slow lens. If a company like

Cosina, (voightlander), can produce a pretty good one with such a

short history of rangefinder lens production, then Leica should be

able to produce a world beating example by dropping the speed to

f/2.8. Dimensionally, it could no doubt be brought in at or less

than the size of the current 50mm Summiliux. This would be an Ideal

second lens to the 35mm, offering a true change from the 50mm, while

not ruining the stealthy profile of the camera like a 90mm lens.

[paul_chefurka]

My vote would go to a recomputed 50/1.4 and a smaller 75 (I'd prefer

a 75/2.0 rather than a 2.8, though). Beyond that, a motor drive with

rewind capability would be nice but not essential.

 

<p>

 

Other than that, I'm happy with the lineup they've got. After using

the Hexar RF for a while, I'm content that Leica brings its own set

of strengths to the table - let Konica test out the AE waters for a

while. I've decided I like the M bodies just as they are.

[dan_brown4]

Ditto what Paul just wrote. Just make sure the new 75 has a real

short length. If they do anything with a new body, I'd say ditch the

TTL flash (add no other electric features) and make it about the

size of a CL, but keep the M6 forever.

[paul_chefurka]

Jay, your comment:

"Visoflex IV, with instant-return mirror, electrically- coupled to

the M7 shutter, with R-bayonet mount and auto-diaphragm and the

correct flange-to-film distance for R lenses to focus to infinity."

 

<p>

 

made me think of a conversation I had recently on the rec.photo 35mm

newsgroup with a fellow named Lewis Lang. He was wishing for a

hybrid RF/SLR Leica. It seems like your idea would give him what

he's dreaming of, especially if you could find some way to couple the

R lenses on the Viso rig to the built-in rangefinder.

 

<p>

 

Of course, the name Rube Goldberg springs to mind too :-)

[jay_.]

R lenses on the Viso wouldn't need coupling to the rangefinder, they

focus on the Viso's ground glass. There wouldn't be much point in

using R lenses under 135mm on the M body, and serious long telephoto

work would still be better on a dedicated R body, but the 80-200/4 or

one of the fast 180's would be nice, as would perhaps the 60 or 100

Macro.

[paul_chefurka]

Lewis was looking for a full hybrid SLR/RF, that would give him the

ability to decide which viewing/focussing mechanism to use

irrespective of what lens was on the camera. I said it sounded like

he wanted to smoosh together a Spitfire Mk. IX and a Jaguar XKE to

make a flying car - thus ruining two perfect designs to create a

monstrous compromise.

 

<p>

 

One thing I value about Leica is their purity of vision. They

produce solid, dependable, well-understood and well-executed bodies,

with the world's best lenses. I would oppose anything that gets in

the way of that vision, and I'd hope Herr Cohn would, too.

[godfrey]

<P>Bodywise, I like the current M6TTL. I'd do three things:</P>

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>- fix the flare in the rangefinder<BR>

- separate the meter's on/off switch from the shutter speed

selector<BR>

- change the eyepoint of the viewfinder to accomodate wearers of

glasses more easily (I don't like the lower magnification

viewfinder as much, and use a 35mm lens a lot). </BLOCKQUOTE>

 

<P>Regards lenses, hmm. All the lenses I have are truly superb as

they are. Perhaps a lower cost/weight alternative to the 75/1.4 would

be nice, and I happen to like the 40mm focal length (miss my

Summicron-C 40/2). But I doubt I'll be buying any more lenses anytime

soon.</P>

 

<P>Godfrey</P>

[hoyin_lee1]

On all future M cameras: back loading, back loading, back

loading . . . .

[godfrey]

Why is "back loading" such a big deal to you? I much prefer the M4+

style of bottom loading. I find it faster and more reliable. Takes me

about 10-15 seconds total to change loads. I fumbled swing open backs

much more often too.

 

<p>

 

Godfrey

[bruce_neuman]

I am a new Leica user and love my M6. I do think an M7 with

automatic exposure and an electronic shutter is the next logical

move. If Nikon could do it so successfully with the F3, then Leica

could certainly do it without sacrificing quality. Leica could also

consider reducing prices. A great camera and lens system deserves

lots of picture takers.

[phil_stiles3]

I'd like to see a camera with the best aspects of the CL and Rollei

35. A collapsable lens of very high quality, rangefinder focus,

optional exposure automation. I take a lot of shots with my Contax

T2, simply because it's in my pocket. An f/2 lens and choosing the

focus point would be nice.

[john_hicks]

Seems that an M6 with an EI-setting scale that doesn't require a loupe to read and an RF that doesn't flare would be a good start.

 

<p>

 

Once those problems are solved....

 

<p>

 

I'd like a winder about the same size as the current one, but that triggers the camera via an electric switch and releases the shutter through the bottom; this would eliminate the pumping shutter button and would make remote operation simple. Power rewind would be nice. Ideal would be an Olympus OM MD-2 that runs on a couple of lithium cells in the handle and fits a Leica.

 

<p>

 

A zoom viewfinder. Not the Contax variety; think of a Leica M viewfinder with the usual parallax-correcting framelines with a little space outside of them. Have only one large set of framelines and change the viewfinder magnification to suit the lens in use.

 

<p>

 

Please oh please oh please don't make a Nikanon technoplastik wunderblaster!

[msitaraman]

Godfrey,

 

<p>

 

I'll settle for bottom loading if they add a simple hinge (or an

articulated/sliding one) to the bottom plate. Seems it would be easy

to do. And John is right, that film speed dial sure could have

clearer markings. BTW, anyone check out the Bronica rangefinder's ISO

dial? Its an ergonomic dream...

[hoyin_lee1]

Godfrey, why is "back loading" such a big deal to me? Well, I would

like to be able to change film in 5 seconds total without having to

hold the base-plate with my teeth! That's about the only gripe I

have with my M4-P (and the M6 0.58 I'm planning to get), otherwise,

the M body is near perfect!

[mark13]

What we really need is to revive and recompute the 50/1.2 Noctilux.

Maybe even make it a 50/1.1 The idea is to get the weight down and

move away from the no mans land of 60mm filters. I would shoot a

50.1.2 Noct if I could afford one. The darn 50/1.0 breaks the bank as

it is.

[mike dixon]

As long as M3 repairs are available, I won't complain.

[lucien___]

The reason I want to see a back loading M6 is that the bottom loading

prevents you to use easily a flash bracket.

 

<p>

 

Try to load your M with a bracket attached to the bottom.

 

<p>

 

;-)

 

<p>

 

Then do the same with a R8.

[lucien___]

The Hexar RF will ot help with bracket. There is no Flash TTL.

 

<p>

 

Lucien

[nesrani]

I'm not interested in new gear, but I'd like to see fast, efficient

and affordable aftersales service. 1 week turnaround max. I'd even

pay for it (an annual premium or some such). The repair people here

in Italy are absolutely slow, unreliable and expensive. Mainly

because Leica is percieved by Leica themselves to be a camera for

fondlers rather than users. So where's the hurry to fix broken gear?

 

<p>

 

To me this would make the biggest difference.

 

<p>

 

After that, an M6 with a 24 frameline at the position of the 35 lines

on the 0.72 model so I can use the skopar 25 without external

viewfinder.