What new Leica would you most like to see?

[david_killick]

The perennial question about the M7 provoked some wild and wacky

thoughts about fantastical futuristic Leicas.

But seriously: what new camera would be most useful? How about a

worthy successor to the CL/CLE? A kind of a hybrid with the minilux

P/S. Lots of folks seem to be opting for the Contax T3, but is a P/S

enough?

If Leica were to produce a new super P/S/CL replacement here's what I

would like it to look like:

 

<p>

 

* Should have rounded ends like the LTM, M, C1, C11.

 

<p>

 

* Not too big, not too small.

 

<p>

 

* Blend of retro style and modern functionality.

 

<p>

 

* Leica script on top like the C1 and classic Leicas.

 

<p>

 

* Large viewfinder.

 

<p>

 

* Manual control, good range of shuter speeds.

 

<p>

 

* Fast, sharp lens. If a zoom, 28 to 70 or 90.

 

<p>

 

* Fast and non-fiddly handling.

 

<p>

 

* Fast focussing and fast shutter release.

 

<p>

 

* Accessory flash. No need to have one built in.

 

<p>

 

There! Not too much to ask, surely?

[joshroot]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. All I want from Leica is

a digital M camera. It should/would be no bigger than an M with a

motor. And would be at least as quiet at the M camera is now.

[michael_kastner]

This is I guess a wrong answer to a right question but as

"replacement" I'd like to see an M 2/75 mm.

[raymond_tai]

Bring back the non-TTL with brass top and real Vulcanite. Also re-

release the M6J as a standard issue.

[dennis_couvillion]

An M2-type, manual camera with an easy loading feature. Basically, a

fully manual, meterless camera with a bright, uncluttered

viewfinder. I have an M6 and an M2. Both are great cameras, and the

M6 is admittedly convenient with its built in meter; however, I

usually grab the M2. I like the feel of it and it's just more fun to

use.

[oliver_s.]

Here's another demand for a digital M. Dear Mr Cohn: we do <i>not</i>

need a number of extras no other camera manufacturer ever thought of,

but we'd like to have it soon and M6 + motor-sized.

[Niels - NHSN]

I want a economy M for less than 1000$. A .72 viewfinder where the

outer edges represents a 35mm, + a 50mm and a 90mm frame permanently

visible in the viewfinder. The lack of frameline preview and coupling

should make it less costly to produce. Also a modern "replace if it

breaks" metalblade shutter would make this model less expensive. 1

model and one color. <br>

Most Leica entusiasts will hate it for the more noisy shutter, and

Leica will not loose too much M6 sales. It should be targeted as an

entry level camera and a backup for those who can't justify the price

of an extra M6.<br>

Also I want an entry level F:2.0 50mm lens. When Canon and Nikon can

sell decent 50mm f:1.8 lenses for under $100, then Leica should be

able to make a good one under 500$ eg. the 69-70 summicron design in

a polycabonat barrel.<br>

[alfie_wang]

A digital M camera? I don't like that idea to be honest. Digital

sucks relative to film to be honest. I prefer old school not

convenience...

 

<p>

 

I would definitely want to see the following changes for a new camera:

 

<p>

 

A Leica R9 which returns back to a titanium body similar to the

Leicaflex SL2 in looks and designs. Reliable workhorse. Add some

solid manual features with "an autofocus detector" which means that

the camera doesn't have autofocus but a signal which can tell you

whether the image is in focus or not. That would be a blessing.

 

<p>

 

Brrr... digital... whew I'm back to the beginning :)

[godfrey]

I put my oar in for a Leica M Digital body. I love the Leica M for its

lenses and would be very happy to continue using them on a

high resolution digital body.

 

<p>

 

I don't need a built in preview screen or a million bells and

whistles. The traditional Leica rangefinder and viewfinder are

just fine. Responsive operation, capacity for100 high rez images,

(6000x4000 pixels is adequate), FireWire interface for fast

upload to imaging system.

[andrew_schank]

An M3 with a built in meter, or an M2 with a built in meter.

According to a few Leica repairmen I have talked to, however, a

camera would have to sell for over $6000 just the body if they were

to try and make one today with the hand craftmenship of the earlier

Leicas. How about a slighlty smaller .72 M6 with user selectable

finder lines, 1 at a time, and no finder flare.

[rob - atlanta, ga usa]

An updated 90mm f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit. Maybe an APO/ASPH version, just

as long as it was no bigger than the original.

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

Seems that a digital M may have a lot of follwers; I have had this

idea since more than a year ago, and I don´t think a M digital is a

much dificult accesory, there just need to be the rigth stuff to

develop it, and not necesarily from the Leica house; but would be the

best of course.

 

<p>

 

My idea is this: thake the M body,(any one), take off tha base plate

and back door, then a back door with a digital sensitive presure

plate goes intead of it, and batteries and the rest of the stuff goes

where the base plate, but bigger, as a motor driver, I don´t know

much about electronics but I know all this is posible, the most

dificult thing would be to relate the mecanical shutter of the M and

the digital sensor of the back door. Do you get it?

[Aoresteen]

Glad you asked!

 

<p>

 

Here's what I would like (the Leica IIIh) :

 

<p>

 

1. IIIg size M mount, with 90, 50, 35mm frames a la Canon P. Let's

call it the Leica IIIH!

 

<p>

 

2. Swing open back, removeable.

 

<p>

 

3. Shutter OM-2/OM-4 type automation OTF plus manual 1-1/1000 + B.

Led exposure indicator like Pentax MV-1/MX/Voigtlander Bessa R.

 

<p>

 

4. Use OM series type winder/motor drive.

 

<p>

 

5. Add on trigger advance like Voigtlander Bessa T. Hell, make it

use the Voigtlander unit.

 

<p>

 

6. TTL flash hotshoe.

 

<p>

 

7. Black finish, Leica script on top plate. Did I say black finish?

 

<p>

 

8. Pentax LX type strap lugs so I can hang the damn thing the way I

want to.

 

<p>

 

9. Carl Zeiss 50mm f/2.8 Tessar T*, fixed, black, 40.5mm filter

(ok , I'll agree to 39mm).

 

<p>

 

10. Street price for body has to be below $850.

 

<p>

 

Ok, I'll take 2!

[iván]

Just dreaming, uh? Leica AG doesn't care what we think, you know !

 

<p>

 

My dream: revamped M3 with 1/4000 metal mechanical shutter (same as

FM-2n's), swing back door, FM-2n's film threading, film rewind crank,

digital MR-like accessory clip-on light meter, 1/250s flash sync.

And, please, don't even try to "fix" anything else. Most specially

regarding the viewfinder.

 

<p>

 

In summary, I'd like Leica to concentrate on what they are good for:

simple, mechanical, solid, trustable, compact photographic tools that

allow you to build a system in time, serve two or three generations

and don't became obsolete as soon as a faster processor, a larger

pixel count sensor or a new battery type hits the market (i.e much

faster than your investement has had a chance to make any sense . . .)

 

<p>

 

My 2 cents . . . on dreaming.

 

<p>

 

-Iván

[msitaraman]

1. Zooming viewfinder, isolated framelines from 28 to 135mm. 1.0x

magnification at 50 mm.

2. Same quick load, but hinged bottom plate (so I don't have to use

my third hand to hold it)

3. Quieter shutter (tell me why not?)

4. 100 g. less weight.

5. DX coding and an ISO dial with bigger and more accurate markings.

6. Dimmer LEDs especially in low light.

[Rob F.]

An M6 with a user-customizable finder, so as to include only the

wanted frame lines. For Example, one would be able to leave out the

75mm and 135mm lines. You should also be able to reconfigure it in

the field, when desired.

 

<p>

 

And like Tony, I'd like the traditional Leica script on top, where it

belongs. And how about black paint?

 

<p>

 

Definitely include the rapid rewind crank. The old pull-up knob of

the M2/M3 may be aesthetically better, but I get impatient with my M2

now that the M6 has spoiled me.

 

<p>

 

A CL-sized camera with modern M6 style metering would be nice. But

I'd like the finder to work with 35mm lenses, and probably even

28mm. They can leave off the 75mm and 135mm frames to de-clutter the

finder, and to avoid exceeding the limitations of the short

rangefinder base. Then a tele-90 f/4 like the Rokkor-C to complete

the picture.

[popeye_cahn]

New Leica I'd most want to see? I'm not picky, I'd like to have a

current m6TTL in black with a 35/1.4 asph on my doorstep tomorrow.

But hell I know that ain't gonna happen, an th' resta oughta wise up

too...

[nom]

Digital M ? Why??? Is the quality that we get from the top digital

cameras so good that we miss the quality of the Leica lenses? If yes

then I guess I am doing something wrong!<br>

If tomorrow Leica would announce a M6d (or DigiSix) with a 5 Mpixel

sensor then the cost of the body would be -at least- $4000. Would you

give this money for a digital camera that will be outdated in 6

months? I would never, thank you.<br>

What I would like to see in a M7 :<br>

1) The Leica logo engraved on top. (too expensive -they said- ha!)<br>

2) Shutter speed in use visible in the viewfinder<br>

3) Aperture priority mode<br>

4) Back to the non-TTL size immediately.<br>

5) Special finish that can not be scratched.<br>

Well, just my opinion again...

[damond_lam]

A self-timer. A lighter titinium body. 1/2000s.

[john_collier5]

Am I the only happy camper? I love my M cameras just the way

they are. Thank you very much!

 

<p>

 

I have cameras with and without the "Leica" script and have

noticed no differences in negative quality nor in ease of handling.

I prefer the quiet rubberized cloth shutter to any metal one. Even

with the mirror locked up, shutters with metallic blades are not

that quiet. This does limit my top speed but I do not mind.

 

<p>

 

Why all the complaints about the 2mm increase in height for the

TTL? Have you ever used a TTL? It is much easier to meter with

and adjusting the shutter speed is an easy one finger operation.

My TTL is my main camera and I would not trade it for two M6

classics.

 

<p>

 

I also have good news for anyone who wants a less expensive M

camera. There are hundreds of thousands of them out there.

Why on our very own pages a M6 sold for $1000 and a M3 is

listed for $550. What do you want: one free in every box of Corn

Flakes?

 

<p>

 

Finally, if you want a *^%£@! special finish, go to a local

hardware store, get what ever you want and DO IT YOURSELF.

Are the Nikon discussion groups full of bitter reproaches to

Nikon because you cannot get a F5 in candy apple red? Do

people refuse to buy Canon telephoto lenses because white

clashes with their ensemble. H***, no other camera

manufacturer even offers any choice in regualr production

finishes!!!

 

<p>

 

 

There that feels better.....

 

<p>

 

PS: It is possible to have individual frames removed if you want.

PPS: If you are having trouble loading a M camera, practice. I can

load mine in the dark and so can you if you want too.

 

<p>

 

 

Cheers,

[michael_kastner]

Just in case anybody happens to be collecting the statistics here, my

answer to your question <i>"What new Leica would you most like to

see?"</i>, is <i>"Another M6TTL, please, but with a self-timer"</i>.

(Thanks for reminding me, Damond -- I have always wanted a self-timer

here -- but have given up talking about it any more.)

 

<p>

 

Mike

[haim_toeg]

Make it a rangefinder FE2 with Leica lenses--1/4000 top shutter speed

displayed in the finder, aperture priority, self timer, zoom finder.

[bobtodrick]

I agree fully with John C. I too love my Leicas for what they are.

If I want a top line digital camera there are a number to choose from

already on the market, so why have Leica even further stretch their

limited (compared to companies like Nikon and Canon) resources.

Polaroid USA just went under, primarily from the debt they have

incurred trying to compete in the digital market. If they can't do

it, I doubt whether Leica can.........

[Spearhead]

Polaroid did <i>not</i> go under. They are in Chapter 11

reorganization, which many companies have undergone and continued to

do business. They will probably pare back their product lines, but

they are expected to be here in the future. Most analysts dinged

them for going digital (which has replaced a significant piece of

the "instant" market) way too late.<p>

 

As for Leicas of the future, isn't there some obscure animal skin

that hasn't been used yet for camera coverings?

[nom]

John, I think you are missing something: We are here because we all

love our Leicas as they are now, or else we wouldn't be bothered to

talk anyway. Still it's human privilege to ask and search for

improvements. After all it is our personal taste and it doesn't mean

that it would be better for all the others too.<br>

The "Leica" script would not make any difference in handling or

negative quality of course, but, wouldn't you prefer if it was still

there?<br>

Would you be less happy if you could see the speed in use in the

viewfinder?<br>

Have you ever used a non-TTL? It's 2mm (or is it 3mm?) smaller -that

is 1/500 metres smaller!- and you dont have to put it to "Off"

position to avoid your battery drain (and let's not start talking

about TTL feature in such a synchronization speed!).<br>I know many

people that pay more than the price of a new TTL to buy a new non-TTL

body -when they find it-. And don't forget that Leica almost went

bankrupt when they changed the classic size of the M series (with the

M5). Size is always important, especially among diehard M users.<br>

A finish that is difficult to be scratched doesn't mean that it

should be candy apple red colored. And in Nikon and Canon discussion

groups they DO ask for improvements -all the time- much more than we

do.<br>

Again, my opinion only.