What Leica would best suit you ?

[Alex_Es]

<p>Eventually the M is going to evolve into a professional mirrorless cameras. At present, we have the M with its lifeboat mirrorless mode. I do not see the professional mirroress camera as an old man's dream. It it just a matter of time.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>The CEO of Sony made a self-serving prediction this Winter, that SLRs will become obsolete within 5 years, replaced by EVFs. Considering how Sony has stirred the pot starting in 2014, I'm confident this prediction will come true. Like vinyl discs, film and rangefinder cameras, there will be relics afield.</p>

<p>The lag time of the Sony A7 viewfinder is short enough for sports and "critical moment" timing. The information available at a glance and focusing aids are invaluable. What I miss, in manual photography, is the clear space around the frame lines in a Leica M, which lets you anticipate action. I also miss the ability to preview the field of view of a lens before I attach it. The last is less important as you gain experience with a camera, but it's still a matter of trial and error if the framing is critical (e.g., you need all the pixels you can get for a landscape or large group portrait).</p>

<p>The megapixel race has not abated. This is not necessarily a benefit for huge enlargements. High resolution captures textures which add subtlety to a portrait or scene, much like the large format portraits and landscapes common 50 years ago. More important, higher resolution gives you the freedom to crop creatively while keeping enough pixels to make two page spreads or large prints.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<blockquote>

<p>This is not necessarily a benefit for huge enlargements</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You then went on to list the benefits, what are the disadvantages?</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>I do agree that the full frame mirrorless camera will be with most of us soon, my only disagreement with the FF mirrorless proselytizers is whether this constitutes a "revolution", which is what the likes of Sony want us to believe. I see it as an evolution that makes not a great deal of difference to the practical act of taking a picture and has no effect on digital output. My other feeling is that the size of FF cameras will not change radically in the long run, mirrorless or not. About the only company that seems to have the money and the audience to keep things small is Leica. As an example of the trend see the new Zeiss 35/1.4 FE lens. At 630 g, it is bigger than the Canon 35/1.4L at 580 g.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p><a href="http://petapixel.com/2015/03/03/a-handmade-wooden-leica-rangefinder-complete-with-two-interchangeable-lenses/">This one</a> fits my price range.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

I'd like that wooden Leica to convert to a

functional pinhole camera.

 

Otherwise, as long as we're make I'druther lists,

I'druther have a Fuji X Pro 2 with manual focus

confirmation in optical viewfinder mode. That

would be handy for M mount lenses via the Fuji

adapter.

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>What are the disadvantages to the expanding size of digital sensors? The file sizes are proportionately larger, which may slow processing and uploads. Battery life is also affected. You want to carry three or four spare batteries if you're out for the day. Memory size is of little consequence, since the sweet spot of $$/GB is hovering between 32GB and 64GB. A 64GB card in my Sony A7ii (24 MP) holds nearly 2000 images or 3 hours of 1080p30 video at 50 MHz bandwidth (the low end of broadcast quality).</p>

<p>The ability to crop freely and extensively means I feel no pressure to add a zoom lens to my menagerie, at least the collection I'm likely to carry at one time. My Nikon 28-70/2.8 is a beast, but performs very well on the A7. While only manual focus on the Sony, the aperture ring works and it's easy to focus manually. It also outperforms the Sony vario-tessar 24-70/4 in both resolution and distortion by a substantial margin. I'll eventually get the Sony/Zeiss lens for convenience and auto-focus.</p>

<p>The body of a Sony A7ii is about 1/4" smaller than that of a Leica M in all dimensions. The weight is nearly identical.</p>

[Troll]

<p>I'd be completely happy with a 35 (f:2) - 50 (f:2.5) - 90 (f:4).<br>

But I'd want the bright-lines to show 100% of the FOV at "real-world" distances, such as 25 ft. For close-ups, that's what the rear viewfinder is for.</p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>A most interesting thought experiment. It would be great if we could somehow bring together the advantages of the Contax G with the advantages of the Leica M.</p>

<p>What follows is a pure rant, so feel free to ignore:<br>

<br />If I was to have an M system, the closest existing set that would meet my expectations would be:</p>

<p>M7 (most silent shutter out of all the film bodies)<br />MM<br>

Zeiss 21/4.5 (negligible distortion, but I'd compare first to the CV 21/4)<br>

Leica or Zeiss 28/2.8 (but the CV 28/2 has surprisingly little distortion for its type, so I'd compare these three before choosing)<br>

Zeiss 35/2 (no distortion)<br>

Leica 50/2.4 (no distortion AFAIK)<br>

Leica 90/2.8 Elmarit M (negligible distortion AFAIK)<br>

Tri-Elmar? Hmm.</p>

<p>Any lens with focus shift or distortion would be out of the running. Distortion can be corrected automatically with digital files but focus shift cannot be. Will anyone notice a distortion-free image? No. But they will notice a distorted image. And that's the point. Anyway, if I want substandard lenses, I know exactly where to get those.</p>

<p>There are some features that Leica should have included in the M but haven't, which is puzzling. Such as deriving distance information from the RF to put into the metadata of each file. This won't work for macro or adapted lenses, but that is no reason to reject the idea. Think about it: all RF coupled lenses that have been designed with the standardized mount since the '30s can benefit from this feature. It can assist in distortion correction and can assist in calculating flash exposure.</p>

<p>And how come motor winders are noisy when AF motors are not? The current motor drive M, a very compact unit, is quite good from what little I know of it, but surely it can be as silent as an AF lens?</p>