fran__ois_p._weill Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 All economic questions set aside, the MP has cleared the tracks!... It is typically the dream of �Leica fundamentalists� come true (and surely a good camera by the way)� Now, you can be assured your addicted customers will find what they cried for Mr. Leica, when will you try to broaden your customer panel with a really 21st century realistically priced rangefinder camera? For those who never bothered about the typical non-issue of battery dependence, accept to be confident in modern reliable electronics and will be just found to find everything the 35mm SLR customer is used to and which is relevant for a rangefinder camera, there is no more excuse for you to shy such a body for fear of loosing the usual customers of your brand. There is no more any reason not to go for a really improved M7, an �M8� with a modern metallic shutter (30 s to at least 1/4000th of a second, full sync at 1/250th) and the most efficient metering combination: manual + spot and AE + matrix and TTL flash. An hinged back for fast loading and unloading with something like the old Canon QL device, and ready for an eventual conversion to full frame HD digital (when the technique will allow), a multiple (flare free) magnification finder (0.6, 0.8, 1), the capability to use the re- born Leicavit or an electronically regulated fast motor drive (6 frames per second) with rewind capability and a price inferior to the MP because electronics cost less than mechanical gears. Now, who can say this will impair your sales with the fundamentalists? The MP will provide for them and; by the way, for the R&D costs as Nikon has demonstrated to be able to issue a modern all mechanical camera with a price inferior to their high end fully electronic marvels. You might have the protection of some god Mr. Leica to survive producing things of 1950�s as new models and being able to sell them the price of up to date technology� But take this warning, this god might have enough soon protecting such a behavior and you may actually lose everything if you supremely ignore other people are now working again as your direct competitors, it is becoming more and more difficult to justify this attitude� You�d better react soon. François P. WEILL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kristian dowling Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 So let me guess, you're after a Leica F5-EOS1VD? In all respect, I thinkn you waisted your time typing the above. Leica aren't a multi-billion dollar company like Canon, and considering the constraints, Leica has done well, and I'd be proud to say I own a Leica MP with minimal technical capabilities. I'd look to complement the camera with my own capabilities....and improve. But this has all been said before..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografz Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 IMO, all this focus on the bodies is a waste of R&D and manufacturing capital. The MP is enough already. Get a Hexar if you want all that junk on the camera. (However, a 10 meg Digital M would be worth it, but I am not holding my breath). Me, I lust for "more better" glass. Maybe some slower smaller ones like a 75/2.8 APO to carry with a 35/2 ASPH. Or some faster stuff...a 35/1.2 ASPH...yummy. A 24/2 ASPH...yes! Maybe a return to some of the older formulas that are hard to find without damage. Also, a new collapsable 50/2 and 90 would be "innovative". Yes, I wouldn't mind a bit higher sync speed and a higher maximum shutter speed. But in truth, I rarely use a M that way anyway. When I shoot flash, it's usually no more than 1/50th even with a camera that sync's at 1/250th. I like fast lenses with a small amount of fill even in the darkest conditions (exactly why I am a lens speed freak). But, to each his own.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kristian dowling Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Lovely example Marc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fran__ois_p._weill Posted March 9, 2003 Author Share Posted March 9, 2003 Without disrespect to Marc's work, I won't consider his example (though convincing about his masterization of the fill-in technique) a very smart illustration of what you can do with a Leica M: a tilted subject centered on the frame with a perfectly uninteresting right part of the composition... However, I'm still unconvinced by this kind of fill-in demonstration as any camera can do that... The real problem of fill in traditionally begins with a heavily backlighten subject in full sunlight. Something universally acknowledged some decades ago when most focal plane shutter cameras cannot get an as nearly as fast sync speed than a central shutter (Like the ones on the good ole Rolleiflex). To say it is unintersting to get a faster sync speed, unless you never use a flash for a real fill-in and not a simple balance with ambient light indoors is something which simply looks like a biased position... Now about the lenses... I think quite funny you put first your requirements for other lenses from Leica... Something I feel hardly necessary as if there is a point they are still the best it is there... So you want a more compact 75 mm losing some aperture in between... It does exist it is called a V-länder 75 mm f/2.5 Color Heliar... You want a f/1.2 35 mm (so about a half stop more than the stellar and splendid Summilux f/1.4 Aspheric) ? It exists and it is a new V-lânder lens... But I doubt it will be as stellar as the Summilux at full aperture... But the most astonishing thing is you are looking for collapsible lenses! Hardly believable at all... A formula which was devised only for a more compact carrying of a camera in an ever ready bag... It has absolutely NO other purpose (except to permit you to waste some films when in a hurry you forget to pull the front part of the lens out)... Who uses ever ready bag today? Just tell me... The triumph of pointless tchnology for sake of a "retro" look... Notice it doesn't bother me at all... I simply consider completely illogical to refer to the Leica tradition and legend which were built with what was tecnologically the most advanced in its own time with such kind of choices. As for what I'm looking for... Certainly not an F5EOS-who-knows-what... Simply a rangefinder camera of our times with no unuseful gadgetery and a tad more advanced than my Hexar RF. And if somebody doesn't want anything but what is already available he (or she) has now the choice and can buy an MP... Now (once again) Leica CAMERA is a small enterprise but Leica AG is not!... If they'd really want to do some real R&D they have ample means to do it and they actually do it in the optical department because it is useful for their other activities. And they can also (as they did once) unit their effort with some other company... Do you remember the Minolta CLE? But to dismiss as unuseful things matrix metering, high speed sync. or fast loading for a camera which owns its reputation mainly to Press photog activities (moreover when you can buy a low tech cmaera if you wish so in the same range)looks to me the demonstration of real lack of any sense... To tell the things frankly, I posted this message just to demonstrate how intolerant the Leica fundamentalists are... I'm not deceived... Thanks folks... Even when you are free to buy your dream camera, you are unable to accept some people might have other requirements for a rangefinder camera... I'm sorry folks but if Leica once disappear, you should be held responsible for that... François P. WEILL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin m. Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Francois, I agree with your general premise if not with your specifics. I think that Leica has got a big monkey off their back by offering the MP to keep the purists happy; they are now free to move the M line into the future - whatever that might be. As I said in another thread, it's as if in the M5/CL era Leica had continued to offer the M4 as well. No offense, Marc (nice fill-flash shot BTW,) but I think if Leica offered some of the Hexar features on the M7 you wouldn't be calling them "junk," Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom h. Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 So, Francois, you should probably just not buy one, right? I'm no leicaphile, (I hate mine half the time) but the lenses are better than just about anything, and the build quality of the bodies is better than anything else I use, including Hasselblad. BTW Marc, I'm sure the Bride and Groom were well pleased with that one. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry_ting2 Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Beautiful picture Marc. I'm with you on this. Fast lens with useable wide-open aperture, without "robbing Peter to pay Paul", and giving nice quality pictures are the attribute of Leica lens. However, Leica product, regardless whether its for consumer use, or for special scientific applications are always a niche product. I remember when I was in a hospital for a physical, they put me in one of those MRI scanner and the technician told me, a replacement lens for the machine is about 30% of the total cost of the entire unit. And when said it's got to be a "Zeiss", he corrected me and said it was a Leica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fran__ois_p._weill Posted March 9, 2003 Author Share Posted March 9, 2003 Not exactly Tom, Actually if I had no problem of budget, the MP looks to me a more logical design than the M7... I don't like things "well seated between two chairs", as we put in French. I just think everything embodied in it has been developed (and sometimes long, long, ago) by Leica (mostly when it was still Leitz)... Consequently I think it is grossly overpriced... My only real critic on this one... A fair price would be the equivalent of the one of a Nikon FM3A... The M camera I consider the less desirable (not because of its qualities) is the M7, because it is a half hearted attempt to a modernization of the original design. I understand through the reactions on this board and other places some Leicaphiles considered it "too modern" for them... Now the MP bring them all what they like to have: a purely mechanical quality camera with very few battery deopendence they are so afraid of (I suppose they never use a portable radio set and start their car engines with a good ole crank)... My intention was not to criticize their love for the MP but to try to see if they will tolerate now their pet manufacturer to go forward (IMHO before it would be too late for them to survive) in the 21st century world as long as their dreams have now come true... I simply had the expected response from them... I wonder why they use a small format rangefinder camera and not a 1910 vintage folding with glass plates and an electronic flash instead of good old smoking magnesium powder... But I have nothing against a dive into the past and still from time to time use the old Zeiss Ikon 6x9 of my late aunt... Simply I won't say "it is all what you need"... What I consider abusive is to impose their way of thinking to everybody... I don't hate any M camera I used, particularly my defunct M5... I'm still convinced it was a mighty good camera. But not to see the technique has not evoluted only in the gadget way seems to me a desperate case of blindness. As for the quality of build, I concur with any participant who have written the new Leicas are not so well built when compared to a classic M3 or M4... And - at least to my eyes - my Hexar RF, though industrially built, is not inferior to the present M's (though I don't know about the MP)... perhaps it is a tad better built in some points. As for the lenses, it is clear you can't find better than Leica ones... Too bad you can't exploit that fully with a more advanced body (even more advanced than the Hexar RF) retaining the points which are really superior in the M7 v.s. the Hexar RF. François P. WEILL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tito sobrinho Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 I would follow Francois's and Kevin's line of thought. The last leica I got was the M5 actually, a gift from my wife (late '70s). Leica is going retroactive to keep up with the purists. No, they are not a multi billion dollars enterprise, but look what happened to Rollei Werk. Bankruptcy in 1981. They use parts of the Rollei 2.8f to issue few commemoratives. Today, they make the wonderful 6000 series along with FEW GXs for the purists. The original MP was labeled M Professional but today, it was changed to Mechanical Perfection!!! If Leica is due to survive, Hermes should concentrate on the Leica's R&D and offer new products instead of commemoratives galore and retroactive designs that date back to the Leitz family's ownership. Like I said before, "just a name cannot survive the game" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gus_christopher Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 "I won't consider his example (though convincing about his masterization of the fill-in technique) a very smart illustration of what you can do with a Leica M: a tilted subject centered on the frame with a perfectly uninteresting right part of the composition... " Why must there be something "perfectly interesting" in the right part of the composition? Why must the entire photo be filled with perfectly interesting things? That's just not how life is. Sometimes, life is something wonderful in the center and something unremarkable in the corner. To compose so that there is something remarkable everywhere you look, in all corners, high and low, seems to me to be fine for advertising work, but slightly dishonest for reportage shots, like Mark's. It is just so easy to to be a critic. While it's actually very difficult to use fill flash indoors and make it appear that you didn't. Great shot, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowell_peterson Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Marc, I would have been proud to have taken this picture; the balance of flash is perfect; would like to hear more about how you do this with the sp-20. I'm sure the couple loved this photo. Black and white is perfect; I get tired of color in everything; I guess it's because when I started in 1944 everything was black and white except for a little kodachrome and some anscochrome. I think your shots are really sharp (focus that is) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 I think that there will always be a market for camera not dependant on electronics, at least as long as film is still available. The average person keeps his camera fairly well protected from the environment. I fish frequently in salt water. My cameras have had their share of rain drops and salt spray over the years although I try my best to keep them dry. No real dunkings, but water does get on them occasionaly. And promptly wiped off. Add on the news asignments when the heavens opened up and we got drenched by rain, and the normal summertime humidity in South Florida. I bought an R4-S twenty some years ago, spent small fortune on keeping it functional, the metal under the black finish is all bubbled, and it now sits dead on a shelf, the electronics shot. In the last 5 years I've discarded 2 cell phones and 2 supposedly waterproof portable marine radios. They stop working and it's cheaper to replace than repair. The M2 and M3 bodies have finders that never get fogged up from moisture inside, unlike my "waterproof" binoculars, don't get corroded, don't stop functioning. I once asked the Leica rep what I should do if I dropped a Leica in salt water. He said to open it up and drop it in fresh water, rinse it well, and get it to a repair tech as quickly as possible, but keep it wet so it wouldn't start corroding. But nothing would be damaged. Try that with electronics! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 I am getting much better results from my M7's than I ever got from a mechanical M before. The exposure with narrow-latitude slide film is much more precise thanks to the stepless and more consistent shutter. Using the AE-lock to set exposure is much faster than manually adjusting the diodes. Aperture-priority with a stepless shutter means being able to use the exact aperture I want--with a preset focus for DOF, or wide open for the fastest-possible shutter speed. I'm not interested in a mechanical M because it doesn't solve those specific photographic problems for me, and I'm glad I have an option other than the Hexar RF...although I will admit that had Konica made it in 0.72 viewfinder I'd never have gotten the M7's. A 10+meg full-frame digital M would jump into my bag, and if the MP raises enough scratch from the fondlers to fund its development, I'm happy Leica makes it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_king1 Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 As far as using fill flash goes, Marc's photo does exhibit very adept use of the technique and it is a nice wedding candid. But the fact is that you don't need an M6TTL or the SF20 to achieve that result in those lighting conditions. Any decent adjustable automatic flash can do that in conjuction with any focal plane shutter camera, as long as the photographer knows what he's doing and how to use his equipment. What the M6TTL/SF20 can't do is teach you that, or let you shoot with fill flash in lighting conditions that require greater than a 1/50 shutter speed. But it is fast and accurate, which lets the photographer concentrate on getting a great shot without worrying about technique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_a. Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Henry, I read your reply about a zeiss lens and your MRI scan. I am an MRI Technologist. An MRI unit does not use optics to produce its image. Strictly magnetism and RF waves. Antennas and radio freq. yes, lenses and light no such thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joel_matherson Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Fransois, Leica did NOT participate in the Minolta CLE program in any way shape or form. It was entirely a Minolta Project. If your so desperate for a more advanced hexar why not jump up and down at Konica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtodrick Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Franacois...you constantly carp about the shortcomings of the Leica (it seems any and all)...the wonderful things your Hexar gives you...yadyadayada!! I have a great idea...just love your Hexar and quit your constant griping! It's obvious from your posts that you're an intelligent and articulate person...why can't you get it that most people using Leica like it for what it is...not what it could/should be. Jeeeezzzz!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografz Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Francois, absolutely no disrespect meant concerning your POV. In fact, I also purchased a Hexar to make up for the few short comings of the M cameras so well outlined here. However, I found that I rarely used the Hexar for those perfectly valid features. So I recently sold it to a forum person ( who is a happy Hexar user now that the back/focus was corrected for M lenses by the Konica folks). My experiences have more to do with the fact that a simple, uncomplicated, highly reliable camera is more important to me than more features that could go wrong. I have had 3 major electronic failures or technology related failures while shooting weddings. In every case the Leica M saved my bacon. It is the reason I will not shoot a wedding without a M and a bag of film with me. There are no second chances, no reshoots. As for the sample photo, it wasn't meant as an example of stellar photography. It was simply an example of using really fast lenses wide open to capture ambient background light while shooting fill flash...on a rangefinder that allows you to shoot at a slower shutter speed than an SLR. I disagree that there are any number of cameras that would allow you to do that. Contax G can't, the lenses are to slow, as are most rangefinder offerings. There are very few really great super fast lenses to help achieve this IMO. If the Vot. 35/1.2 turns out to be a world beater, I probably consider getting one. But in my experience, Leica fast glass is the best, especially wide open. So while I respect your right to your opinion, you must come to at least understand that needs differ ( thus the "to each his own" last line of my post). I don't really need or want all that "junk" for what I do. You may. I already have it , in such an advanced form with some of my other cameras, that it would take Leica 25 years to catch up. But why? To forever be second best? IMO they are the best at what they do. There is still something to be said about specialization. Lack of failure ain't a bad speciality. Neither is having the fastest, highest quality lenses out there. But, again, to each his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kristian dowling Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Damn, there are so many different products out there for many different purposes. For God's sake, if you aren't happy that Leica hasn't made a perfect camera for you, just bitch about it on a Canon forum and blame Canon for not making the perfect camera you desire. I am just so sick of hearing the same repetitive crap about Leica's shortcommings- the main reason why I choose Leica. If you want a camera that fullfills your own technical photographic skill shortcommings, then seek out a Canon or something alike. People like Mark really prove what I am talking about. Images speak for themselves, whereas technical shortcomming crap-talk (which I am guilty of too) means just that! .....now back to "photography with Leica cameras".........:-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin m. Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Kristian, no need to take offense just because others have different needs/desires than you. I say again, now that Leica is making the MP - a fully manual camera for the ages which I would love to own someday - it will free them up to be more creative with the M line. Ideally, creative in ways we may not be able to predict. That doesn't mean some all-electronic, auto-focus number ala Canon or Nikon. I doubt they would do that even if they could; it goes against the ethos of the M. I'm hoping for something that matches the audacity of the M3 when it was introduced. Now that the purists are kept happy with the MP, maybe the company can move forward and surprise us with a camera we won't know we want until we see it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kristian dowling Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Hey, don't take me too seriously, no offense taken. Just a little tired of hearing the same tiring comments with impossible outcomes desired. Surely I can't be the only one right? People are crying as if their mommy Leica hasn't got them the lolly pop they asked for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 While their has been a bit of competition of late it isn't serious enough to shake up the good people in Solms. Konica's efforts must have been good for a few laughs over a stein or two. "Backfocus shmackfocus! Can't they measure it?" Bessa is like a kindergarten for aspiring Leica buyers. No problem there. Leitz never made a 15mm anyway, they marketed Zeiss's Hologon. Pentax made a few lenses and dropped out of the running. What could really light a fire under their feet would be an effort by the likes of Canon to update the Canon 7 with a through the lens meter and M bayonet mount. They had some pretty decent glass designed 40 or more years ago. A 19mm f/3.5 that could hold it's own against Schneider's 21/3.4. I had one for a long time. 35mm f/1.5. 50mm f/1.2 and f/0.95 that was years before the Noktilux. 85mm f/1.8 and and f/1.5, and a 100mm f/2. Updated with new designs, new glass and coatings, that's an impressive line-up. A little pin in the accessory shoe moved up and down as you focussed. Auxilliary finders corrected for parralax. Or you could dial in a frameline in the range-viewfinder. A Canon VIII (they used Roman numerals through VI) could give Leica some serious competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_hall1 Posted March 10, 2003 Share Posted March 10, 2003 Al, Canon is still making cameras (film AND digital) for Leica lenses - you just need an adapter. Yet, what you suggest is probably the only kind of wake-up call that does it for Leica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerry_szarek Posted March 10, 2003 Share Posted March 10, 2003 Al, Konica NJ can measure the backfocus of Leica optics on Hexar RF, AND they can fix it. Costs a wopping ~$55 give of take for some shipping. Why they didn't make the camera focus with Leica optics has to be a marketing question. Gerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now