M9: Do you want a dust reduction system?

[Lord Fluff]

Originally Posted by hteasley

You are responsible for everything the camera does, down to slow-shutter blur because you aren't relying on IS.

I can understand creatively why you might want motion blur in your subject at times - I just can't see why you would *want* wobbly-hand-blur, ever.

[Lord Fluff]

Originally Posted by hteasley

But with IS, there is interference by the camera, and a photographer can't take the same picture with it on or off.

How is a picture taken with IS off any different to a picture taken on a camera without the feature? (assuming a well designed system that does not degrade quality by its very presence)...or am I misunderstanding you?

[hteasley]

Originally Posted by Lord Fluff

How is a picture taken with IS off any different to a picture taken on a camera without the feature? (assuming a well designed system that does not degrade quality by its very presence)...or am I misunderstanding you?

If I were to sum it all up very succinctly, I'd say, "Modern Canon/Nikon/Sony/Fuji cameras help the photographer. Leica cameras help photographers help themselves." Although that comes across a little more dickish than I intend.

Nothing against fully-featured cameras: I own several. But there's something not merely good, not merely great, but transcendent about cameras that don't help you out, that make it easy for you to express nothing but your own intention.

[Paul Luscher]

Originally Posted by hteasley

If I were to sum it all up very succinctly, I'd say, "Modern Canon/Nikon/Sony/Fuji cameras help the photographer. Leica cameras help photographers help themselves." Although that comes across a little more dickish than I intend.

Nothing against fully-featured cameras: I own several. But there's something not merely good, not merely great, but transcendent about cameras that don't help you out, that make it easy for you to express nothing but your own intention.

Actually, that's EXACTLY the point about Leica Ms. Couldn't have said it better myself. Yes. Leica appeals to a certain type of photographer. Maybe that's why it's a niche product...it addition to its price.

So really, if you want a "full-featured" camera that has the this, the that, and does everything but take the photo for you (and maybe even that ,too) then a Leica is not for you. But please don't make a Leica into something that the typical Leica user does not want.... or need.

And I hope that doesn't sound too dickish....

[Lord Fluff]

But there is a lot of strange thought at play here (and this must vex the Leica R&D department no end) - people want the Leica M to evolve, but not too much, and only in certain ways.

People have a certain preconception about what a Leica M should be - to me it means only one thing - it's a rangefinder with the M mount. Any new features can be turned off - heck you can even tape over the LCD if you're that much of a purist / fanatic.

If you really want total simplicity at the expense of all else, the MP is always there for you. Meanwhile I'd welcome with open arms things like accurate LED frame lines, better high ISO, a more logical interface for the menu based items, and why not in-body IS or dust reduction?

It's interesting to ponder at what point Leica chose to halt their attempts to simply make the M the best 35mm camera possible and chose to lean on their mystique instead. At least the S line shows they have not abandoned progress altogether.

[Lord Fluff]

Originally Posted by Paul Luscher

....the typical Leica user....

It's interesting to ponder quite who that might be. I'd guess, on average, a middle-aged, reasonably well-off man with a photography hobby. If you rephrase that to 'typical Leica owner', then I'd say as above, but with more money, and less inclination to actually use the damn thing.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Lord Fluff

But there is a lot of strange thought at play here (and this must vex the Leica R&D department no end) - people want the Leica M to evolve, but not too much, and only in certain ways.

And all of those ways are different.

If you really want total simplicity at the expense of all else, the MP is always there for you. Meanwhile I'd welcome with open arms things like accurate LED frame lines, better high ISO, a more logical interface for the menu based items, and why not in-body IS or dust reduction?

It's interesting to ponder at what point Leica chose to halt their attempts to simply make the M the best 35mm camera possible and chose to lean on their mystique instead. At least the S line shows they have not abandoned progress altogether.

I guess one answer to this would be to make two digital Ms, a "traditional" one (the M_M is a big step in this direction) and one with some advanced features. Don't want LED framelines, image stabilization and dust removal? Get the old-fashioned model instead.

[Lord Fluff]

rxmd - that's actually a great idea and might prove popular. Freeze one M in the past, as 'typical' Leica users apparently want, and have another bells-and-whistles modern model for those of us interested in seeing what a rangefinder camera could evolve into.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Lord Fluff

rxmd - that's actually a great idea and might prove popular. Freeze one M in the past, as 'typical' Leica users apparently want, and have another bells-and-whistles modern model for those of us interested in seeing what a rangefinder camera could evolve into.

Yeah, it's basically what they did with the M7 and MP. Only problem is that it requires development efforts. Then again, it only requires them once as there can be a "trickle-down" from the bells-and-whistles model to the frozen model.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by jaapv

Yes - as said the M8/9 has an optical IR filter in front of the sensor - easily wet cleaned by hand.

I'd rather have my camera remove dust by itself, rather than force me to do easy wet cleaning by hand.

[Paul Luscher]

Originally Posted by Lord Fluff

It's interesting to ponder quite who that might be. I'd guess, on average, a middle-aged, reasonably well-off man with a photography hobby. If you rephrase that to 'typical Leica owner', then I'd say as above, but with more money, and less inclination to actually use the damn thing.

Well, sir, you'd be a little bit wrong. But then, engaging in stereotyping is such a bitch, isn't it?

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by Lord Fluff

It's interesting to ponder at what point Leica chose to halt their attempts to simply make the M the best 35mm camera possible and chose to lean on their mystique instead.

Perhaps they learned from the M5 that you don't f with tradition and that that tradition is what keeps most of its customers interested in leica m cameras. Completely redesigning the M could have huge ramifications for a traditional camera company with a rabid fanbase who craves the simplicity of the M.

I'm torn on this. I doubt I'd buy another Leica M ever at this point. I just don't like the prices for digital Ms. However, I think the M should be left alone for the most part. But another part of me would like closer focusing, high ISO, weather proofing, and dust reduction. BUT... If you want a "swiss army" camera with all of the latest functions and convoluted menus, then there are plenty to choose from. If you want a simple digital camera with classic controls... there aren't many choices.

I always wonder why do people want to change a camera that is one of a kind and make it like every other camera on the market...

[Steve Ash]

I'd rather remove the dust from the camera my self once in a while, instead of collecting it in the camera by itself.

For me a dust removal system is pointless.

Steve

Originally Posted by rxmd

I'd rather have my camera remove dust by itself, rather than force me to do easy wet cleaning by hand.

[krötenblender]

Originally Posted by Steve Ash

For me a dust removal system is pointless.

Knowing the difference from many years of use in different Olympus-cameras, I would say, a dust removal system would be one of the most welcome features for my M9, where cleaning the sensor myself is something, that is needed much too often and is something, that I really hate.

[Lord Fluff]

Originally Posted by Paul Luscher

Well, sir, you'd be a little bit wrong. But then, engaging in stereotyping is such a bitch, isn't it?

Yep - you'll not it wasn’t me that introduced 'the typical Leica user' to the debate though. However I'd like to know where your assertion that I'm a bit wrong comes from? (not to say I'm not)