Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Digital Rangefinder Cameras > Digital Leica M8 / M8.2 / M9 / M-E /Mono / M10 aka "M"

Digital Leica M8 / M8.2 / M9 / M-E /Mono / M10 aka "M" Discussions about the Leica M8 /M 8.2 / M9 / M9-P/ M-E / M Monochrom / M10 aka "M": Leica digital M mount rangefinder cameras. Naming the new digital M the "Leica M" is VERY unfortunate as it will only confuse newbies with other Leica M cameras of the the past. Happily there is room for confusion with only the past 59 years of Leica M production ... since Leica introduced the Leica M system in 1953. All Hail for the Leica Marketing Department learning Leica M history!

View Poll Results: The ME is ugly.
Strongly disagree 108 26.93%
Disagree 114 28.43%
Agree 116 28.93%
Strongly agree 63 15.71%
Voters: 401. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Is the ME ugly?
Old 10-09-2012   #1
ramosa
Registered User
 
ramosa is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 921
Is the ME ugly?

Let's get to the bottom of this once and for all ...
__________________
Leica M9 + 35x2/50/90
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #2
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,209
I actually think it looks nice and would love to own one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #3
pieter
Registered User
 
pieter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 124
I like the modern styling very much. It's a daring departure of the same old black or grey. Probably bevond the styling sensibilities of the typical Leica M buyer.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #4
maggieo
More Deadly
 
maggieo's Avatar
 
maggieo is online now
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Nebraska, USA
Posts: 2,936
The ME's styling is horrid and ugly. I know I'm not a typical M buyer, because I love the looks of the Pentax K-01, especially the yellow ones.
__________________
My Flickr Photostream & My Photo Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #5
Godfrey
wonderment
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,749
While I tend to prefer simple black, the M-E's blue-gray with silver accents seems subtle and classy.

I suspect it looks nicer in the flesh than I've seen in photos, much like my blue Panasonic G1 did.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #6
jpfisher
Registered User
 
jpfisher is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Glen Ridge, NJ
Posts: 240
If the "M" was available in that color scheme, I might go for it. Looks very nice, to me, up close. Then again, I have a blue M3, so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #7
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 35
Posts: 3,710
Not ugly, but far from Leica's best looking camera. I don't think Leica has ever done *ugly*. The ME, although it's a bit 'meh' by Leica standards, it's stunning compared to Canon, Nikon, Pentax, and just about everybody else barring Rollei, Hasselblad, Alpa, Zeiss and others.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #8
gho
Registered User
 
gho is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Berlin
Age: 41
Posts: 788
I voted "strongly disagree". To my eye, the M-E does not look ugly at all. That does not mean that I find it pretty, by the way.

Let's make this a bit more informative. What do I like? Clean, classical M design, the color scheme is to my taste.

What do I not like? If you are asking, the top plate is a bit too high, slimming it down would make more space for a larger display. It looks, as if the design of the proportions centered a bit too much around the display than the other way round. The body is a bit too thick also, the upfront Leica logo, the "eye lid" like silver stripes at the viewfinder window. Compared to the film Ms it is all looking a tad unbalanced, but still no way bad looking.
__________________
Georg
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #9
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,949
looks like just another digital M. little chubby vs. film M's, but thats it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #10
Rangefinderfreak
Registered User
 
Rangefinderfreak's Avatar
 
Rangefinderfreak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nowhere in sight
Posts: 640
If I would have a say on leica product range, I would offer the M-E also without any leather ! The customer would then choose a leather by his choice from several alternatives/colors. The local Leica repair shop would glue them on in a professional manner. I guess it would add to the price maybe a couple hundred Euros, but would offer a "customized" leica for considerably less than "ala carte" specials.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #11
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 20,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarski View Post
looks like just another digital M. little chubby vs. film M's, but thats it.
Well, just like an M8-8.2-M9, anyway. Clearly I am not alone in being unable to understand the question.

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Now even more free photography information on www.rogerandfrances.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #12
luuca
Registered User
 
luuca's Avatar
 
luuca is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: italy
Age: 39
Posts: 448
I must admit I thought the title of this thread was an ungrammatical way to ask "am I ugly?"
__________________
.
.
http://alliluca.wordpress.com
.
.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #13
NeeZee
Registered User
 
NeeZee is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany
Age: 35
Posts: 449
i bet it takes ugly photos...
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #14
k.a
Registered User
 
k.a's Avatar
 
k.a is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 227
it is beautiful!
__________________
elmarit 28 asph
flickr

homepage
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #15
Chuck Albertson
Registered User
 
Chuck Albertson is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 440
I saw a M-E in the display case at Glazer's the other day. Looks nice.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #16
segedi
RFicianado
 
segedi's Avatar
 
segedi is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 988
Based on the results so far, just like us Leica users to be all over the map!
__________________
-----------------------

Segedi.com

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #17
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by segedi View Post
Based on the results so far, just like us Leica users to be all over the map!
yup. we are getting bottom of this once and for all
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #18
RichC
Registered User
 
RichC is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 886
Who cares?

I'm a Leica owner, and I think talking about minor style differences from previous cameras, like chrome accents, a few mm extra thickness or a different shade of grey paint, is ANAL.

A camera is a tool. Do you choose a hammer or a screwdriver over another because of its looks? Of course not (unless you're an idiot) - you choose one that will do the job you require of it...! (OK, if its aesthetics were so bad as to be distracting (like lime green paint), then fair enough - but that doesn't apply to the ME.)

A camera is not a handbag...
__________________

-=Rich=-


Portfolio: www.richcutler.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #19
MartinP
Registered User
 
MartinP is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,043
It is, of course, unusably awful.

But I can help out all you embarrassed ME owners - just send the cameras to me and you will not have to look at the monstrosity again. I will even pay half of the postage, can't say fairer than that now, can I?
.
.
.
.
EDIT:
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #20
Ron (Netherlands)
Registered User
 
Ron (Netherlands)'s Avatar
 
Ron (Netherlands) is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,725
a bit 'cheap' but intended so I guess
__________________
__________________
When day is done......

Leica: Urleica, IIa synch conversion, M2, M6 TTL Millenium

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #21
CK Dexter Haven
Registered User
 
CK Dexter Haven is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,086
It's ugly in the way that Leica wants to be sure you understand you're paying a penalty for not ponying up the dough for 'the big boy.'

Same thing afflicts the Canon 5D series. It's in use by a lot of pros, but it still has that Idiot Dial like the cheap bodies. You'd think paying $2500 for a camera would entitle you to better aesthetics and a bit of self-esteem. But, no.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #22
hteasley
Pupil
 
hteasley is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,950
It looks essentially no different to me than any of the other random special editions, or bespoke options, of other M cameras. No biggie.

I think people are mostly offended that there's a particular look to a camera that Leica has declared to be "the budget real Leica", and that "the budget real Leica" is every bit an M9. Folks can't get a new M9 without looking like they went for the budget camera.

Whatevs.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #23
bugmenot
Registered User
 
bugmenot is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 368
It is not even remotely an improvement over the existing M9.

If you found the M9 ugly, you find this ugly. The colour scheme is the only distinguishing feature other than what has been stripped away from the M9.

Given M9 was already relatively old tech in 2009, speaking from the perspective of the sensor and other electronics, I would have expected Leica to at least try to cut down on the size, make it closer to a film Leica body size, but no. All they wanted to do was extend the life of their production lines for the Leica M9.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #24
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,699
All of the digital M's are ugly. The M3 and its lineal descendants have perfect, "just right" proportions. The digital M's have proportions that are "just wrong." It's like cropping a Picasso on one edge -- a small dimensional change that makes a huge aesthetic difference.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2012   #25
crispy12
Registered User
 
crispy12's Avatar
 
crispy12 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by gho View Post
I voted "strongly disagree". To my eye, the M-E does not look ugly at all. That does not mean that I find it pretty, by the way.

Let's make this a bit more informative. What do I like? Clean, classical M design, the color scheme is to my taste.

What do I not like? If you are asking, the top plate is a bit too high, slimming it down would make more space for a larger display. It looks, as if the design of the proportions centered a bit too much around the display than the other way round. The body is a bit too thick also, the upfront Leica logo, the "eye lid" like silver stripes at the viewfinder window. Compared to the film Ms it is all looking a tad unbalanced, but still no way bad looking.
This is exactly what I think as well. I'm thinking of getting one too.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:16.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.