M9: Do you want a dust reduction system?

[K3N]

What do you reckon?

[c.poulton]

With an interchangable lens (digital) camera, this does seem like a logical step to make.

[Alpacaman]

If it doesn't interfere with other functions, and doesn't take up more space, and is reliable, why not? But how would it be best implemented?

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Alpacaman

If it doesn't interfere with other functions, and doesn't take up more space, and is reliable, why not? But how would it be best implemented?

Or shorten battery life...

How do people imgaine you can ALWAYS fit more into an M-body?

Cheers,

R.

[Alpacaman]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Or shorten battery life...

How do people imgaine you can ALWAYS fit more into an M-body?

Hence the second question

[Renzsu]

M9: Do you want cream with that and a cherry on top?

[Nikon Bob]

If it is possible to do in an M body given the restrictions imposed by the body itself and limited battery power, it would cut down on the number of times you had to clean the sensor. It would not eliminate the need to clean altogether. I have it on my D700 and have had to clean the sensor once in over 2 years of use. I think it has it's uses.

Bob

[K3N]

It should be possible. The Olympus PEN is thin and has both IBIS and a dust reduction system. I really would like to see such a system in a future M.

[tlitody]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Or shorten battery life...

How do people imgaine you can ALWAYS fit more into an M-body?

Cheers,

R.

Moores Law for digital cameras.

[usayit]

I'm all for this as well.... I've done my share of cloning out dust in post.

[Ben Z]

I love my M9, don't get me wrong, but if Leica couldn't manage to make sure my rangefinder was adjusted correctly before they shipped it out, I cringe when I think about all these added features like IS and dust reduction people want Leica to put in the next model.

[j j]

What is it about a Leica that means it couldn't cope with IS and sensor cleaning? The concerns raised here (battery, internal dimensions, rangefinder too delicate) seem odd one when we are discussing a well-constructed camera that is made with minimal concern to cost. Simple technology such as IS/dust removal (the same mechanism does two jobs) is cheap, would fit in the M body, does not use a great deal of battery charge and is not connected to the rangefinder mechanism. Why is it controversial?

[Paul Luscher]

Would be nice, but not absolutely vital--and a long as it did'nt cause them to have to change the camera's current configuration.

[Paul Luscher]

Well, j_j, the problem is that it doesn't seem to stop there....

There are already people suggesting that the M9 be equipped with focus confirmation, which seems a little odd, as the rangefinder patch(two images merging into one) would seem to be its own focus confirmation. Then, it wouldn't surprise me if someone suggests an EVF--and why not a Program Mode? And before you know it, you have--an M9 DSLR....

[MarkoM8]

If you want all this junk, why not buy the SLR's?

For me, the Leica is a traditional and simple camera system without all unnecessary gadgets ..

Sensor Cleaning takes about 5 minutes. I use a Rocket Air Blower about four times a week, and that's it. I have had to do wet sensor cleaning only twice a year.

[ampguy]

IS and dust reduction would require the Leica engineers to design a unique 7-bit patterning scheme.

This is in the works, but is slated for 2090. Watch for early leaks in Wikileaks or at Photokina 2087.

[ZlatkoBatistich]

I don't agree with the arguments against it. Automatic sensor cleaning is extremely valuable, not a junk feature. Some cameras with dust reduction have phenomenal battery life, much better than the M9. Rather than argue against dust reduction because it uses a tiny bit of battery power, why not argue for dust reduction AND improved battery life?

Why do people imagine you can't fit anything into an M body? Wasn't that one argument against a digital M, that there's no way to fit all the digital stuff into an M body?

Also, there is nothing traditional or simple about dust on sensors or cleaning the dust. It's not a more traditional or simple camera if it has dust that I have to clean manually. If you want a traditional simple camera, without automatic sensor cleaning, why not buy a film camera? After all, traditional simple cameras use film and only film, not digital gadgetry.

[Paul Luscher]

Ampguy: Wiseass. :-)

Zlatko: that only problem I see is that if you keep adding this, that, and the other, the M loses what makes it great: its simplicity. The M really IS a DIY camera, for people who'd rather do their own thinkng and shooting, rather than have all the bells and whistles do the work for them.

While I love my DSLR, (yes, I have one) it is a RELIEF, after using it, to get back to my M. Nice to get back to a simple, elemental camera (even if it is horrible expensive, for all that simplicity) that makes me do the work and THINK about what I'm doing.

Besides, I haven't really had much of an issue with dust on the sensor--just careful about changing my lenses....

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by ZlatkoBatistich

I don't agree with the arguments against it. Automatic sensor cleaning is extremely valuable, not a junk feature. Some cameras with dust reduction have phenomenal battery life, much better than the M9. Rather than argue against dust reduction because it uses a tiny bit of battery power, why not argue for dust reduction AND improved battery life?

Why do people imagine you can't fit anything into an M body? Wasn't that one argument against a digital M, that there's no way to fit all the digital stuff into an M body?

Also, there is nothing traditional or simple about dust on sensors or cleaning the dust. It's not a more traditional or simple camera if it has dust that I have to clean manually. If you want a traditional simple camera, without automatic sensor cleaning, why not buy a film camera? After all, traditional simple cameras use film and only film, not digital gadgetry.

And indeed it WAS impossible, hence the chubby M8/9.

You want an even chubbier camera?

Cheers,

R.

[ZlatkoBatistich]

Paul, I don't follow your argument. Automatic dust cleaning works in the background. It doesn't get in the way of photography — ever. It works without you thinking about it. Photography with the camera doesn't become the slightest bit more complicated. You can think all you want about the pictures without having to worry about the dust. DIY sensor cleaning takes time and doesn't make for more thoughtful photography. Likewise, spotting out dust in Photoshop doesn't make for more thoughtful photography. Cleaning dust just a flat-out waste of time, not a beneficial photographic activity.

Think of it with a computer analogy. Would you rather have a computer system that makes automatic daily backups in the background without requiring any intervention, or would you rather have a computer that never makes a backup unless you direct it make a backup? Which system is more susceptible to human error and forgetfulness? Which system is more likely to lead to an easily avoidable waste of time?

Besides, the M is not a DIY camera. It has aperture priority mode, automatic ISO, automatic exposure bracketing, exposure compensation, a snapshot mode hidden in the menu, two jpeg modes. two dng compression settings, a black & white mode, an old timey sepia mode, a built-in light meter, continuous frame advance, automatic shutter cocking, four shutter release modes, five automatic power off settings, automatic lens detection, various settings for contrast, sharpening and contrast. Simple?? A DIY camera would not have all of those options and features. A Tichy camera is a DIY camera.

[ZlatkoBatistich]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

You want an even chubbier camera?

OK, yes, the M8/M9 are slightly chubbier. Some very small cameras have automatic sensor cleaning, so I'm not sure automatic sensor cleaning would require an even chubbier camera.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by ZlatkoBatistich

OK, yes, the M8/M9 are slightly chubbier. Some very small cameras have automatic sensor cleaning, so I'm not sure automatic sensor cleaning would require an even chubbier camera.

With very tiny sensors...

That's the thing. Look at all the other digital cameras with so-called 'full frame' sensors (near enough 24x36mm).

Now show me one the same size as a Leica.

Cheers,

R.

[Nikon Bob]

FF DSLRS have followed the form factor of modern film af SLRs and have not really increased in size. My D700 is very close to my F90x in size and feel. I really don't think that in camera senor cleaning would add much if any to the size of a camera no matter the form factor. Leica have done a good job of keeping the size of the M9 near enough to film Ms so that should not be a problem.

Bob

[Rob-F]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

You want an even chubbier camera?

I don't have an M8 or M9, but aren't they the same size as the M6/MP except for the front-to back dimension? I think they are a little deeper/thicker because the sensor, being thicker than film, requires more depth.

No?

[ZlatkoBatistich]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Now show me one the same size as a Leica.

Roger, I'm not an engineer, so I'm not going to convince anyone that it can be done. However, I think you're making a basic logical error. Your argument, essentially, is that the fact that something hasn't been done yet is proof that it can't be ever be done. The corollary of this is that if something can't be done, then it is foolish or pointless to express a desire for it.

But that logic has been disproved time and time again, especially in the field of technology, where just a few years can turn an improbable concept into a reality. Clever engineers sometimes find ways to turn fantasy wishlists into practical realities.

Year
1994 "Now show me an SLR lens with an electromechanical system to detect and counteract handheld camera unsteadiness." There are none, hence it can't be done!
1995 Canon introduces the first image stabilized lens.

1999 "Now show me a DSLR with live preview." There are none, hence it can't be done!
2000 Olympus introduces the first DSLR with live preview.

2003 "Now show me a digital rangefinder." There are none, hence it can't be done!
2004 Epson introduces the first digital rangefinder.

2007 "Now show me a DSLR that offers HD video recording." There are none, hence it can't be done!
2008 Nikon introduces the first DSLR with HD video recording.

etc.