PDA

View Full Version : Leica M-D in action


Bruno Gracia
04-28-2016, 07:13
http://blog.leica-camera.com/2016/04/28/one-city-three-photographers-and-the-leica-m-d/

B-9
04-28-2016, 07:34
Similar articles have been hitting facebook for a few weeks now.

One this morning even claimed a release price around 5600 USD.

We will see?

calebarchie
04-28-2016, 08:08
Sorry I must of upset some asians feelings. Distasteful vid anyhow.

squirrel$$$bandit
04-28-2016, 08:25
I gotta admit, I don't understand these posts about not trusting Asians. What in the hell are you talking about? It's coming off as racist, frankly.

35photo
04-28-2016, 09:22
I gotta admit, I don't understand these posts about not trusting Asians. What in the hell are you talking about? It's coming off as racist, frankly.

Totally! Has nothing to do with race... Hipster/young professionals who have cash is more like it, Leica is smart at who this are targeting here no question.. They are clearing looking to expand the target demographic..

jsrockit
04-28-2016, 09:25
You guys do realize that a lot of older, non-hipsters buy from Leica too... they are targeting people who want the closest thing to a film Leica (in digital) regardless of race, perceived hip-factor, age, etc. Of course, it IS targeting the loot!

35photo
04-28-2016, 09:34
You guys do realize that a lot of older, non-hipsters buy from Leica too... they are targeting people who want the closest thing to a film Leica (in digital) regardless of race, perceived hip-factor, age, etc. Of course, it IS targeting the loot!

Oh Sure of course there are a lot of older hipsters, but in this video they posted clearly you see the the 1 older guy surrounded by 3 young guys... The target is the younger generation..

Dez
04-28-2016, 18:39
I see from the Leica Forum site that the displayless Leica M-D costs a mere 500 Euros more than the basic M for the value added associated with removing the display. Brilliant piece of work, that.
Next year, I foresee another model with metering removed for a trifling additional premium, maybe 1000 euros, for REAL purists. The only thing left to do after that is a version with a memory capacity of 36 shots, where you need to wait a couple days before you can view the images. God only knows how much that will cost.
And there will be people out there queuing up to buy all of them.

Cheers,
Dez

Keith
04-28-2016, 19:01
I see from the Leica Forum site that the displayless Leica M-D costs a mere 500 Euros more than the basic M for the value added associated with removing the display. Brilliant piece of work, that.
Next year, I foresee another model with metering removed for a trifling additional premium, maybe 1000 euros, for REAL purists. The only thing left to do after that is a version where you need to wait a couple days before you can view the images. God only knows how much that will cost.
And there will be people out there queuing up to buy all of them.

Cheers,
Dez



And then there's the 'total minimalism' (TM) model after that where you pay fifty percent more than than the metered LCD equipped version but don't actually get a camera at all ... just a box and a manual with a letter from the good doctor congratulating you on your choice! :D

Dez
04-28-2016, 19:15
Ah yes, but these minimalist designs are for the true pro!

As everyone knows, anyone who makes his or her living with a camera will seize every opportunity to reduce the probability of getting the shot.

Cheers,
Dez

Darthfeeble
04-28-2016, 19:22
I'm not a hipster, does that mean I can't buy an MD?

calebarchie
04-28-2016, 21:38
I'm not sure how its racist but just pointing out the obvious, leicas target for a while now.

I know a few exactly like in the video, same clothes, same bag, same shoes, same hat, same attitude, exactly the same self-imposed label, same age and same race.
Unfortunately have a hard time taking that kind of stuff and people seriously along with hipsters etc...

angelopartemi
04-28-2016, 22:10
Just take my damn money.

calebarchie
04-28-2016, 22:10
Calebarchie, you are a very unsophisticated thinker.

OK old man, wheres the report button again? Again, it was a general comment that I could't take the bloke seriously. Whats all the damn fuss about?

aizan
04-28-2016, 23:10
of course rui palha is the only one who doesn't make my eyes roll.

interesting to see that they're targeting a younger demographic. what's old is new again!

Leica All Day
04-28-2016, 23:23
at least it has strap lugs :)

OurManInTangier
04-29-2016, 00:23
Well I for one am over the moon. Turns out I'm a hipster, or young enough to be, just about, hip...or maybe I'm just a (non Leica using) Leica fanboy after all.

I have always liked the idea of a digital camera with no viewing screen. Not because its 'like the film days' and therefore cool, but simply to remove that almost impossible pull to stop what you're doing and look at what you've just done instead. Frankly, with wifi I'm happy to upload a few pics to my phone/tablet whilst having a coffee if I really have an urge to see what I've done before I get home.

As for professionals not wanting to reduce their hit rate, why would that be the case? Either use a different model (there's plenty to choose from) or be professional and learn to expose well enough to reduce your 'dud rate' in the first place.

If Fuji did one i.e. I could afford one, I'd probably go for it. Instead I'll just have to go out and buy a plaid shirt and beanie hat as I'm obviously much younger and less conservative than I thought ;):D

Post Script: Marketing will either make you buy or queasy. As they say in the UK, as a direct result of marketing, "Simples."

jaapv
04-29-2016, 00:48
Interesting that this marketing is remarkably video-oriented, for a camera that had video deliberately removed. (it looks like it was taken with an M Typ 240...)

Lss
04-29-2016, 01:49
I watched the video and found it surprisingly enjoyable. Very little dumb marketing talk, lots of nice visuals. It was a story about three photographers and their photography, not so much about this camera (although the M-D was essentially in every shot). Didn't read the text, and there was no usable interface to view the photos. In summary, this is well above most marketing sites, but you don't miss much if you never go there.

Keith
04-29-2016, 01:50
I watched the video and found it surprisingly enjoyable. Very little dumb marketing talk, lots of nice visuals. It was a story about three photographers and their photography, not so much about this camera (although the M-D was essentially in every shot). Didn't read the text, and there was no usable interface to view the photos. In summary, this is well above most marketing sites, but you don't miss much if you never go there.


Pretty much sums up how I saw it. It had a lot less gag factor than some of their efforts! :)

View Range
04-29-2016, 04:35
Darthfeeble, it is M-D; not MD. The MD is a film camera from 1963 to 1966.

Has Leica marketing run out of alpha, numeric, and special characters so that all cameras in the future will reuse already used designations and type numbers?

jsrockit
04-29-2016, 06:13
I think it is cool to give a nod towards Leica's past... Olympus just did it too... Pen F.

View Range
04-29-2016, 06:27
Yes, but the MD was a scientific camera with no rangerfinder/viewfinder. Not a camera to give a nod to. Strictly speaking the MD should not have been called an M, designating "rangefinder" in German. So does "D" mean "deleted" or does it mean "digital". ?

jsrockit
04-29-2016, 07:02
Does it matter much why it is called what it is called? Leica isn't going to change it and most people aren't going to care.

raid
04-29-2016, 08:04
I bought an SWC to slow down my digital adventures, and then I got a Polaroid Land camera for the same reason, but Fuji stopped making film for the Land camera!
I am sticking with my M8 and M9 cameras until they stop working.
The original MD was very attractive to get for a (very) wide angle lens. Instead, I got a Bessa L and a T.

Why get a digital M-D? If you have the cash for it, why not.

raid
04-29-2016, 08:31
Maybe a D M-squared?

FrozenInTime
04-29-2016, 08:47
How about a readout of percentage pixels clipped - displayed in place of the shutter speed post exposure for a couple of seconds.

Out to Lunch
04-29-2016, 08:51
What I don't like about this camera in relation to the M typ 262, is US$ 800 more not to have a screen and the fact it captures images in RAW, only. Other than that I don't quite get the 'screen' 'no screen' dichotomy: the Epson R-D1 has a neat screen that you can open-up or turn-around and close. Problem solved.

jsrockit
04-29-2016, 08:59
Isn't it fair to say that there are options if you don't like the LCD screen-less M? You might not get it, but it will sell and some people want it. Just like the Monochrom...

BLKRCAT
04-29-2016, 09:22
wait, so people ACTUALLY shoot like the guy at 3:50?

I'm sorry but with his shooting style I wouldnt be surprised if his actual regular camera was an LCA.

I honestly cant even deal with this video.

robert blu
04-29-2016, 09:30
Personally I would never buy a digital camera without LCD even if the rare times I shoot digital with my wife's DSLR I almost never chimp.

But if there is market for this, enough people like it and will buy it and Leica can make money out of it why not?

It's so nice to have many different possibilities!
Anyone does not like it? Not obliged to buy!

About the price when you are ready to buy a few thousands EUR (or $) camera and you really like it I guess it is not a difference of a few hundreds that will stop you!

robert

PS: what I didn't like in the short film was the slow motion effect (as in the DAH film), I understand the idea to slow down with digital but the photographer should be the one slowing down not the world around him!

airfrogusmc
04-29-2016, 10:04
You guys do realize that a lot of older, non-hipsters buy from Leica too... they are targeting people who want the closest thing to a film Leica (in digital) regardless of race, perceived hip-factor, age, etc. Of course, it IS targeting the loot!

Agree. I have just completely switched to Leica M for my pro work too. Been a full time working pro for 3 decades. Had an MM for 3 1/2 years now and I'm so tired of all the bells and whistles that further are removing me from process that major companies seem to be so obsessed with and that obsession also includes a lot of young hipster photographers that are on the gadget go round..

I'm old enough to remember when Leica M was more than twice the price of the top of the line Nicanons. My M 262 was 2 K less. In the 50s wasn't an M3 about the equal to a months salary from an average family? Does that make those buying those big heavy beasts with all the auto everything ultra hipsters because there are those in that group to the hang those big monsters around their necks like jewelry too?

Nice that Leica is making real choices. I remember all the hate when the MM first came out. I had never liked digital B&W until the MM and it turned out to be a good move for Leica in spite of all the hate. I say to those throwing out all the hate, find equipment that works for you and don't worry if there's a tool out there that doesn't work for you and who might buy it. Just be glad we all have choices. Thanks Leica for daring to be different.

I'm trying to figure out a way to buy one. I have an MM, M 262 and an M-E and really could use another color body. Maybe next year....

Lss
04-29-2016, 10:19
Other than that I don't quite get the 'screen' 'no screen' dichotomy: the Epson R-D1 has a neat screen that you can open-up or turn-around and close. Problem solved.
Fundamentally it is a question about how the interface is designed. The M-D is not a clean design in this sense, it is only an M typ 240 iteration (like the Series 60 special edition it resembles).

A folding screen is a solution to a different problem. I used to own the R-D1 and usually kept the screen covered. This was both for aesthetic reasons and to protect it. But it did not improve the usability at all. A screenless design, or a non-screen centric design, has much more potential. I don't find the M-D ideal in this sense, but I would rather have it for usability reasons than the regular M typ 262. I cannot afford either one, though.

nightfly
04-29-2016, 10:46
Homerun would have been being able to reduce the body size by getting rid of the screen to get it back down to the size of a film M.

I only use the screen on my M9 to set the ISO and check the battery. ISO dial is there which is nice. Probably some way to check the battery or a light or something I assume?

The more the camera gets out of the way and lets me take photos the better. And I'm not that old and not a hipster.

ferider
04-29-2016, 10:49
Like Michael said, at least it has lugs.

That being said, it would be useless for me, since my classic wides are uncoded, and I pick the lens code manually. I need a screen for that. Plus other useful features like changing the self timer setting, formatting the card, cleaning and inspecting the sensor, checking battery load, etc.

And the one thing I take from the video is how huge and ugly the Frankenfinder is. You guys really prefer that over LV ?

Roland.

jsrockit
04-29-2016, 10:49
Homerun would have been being able to reduce the body size by getting rid of the screen to get it back down to the size of a film M.


Agreed... maybe in the future.

mlu19
04-29-2016, 11:22
Nice camera for camera enthusiasts. Pros should just stay away from Leica in general.

JPSuisse
04-29-2016, 11:32
I see from the Leica Forum site that the displayless Leica M-D costs a mere 500 Euros more than the basic M for the value added associated with removing the display.

Basically, this is not an optimized product. If it were, the body would be thinner. So, it really is a case of paying more for less.

In another 3 years, Leica maybe will have a new digital M for me to buy. Unfortunately, by then it won't be compatible with Lightroom 4, so I'll just keep using the M8 and scanning. So goes the digital life cycle nowadays.

Pete B
04-29-2016, 11:42
What I don't like about this camera in relation to the M typ 262, is US$ 800 more not to have a screen and the fact it captures images in RAW, only. Other than that I don't quite get the 'screen' 'no screen' dichotomy: the Epson R-D1 has a neat screen that you can open-up or turn-around and close. Problem solved.

I've turned off the screen on my M240, but it's there when I want to check something.
Pete

AlejandroI
04-29-2016, 11:47
ITT: the most boring, unengaging, armchair photographers complain about one of the best working photographers of this generation.

Seriously you guys. Please, please actually go look at DA's work. Then take some time to reevaluate your lives.

I am no expert, nor shoot for a living, i just shoot for fun, but i did as you suggested, and google his work. And honestly I dont see anything special besides another street photographer shooting from the hip with flash, nothing special at least as i see it.

I am not discrediting his work, but calling him one of the best photographers of this generation? Actually makes me think you havent gone the extra mile to see better photographers..

jsrockit
04-29-2016, 11:57
ITT: the most boring, unengaging, armchair photographers complain about one of the best working photographers of this generation.

Seriously you guys. Please, please actually go look at DA's work. Then take some time to reevaluate your lives.

While you have a point (generally speaking), I'm not so sure people have been complaining about the photographer as much as the camera...

I think there were 2 comments about the photographers in the video ...

BLKRCAT
04-29-2016, 12:27
ITT: the most boring, unengaging, armchair photographers complain about one of the best working photographers of this generation.

Seriously you guys. Please, please actually go look at DA's work. Then take some time to reevaluate your lives.

If you are projecting to me I'll give you some insight to my thoughts.

I looked at his work and the majority of street photography posted around is very much his style. Random passerby shots, shooting from the hip, spontaneous snapshots.

While he shows potential when it comes to curating and editing his shots, anyone (I mean anyone.) can walk down the street and aimlessly click a button. It's been joked about that you could give a blind person a DSLR set on continuous and that they could get good shots as well.

Out of curiosity I wonder how many shots he goes through before he finds one he likes.

His quality of images reflect the style of shooting. Personally I feel like that style doesn't give me the impression that any care or thought is put into it the shot. If you feel the opposite then good for you and have fun filling those SD cards.

*sits back in armchair.

jjabad
04-29-2016, 13:03
I enjoyed the video. I was more interested in learning about new photographers. I didnʻt really care for DA.

JOCO34
04-29-2016, 16:12
Pretty interesting Vidieo. I think Leica did a pretty good job with it. What I don't understand is all of the negative comments here about it or "hipsters". By the way Dan Arnold really does not need a rear screen, heck he doesn"t even use the rangefinder!

Richard G
04-29-2016, 16:24
Interesting. If only the LCD removal made the camera the same depth as an M2. I like the whole idea of the MD. But, how do I know my new camera is not silently saying 'No SD Card' when there is one? Or that the last three shots have not recorded to the card somehow. And there's no manual white balance option. And you need coded lenses. And, for the record, I'm typing this in black jeans even though I'm over 50.

Huss
04-29-2016, 16:43
What I have so far learned from this thread is that this is a very cool camera, and some people have hipster envy. Otherwise why keep mentioning us?
;p

MCTuomey
04-29-2016, 20:12
I'm not a hipster, does that mean I can't buy an MD?

Pretty sure you can, I think I can too. We will not be retro, hip, cool, or fluidly pro-like. Rather we will be doofs with good gear, secretly wishing for one quick chimp.

sevres_babylone
04-29-2016, 21:07
I'd buy it, but only if it had wireless so I could chimp on my phone:)

_lou_
04-30-2016, 23:31
I personnaly find the video apalling, when it's not downright outrageous. It starts as a apology of trespassing. Then the usual marketing bull****, and a ton of self justifying discourses which I couldn't care less about. And then those guys who look more like rude people than hipsters to me. The camera looks very appealing to me, but this advertising style puts me off.

Only funny thing is I think I spotted a contax G hanging from one of the guy's shoulders.

Porto is a nice city though.

leicapixie
05-01-2016, 03:57
I don't give a rat's mmm for cool.
A digital camera NEEDS a screen.
If one doesn't, as seems here,
save a bundle, buy a film camera,
and guess what, have an archival memory*,
capture all the highlights.
No chimp.no camera.
If NASA can't view their digital history..

Bolin27
05-01-2016, 04:10
I think hipsters only shoot film, anyway ;)

Ronald M
05-01-2016, 04:58
Ah yes, but these minimalist designs are for the true pro!

As everyone knows, anyone who makes his or her living with a camera will seize every opportunity to reduce the probability of getting the shot.

Cheers,
Dez

Lets get all the amateurs out of the picture taking business and turn it back into a black art. I can dig out my spot and incident meters and look like a pro.

I think we should get rid of auto WB also. No, all options except daylight and charge extra for a tungsten WB model and then we can carry stacks of filters around. Tungsten WB was always hard to find in 35 mm any way.

After this is all done, we can finish the black art on the computer with raw files only. JPEG will be so messed up it will be impossible.

Now we have something that is as slow as large format to use.

I will now go look at the video to see what all the fuss is about.

jsrockit
05-01-2016, 05:17
So, an LCD is necessary for digital and not for film? Yet slide film is harder to use than modern digital...

Lss
05-01-2016, 05:25
A digital camera NEEDS a screen.
Why?




A forum post NEEDS extra characters.

Brian Atherton
05-01-2016, 05:58
For what it’s worth I enjoyed the video puff for the M-D; three blokes wandering about a city each with a camera taking pictures. What’s wrong with that?

Yes, it’s advertising. Yes, it’s contrived twaddle, mostly. But it kind of made me want to get out and walk a city with a camera, which I did yesterday in London in the sun with my M5 and a 50mm, loaded with Tri-X.

Did I miss not having a LCD screen to chimp my shots? No.

Apart for video shooting, what is it with digitals that they ‘must’ have a rear screen?

To my mind the Monochrom would make an ideal candidate for the LCD screen’s next axing. :)

Pete B
05-01-2016, 06:12
http://mediastudies.transylvania-college.ro/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/daniel-arnold-tumblr-photography-3.jpg

Pete

xayraa33
05-01-2016, 06:32
RAW or not, I did not like the colour in the colour photos.

sojournerphoto
05-01-2016, 06:56
http://mediastudies.transylvania-college.ro/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/daniel-arnold-tumblr-photography-3.jpg

Pete

;) zone focus rules

willie_901
05-01-2016, 07:25
[QUOTE=Richard G;2609071... And there's no manual white balance option. [/QUOTE]

As it only records raw files manual color balance has little, if any value. Auto-color balance will be 'good enough'™ for the raw data initial rendering. Then you can manually set the color temperature parameters as desired.

willie_901
05-01-2016, 07:43
...

I think we should get rid of auto WB also. No, all options except daylight and charge extra for a tungsten WB model and then we can carry stacks of filters around. Tungsten WB was always hard to find in 35 mm any way.

After this is all done, we can finish the black art on the computer with raw files only. JPEG will be so messed up it will be impossible.

...

No one interested in the convenience of in-camera JPEGS will buy the M-D. It can't produce in-camera JPEGs.

I never use in-camera JPEGs. I have not changed WB from auto since I started using DSLRs ~ a decade ago.

Tinted lens filters to affect color temperature corrections are redundant for raw. They might be useful for B&W, but I doubt it.

However I have gelled flashes to minimize selective, color-temperature blending for scenes lit by mixed light sources (e.g. tungsten lamps on one wall of a room and sunlight from windows on an opposite wall). This is not necessary but it does save time during raw rendering in post-production .

noisycheese
05-01-2016, 08:11
Nice camera for camera enthusiasts. Pros should just stay away from Leica in general.

Next time Magnum has a meeting of its members in New York, you should crash the meeting and make that announcement. :D

Brian Atherton
05-01-2016, 08:34
Next time Magnum has a meeting of its members in New York, you should crash the meeting and make that announcement. :D

:D:D:D

I've lengthened my message to at least 10 characters.

Godfrey
05-01-2016, 08:53
I enjoyed the video, thanks for posting it.

I'm already fully outfitted with cameras that work well and that I really enjoy using, namely the M-P and SL in particular, but this new model appeals to me quite a lot anyway. The lack of LCD, buttons, and dials on it means more space and room for my fingers when handling and shooting with it, and that's enough change to make it even more comfortable and convenient to use.

I see there's been the usual "want it to be smaller like a film M" on this thread. I believe that's simply impossible due to the Leica M lens mount register and the depth of the sensor stack. The M-P baseplate is only about 4.5 mm deeper, front to back, than my M4-2's baseplate, and the LCD is actually mounted outside the body shell so there's no gain from removing the LCD. The only way to make the body substantially thinner is to put the lens mount on a pedestal at the front of the camera, which changes the style (a lot of people wouldn't accept that) and most likely means re-engineering the rangefinder mechanism.

The battery is another obstacle to thinning the body: All the typ 240, 246, and 262 models are using the same battery and charger now, and it's a good battery storing enough power for up to 1000 exposures or more. You can't thin the body without requiring a different battery, and I'd rather not invest in yet another different battery and charger system.

No money for one at the moment, wouldn't really want to spend for it right now if I had the money either, but if a windfall comes my way I'll get one.

G

gavinlg
05-01-2016, 09:06
LOL I can't really understand why the video gets under peoples skin, I enjoyed it. It was a little cheesy but really lovely visuals at least.

Huss
05-01-2016, 11:17
A digital camera NEEDS a screen.

If anything a film camera needs a screen much more.
You have a limited # of shots per roll while w/ digital you have literally thousands on a single card.
There's a reason instant backs were made - to make sure the exposure and lighting was correct for film photography. And what were instant backs? The precursor to screens...
And guess who the instant backs were aimed at? The pro market.

If you can't get the exposure right on digital, why should you somehow get it right on film?

I love this new Leica. And initially I was scoffing at it.

Saul
05-02-2016, 11:57
Wow! There's a LOT missing for 6K. What do you think??
https://us.leica-camera.com/Company/Press-Centre/Press-Releases/Press-Releases-2016/Press-Release-LEICA-M-D-%E2%80%93-the-new-digital-Leica-rangefinder-without-a-monitor-screen

Godfrey
05-02-2016, 11:59
It costs a lot to make a digital camera this simple.

Pablito
05-02-2016, 12:09
Less for more is all this is.

I used the Leica m6 and worked it hard for 20 yrs. Had 3 of them and put thousands of rolls of film thru them, did dozens of exhibits. Now I work all in digital and can't afford the digital Leicas. But if I could I would not want to give up the advantages of working in digital. I don't chimp, but when I do, I want to be able to chimp.

Ken Ford
05-02-2016, 13:08
I like the idea, but...

jsrockit
05-02-2016, 13:16
I can't understand all of the fuss... it's one camera without an LCD and they make the same camera with an LCD. If you like it, you buy it. If you don't, then you buy something else. I can't be upset at someone else for wanting it.

Ken Ford
05-02-2016, 13:25
It reminds me a little of all the sturm und drang over the Df. Some people gotta prove they're more orthodox than the rest. LOL

jsrockit
05-02-2016, 13:44
It reminds me a little of all the sturm und drang over the Df. Some people gotta prove they're more orthodox than the rest. LOL

Right, but I'll admit I wasn't a fan of the Df when it came out... because I wanted it to be F3 sized. However, a year went by, I saw the black one in person, and then I bought and used it... converted. :) With regard to the Df, the gripes are fair if you expected a smaller size and interchangeable screens that are optimized for MF lenses. However, it's similar to the M-D in that people who hate it have many other Nikon models to choose from.

Godfrey
05-02-2016, 13:45
I can't understand all of the fuss... it's one camera without an LCD and they make the same camera with an LCD. If you like it, you buy it. If you don't, then you buy something else. I can't be upset at someone else for wanting it.

Couldn't agree more.

I happen to like the idea of the M Edition 60 and M-D a lot, particularly because I have the SL kit for all the other stuff that isn't practical with an utterly bare-bones RF camera. Either of them with a 35 and 75mm lens is all the RF kit I need.

But I already have an M-P, which I thoroughly enjoy, and there's no reason to spend that money again for the M-D. If I was to come into a windfall and had nothing else pressing me for funds, I'd buy an M-D for the joy of it.

Lss
05-02-2016, 23:49
One could spend days shooting and never realize that nothing was recording. :eek:
Dealing with this scenario is not really as simple as having a screen or not.

Godfrey
05-02-2016, 23:58
Well I would a least like to know if the "film" is loaded. :)

One could spend days shooting and never realize that nothing was recording. :eek:

But as noted, to each his own.

Tap the FN button once for a rating of how much battery is left, tap again for amount of storage remaining (in exposures). Pull card, fit in card reader, and check with compute or smartphone to check exposures.

G

Fraser
05-03-2016, 01:05
Tap the FN button once for a rating of how much battery is left, tap again for amount of storage remaining (in exposures). Pull card, fit in card reader, and check with compute or smartphone to check exposures.

G

What would be good if it had a built in smart phone screen on the back:D:D

Fraser
05-03-2016, 01:07
Right, but I'll admit I wasn't a fan of the Df when it came out... because I wanted it to be F3 sized. However, a year went by, I saw the black one in person, and then I bought and used it... converted. :) With regard to the Df, the gripes are fair if you expected a smaller size and interchangeable screens that are optimized for MF lenses. However, it's similar to the M-D in that people who hate it have many other Nikon models to choose from.

The thing about the df though as as much as you dislike the retro thing it still is a smaller body with a d4 sensor.

robert blu
05-03-2016, 01:13
I'm not interested in a similar camera, and personally I do not feel "ready" to buy a digital camera without LCD but Leica doesn't force me or anyone else to buy it!

You like it you buy it, you do not like it for any reason you do not buy it!

And if this helps Leica to make a profit and stay in the business why not?

robert

willie_901
05-03-2016, 05:46
The thing about the df though as as much as you dislike the retro thing it still is a smaller body with a d4 sensor.

Not to mention much lighter!

JoeV
05-03-2016, 06:29
Yea, if only the new M-D was built around an M7 or film MP chassis.

~Joe

jsrockit
05-03-2016, 06:34
The thing about the df though as as much as you dislike the retro thing it still is a smaller body with a d4 sensor.

Personally, I love the retro thing... it's what makes the camera for me. I hate the typical Nikon DSLR. The D4 sensor was just a bonus.

Godfrey
05-03-2016, 06:37
Yea, if only the new M-D was built around an M7 or film MP chassis.

~Joe

The camera's guts wouldn't fit. The digital Ms need 4.5 mm more space to accommodate the sensor stack instead of the film and pressure plate.

The geometry of the lens, lens mount, and imaging plane is fixed. You're either going to need more room in the body or you need to put the lens mount on a pedestal to accommodate the geometry, which then requires a major design change to the rangefinder mechanism.

I'm sure Leica would make the digital Ms smaller if it were possible. They're not stupid...

G

nightfly
05-03-2016, 07:53
Is there really no technical way to overcome this?

Every other piece of very complex computer equipment manages to get smaller and thinner over time.

Is this a limitation of physics and optics or just current technology?

The camera's guts wouldn't fit. The digital Ms need 4.5 mm more space to accommodate the sensor stack instead of the film and pressure plate.

The geometry of the lens, lens mount, and imaging plane is fixed. You're either going to need more room in the body or you need to put the lens mount on a pedestal to accommodate the geometry, which then requires a major design change to the rangefinder mechanism.

I'm sure Leica would make the digital Ms smaller if it were possible. They're not stupid...

G

Vince Lupo
05-03-2016, 14:30
I think the M-D is a beautiful camera -- just not sure I really need one.

jaapv
05-03-2016, 23:37
Is there really no technical way to overcome this?

Every other piece of very complex computer equipment manages to get smaller and thinner over time.

Is this a limitation of physics and optics or just current technology?

The only way would be to thin the sensor array down to the thickness of film and the motherboard+connections to the sensor to the thickness of a pressure plate. Unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future, if at all.

Luke_Miller
05-04-2016, 05:17
Is there really no technical way to overcome this?



Sure - Leica could introduce a set of M mount lenses with a shorter register distance to work with a new digital body with the same thickness as an M7. Of course none of the existing M and thread mount lenses would work on it.

peterm1
05-04-2016, 06:03
I don't understand why anyone needs to buy a digital M without an LCD screen. They should just buy a used M8. Their LCD is so bad it's almost like having no screen. (Oops I am going straight to Leica hell for that one.) :D

olakiril
05-04-2016, 06:06
Is there really no technical way to overcome this?

Every other piece of very complex computer equipment manages to get smaller and thinner over time.

Is this a limitation of physics and optics or just current technology?

Oh there definetly is.

After tryinh to mod an FE with a digital sensor and removing the LCD from the xpro1 I got a clear idea about size limitationss.

Most cameras have a sensor, then the sensor plate,, then the main motherboard and finally the LCD with the plastic cover.
The thickness of the LCD is actually very very small. So of course it wouldn't lead to a significantly smaller body and my guess is that is why md wasn't thinner.

To allow for thinner designs the motherboard has to shrink and move to one side of the camera. Many small cameras have adopted this design in order to be very thin. The sensor plus its plate are about the same thickness as the distance from the film pressure plate to the back of the camera.

Ken Ford
05-04-2016, 06:07
Sure - Leica could introduce a set of M mount lenses with a shorter register distance to work with a new digital body with the same thickness as an M7. Of course none of the existing M and thread mount lenses would work on it.

Or they could bump the lens mount forward on a thinner body to maintain the register distance. Of course, people would complain about that too.

aizan
05-04-2016, 06:36
if the film body wasn't thinner, nobody would care about the digital bodies being thicker. the solution: travel back in time and change the m3's size.

Emile de Leon
05-04-2016, 09:08
I think I like this thing..
No screen to smash or fail...
Simplicity in operation as well as risk...will improve photos probably...
Close to M6 feeling once again..but with no chemicals..
Whats not to like for an old fart like me...
I'm turning 60 this week..maybe I'll order one for fun...

donny
05-04-2016, 12:31
Perhaps it's because I feel the M9 isn't so stellar at moderate ISOs, an ISO dial is something I wish the M bodies have, LCD or no. Maybe I'm alone here and/or I'm just doing it wrong?

jaapv
05-04-2016, 12:34
Or they could bump the lens mount forward on a thinner body to maintain the register distance. Of course, people would complain about that too.

They’d get into trouble with the rangefinder linkage...:rolleyes:

Lss
05-04-2016, 12:46
an ISO dial is something I wish the M bodies have, LCD or no. Maybe I'm alone here and/or I'm just doing it wrong?
Nope, not alone. The addition of the ISO wheel and the overall simplification of the UI for quicker and more intuitive operation are exactly the reasons why I like the removal of the screen. In majority of my photography, I have absolutely no need for the screen for any operation that truly requires a screen from the UI design perspective. I use the screen because I have to check things like the ISO setting and exposure compensation there. It should not be so, and with the M-D it is not so (as far as ISO goes).

It's a mistake to look at this camera and only think there are applications where it will not work well.

Godfrey
05-04-2016, 14:56
EC setting is in the viewfinder readout.

jsrockit
05-04-2016, 15:06
What I would miss is Auto ISO.

Huss
05-05-2016, 10:35
What I would miss is Auto ISO.


I recently discovered that on my M (late to the party, eh?) and it is great!
I use it all the time now.

But as the MD has the ISO dial right there, instead of having to push a couple of buttons and dial through the menu to set the ISO, it's not a huge loss. In fact I think it's a good trade off because AUTO ISO is much more necessary if changing ISO manually is fiddly.

jsrockit
05-05-2016, 10:40
It's just the way I photograph Huss. I want to be able to react quickly in very different light here in NYC. It can go from bright sun to dark alley quickly here. I trust my cameras up to a certain ISO, so I always use auto ISO. I wouldn't want to change. That said, I would only buy another Leica (due to manual focus, no shutter priority, etc.) if I decided to do something different in the way I photograph. You never know when you get bored of a certain way of working. Changing to a Leica M like this one could be a very good change if you are currently stagnant in your current way of doing things.

lawrence
05-05-2016, 11:10
I always thought that getting rid of the screen would be a great idea :) and I also guessed that by removing the screen there would be a substantial price reduction :confused:

jsrockit
05-05-2016, 13:38
I always thought that getting rid of the screen would be a great idea :) and I also guessed that by removing the screen there would be a substantial price reduction :confused:

But why? LCDs aren't that expensive I would imagine.

Huss
05-05-2016, 13:48
But why? LCDs aren't that expensive I would imagine.

And also it now requires a newly machined body case, with a new mechanism (ISO dial) for a camera that will sell in lower numbers.

I get why one could argue it should be cheaper. But I also see the other side to the argument.

I just wish that this was the direction they went to originally...

airfrogusmc
05-05-2016, 17:01
A cool review
https://fstoppers.com/originals/defense-screenless-digital-leica-m-d-128158

jaapv
05-05-2016, 22:45
But why? LCDs aren't that expensive I would imagine.
At a guess: about 20$...

jaapv
05-05-2016, 22:48
And also it now requires a newly machined body case, with a new mechanism (ISO dial) for a camera that will sell in lower numbers.
That is indeed the reason. Plus different machining on the top plate and development costs amortized over a small number of cameras, etc.

LeicaFoReVer
05-06-2016, 01:50
This may make sense if the body is thinner now. Is it? or how much thinner? Do you know?

jsrockit
05-06-2016, 06:14
This may make sense if the body is thinner now. Is it? or how much thinner? Do you know?

It is not any thinner.

Godfrey
05-06-2016, 06:48
This may make sense if the body is thinner now. Is it? or how much thinner? Do you know?

It is not any thinner.

It can't be.
But we've been around that May pole a few times already.

G

jschrader
05-06-2016, 06:55
if the film body wasn't thinner, nobody would care about the digital bodies being thicker. the solution: travel back in time and change the m3's size.

Bad idea. You might change history. The M3 might have got some 10% less sales because of the fat body and Leica went bankrupt long before the M5.

Todays M-D would seem thinner but there would be none.

Ken Ford
05-06-2016, 07:16
It is not any thinner.

From pics I think it *is* slightly thinner in the area where the screen would be, but the overall dimensions don't change because of the thumb hump. The thinner area (if it exists) isn't where a human would put their hand, so it's just cosmetic. Maybe left eye shooters with big noses can feel the difference. :o

I would still love an M-D as a second body, but *that* ain't happening!

jaapv
05-06-2016, 12:48
The body itself is identical to the 240/9/8 in dimensions, but obviously lacks the protrusion of the LCD/buttons.

airfrogusmc
05-07-2016, 11:25
Actually its the M 262 that also has the stepped down top plate and a really quiet shutter like the 262.

maggieo
05-07-2016, 14:40
It's gorgeous, and as a left-eyed shooter, it'd be nice to not have to see a big smear of nosegrease on the screen. ;)

Too bad it doesn't come in silver.