The News: Leica Announces M10, Drops the '10'

The antipanda M-E: The M9 re-purposed as the
"stripped-down" budget model

The Leica M
In a giant party at Photokina, Leica has announced that it will build a new camera for delivery early in 2013. It's a successor to the M9, but it's not an M10.

It's the "M."

Not only that: Leica also says that all Leica rangefinder-type cameras from now on will be called the "M." Just "M." I guess that's so that only initiates into the Secret Rites will know which model is which. (Either that, or there will never be any future models beyond the one coming in 2013. No, I suppose that isn't it.) It will be sort of like knowing the points of first editions, I guess.

I've been critical of many camera naming protocols (picking on Canon especially), so I look forward to lampooning Leica's affectations, also at some point in the future. (I laugh my evil laugh.)*

One thing this will do is completely screw up the established convention of referring to all the Leica M's—the whole line, from the M3 of 1953 to the M9—as "the Leica M."

Don't you hate it when the newsreader editorializes, and doesn't just give the news? OK, the news: The M10 (rats, no, just "M") will be along in 2013, quite possibly, and will have a 24-MP CMOS sensor made by the Belgian company CMOSIS. It will also have live view and focus peaking. That will be great for people who own R lenses, because you'll be able to slap an R lens on your M10 (rats again) and focus it. It will also accept the EVF that goes on the little fixed lens mirrorless camera of theirs, the name of which I can never remember. (X2.)

Of course, live view and focus peaking and an optional EVF also sort of takes it a lot closer to a conventional mirrorless camera and relegates the optical rangefinder, which after all is the whole raison d'être of the M concept, a whole lot closer to irrelevance—doesn't it?

Must be for the M user who is just pining to be able to make his RF camera into a passable imitation of an ordinary DSLR.

Sorry, I am being a rogue. The new features will allow options for shooters that will doubtless be very helpful and useful. (And anyway, aren't I the guy who always says you should never slam a camera until you try it?)

The new Leica M-only body will be weatherproof, too, which is great news.

The Leica M-E
Meanwhile, the M9 will continue in the lineup, more or less, but it will now be called the M-E (remember the R-E? I liked that camera. The "budget" R5). It will be a stripped down economy model that will reportedly sell for only $5,450.

OK. And how is it that someone will want a last-generation super-expensive luxury product but not mind foregoing the status of owning the good model? And who both really wants to spend $5,450 on a camera widely understood to be a status symbol but also wants to broadcast to the world the fact that he's too cheap to spend an additional $1,500? Doesn't make sense to me. Being not in the target demographic, I concede that maybe I'm not supposed to get this.

At least Porsche has the decency to charge more for its superlight 911, which has all sorts of parts taken out. That way the buyer can feel good about getting less.

The M-E sure is cool, though, with its "partial antipanda" looks. Always liked Leica antipandas. (In Leicaspeak, panda means silver with black knobs. Black with silver knobs is the anti-.)

The Leica S
Meanwhile, the Leica S2 (perfectly sensible name) got a minor upgrade and will now only be called the "S." This name crap is making me unhappy, so let's move on.

Hasselblad
...To something that makes me even more unhappy. Along with the gruesome spectacle of the decline of Kodak, we are also being forced to witness the decline of Hasselblad. Whoever and whatever Hasselblad now is—I've had to avert my gaze—those responsible have decided to put out some digital cameras clad in ultra-"luxurious" casings of rare woods and gold and so forth.

Does anyone remember the name—model, make—of Andrew Wyeth's car? (Hugh?) It was some one-off, super-deluxe, overbuilt, extremely expensive, jump-the-shark wannabee luxo cruiser that was being offered at the time as a super-status-mobile, before sinking 'neath the waves. I think Wyeth was given one, as a prize or an award, and he said he liked it because he'd park it on a hillside in the Brandywine countryside somewhere with the motor running, turn up the heater, and then sit on the roof sketching or painting while dangling his legs through the sunroof into the toasty interior to keep his toes warm. Whatever that car was—I can't remember—the new Hasselblad horrors remind me of it.

No pictures. Please.

Mike

*P.S. I think Kevin P. called it in the Comments: Somebody else probably already owned the rights to "M10," and either wouldn't sell or license it or asked too high a price.

ADDENDUM: About the car, it finally came to me: It was a Stutz Blackhawk, a luxo-frankenmobile sold from '71 through '87 that had a custom Italian body on a GM chassis and drivetrain. Jalopnik said of it that it "would make even a pimp cringe":

Evel Knievel and Lucille Ball owned one, and Elvis had three, one with red leather and interior trim of real gold. The pictures above are from an Elvis website, although this wasn't one of Elvis's cars.

I even found a picture of Andrew Wyeth with his at Chadd's Ford, being offered as a print on Ebay by a seller called sirryan:

Although you can't see it in any of these pictures they had a spare tire in a housing mounted on top of the trunklid.

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2012 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Featured Comment by Slobodan Blagojevic: "New Leica naming policy? Not new at all. Car manufactures have been doing it for decades. Camry, Accord, Passat.... Able to distinguish them only by release year. So, the new Leica M will be known as 'Leica M, model 2013,' or, affectionately, M-13?"

Mike replies: True, but there's a very strong convention of distinguishing car models by year of introduction, which the car companies go along with in the model introductions. But in your "affectionately" lies the rub: now it will likely be up to individuals to decide how to distinguish one M from another, and, most probably, different people will do it lots of different ways, like the five or six nonstandard ways people refer to or abbreviate "Micro Four-Thirds." My guess is that it will just be an added annoyance.

Featured Comment by John Robison: "Hmm, just 'M' you say. Wasn't that a famous Fritz Lang film with Peter Lorre about a child murderer? Or the head of British secret service in the Bond films? I guess somebody will bring it to Leica's attention. After all they were the company that got all bent out of shape at the 1972 Photokina when Olympus introduced the M1."

Questions from Bryan Willman: "So, would the first sane person to lay hands on a 2013-M please look through the rangefinder part and tell me:

1. Does it have frame lines? (The frame mask window is gone....)
2. Can you change the frame lines manually? (The little-used frame mask lever is gone from both M-E and 2013-M.)
3. Can you see some part of the fancy focus-peak in the rangefinder window with the camera to your eye? (Evolution of X100 tactics)?

"It could be, is implied by one or two weird sentences, that this camera has a startling advance in the rangefinder window. But there's so much nonsense about historic crap that you cannot tell. First M-mount camera I've ever seen announced without framelines listed....?!?"

Answer (to question #1) from Jonas Yip: "The framelines on the M(10) are illuminated with an LED instead of the illumination window."

Mike adds, to Slobodan: Note that just in these few comments here, we've already had "M-13," "2013-M," and "M(10)." See what I mean?

Featured Comment by Michel: "If I purchase my Hassy through one of your links will you issue a retraction? ;-)"

Mike replies: Yes.

Featured Comment by Jeff: "Well, I was considering a 5DIII to supplement my M8.2 for bad weather and use of longer lenses if the new M didn't serve those needs. And my wish list for the new M also included 2m frame lines like the M8.2, a quieter shutter sound (without the obnoxious re-cocking noise) and the Maestro processor (as in the S) for better processing than the M9. It seems I got all five wishes. That never happens when I really want some features in a new camera. They can now call it Shirley for all I care."

[Ed. Note: The following two comments came in one right after the other in the order they're presented. I didn't juxtapose them for effect.]

Featured Comment by Kenneth Tanaka: "Since I made no note of the Leica announcements earlier a fellow TOP reader asked privately what I thought of the M, knowing that I'm a Leica user.

"Frankly, on pure specs I think the M is probably a remarkable piece of engineering. No, there's nothing in it that isn't already widely available in many far less costly cameras. In fact yes, Leica is very late in offering such features in its products.

"But, jeez, pinch me. Live ttl view with focus peaking, an EVF accessory, and video in basically the same container that Cartier-Bresson (and countless other 20th century greats) used for their work? All in response to the demands of customers. How many other brands can you name that have made such an effort? How many other brands have survived to make such an effort?

"So will I buy an M? I don't know and am in no particular hurry to know. My use of Leica cameras has waned as other sharper and more versatile tools have become abundant. All that really counts is the image; the tool is only a footnote in service to that end. Nevertheless as a photographer who respects and enjoys good photographic tools I am eager to begin seeing reliable hands-on vanguard reports and perhaps even taking one for a spin.

"Aren't you?"

Featured Comment by ch: "I'm at the end of the road with Leica. I have used film Leicas for years. My MP is still my go-to film camera. I bit on the M8. Pricey, good sensor, but frankly just a pain-in-the-ass to use. Plus—it was LOUD. My film Leicas just have a quiet 'snick' when the shutter is released. The M8 had a loud mechanical snap and whir. Plus the crop factor. WTF? All that good Leica glass being wasted. And don't get me started about having to buy UV/IR filters so my pictures weren't magenta.

"Used it a year. Got some good stuff with it. But I never bonded with it. So I sold it.

"Then the M9 came out. In a weak moment, I succumbed. Rationalized the purchase because of my stash of good Leica glass. The full frame thing was nice. Incredibly good digital files—when I got the shot. But another ergonomic and usability basket case. Kept it a year. Now it is gone.

"Now the M is out. I am going to pass. Got a D800 and even though the glass can't match what Leica makes, it is less than half the price, and with 36 megapixels and some Zeiss glass on it, it will kick the M's ass around the block. Plus it is easy to use. Has a flash system. In fact, it is a full system. And I get the shot 95% of the time.

"The digital Leica is like the Morgan motor car. Beautiful in some respects, idiosyncratic in design and construction, but ultimately only appreciated fully by a few well-heeled collectors.

"But, I still love my MP with the 50 'Lux and my M3 with the Noct. I'm going to keep those along with a 35 'Cron and keep shooting film in them. While it lasts."

Comments

[Andrew Molitor]

Maybe Leica is now going to play a sort of reverse hangman, removing the strokes of the letter M one by one, model by model, until they reach perfection, and that camera will be simply called "".

[Carl Blesch]

So Leica is following Apple's lead. Earlier this year, Apple introduced its third generation iPad, but instead of naming it the iPad 3 (or the iPad HD, as some speculated), Apple simply named it the iPad.

[Ken Ford]

Sigh. Leica could have morphed the M-E into an EVF-only body like the NEX7 or X-E1, but instead they rewarmed the M9 into this.

[Daniel]

The 24MP sensor is to be made by CMOSIS: http://www.cmosis.com/

Article: http://electronicsfeed.com/news/2952
"The sensor is the first milestone in a long term, strategic cooperation between Leica Camera AG and CMOSIS"

Cheers,
Daniel.

[Robert Roaldi]

Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear makes fun of Porsche Boxster buyers in a similar way: Why would you buy a model that advertises the fact that you can't afford the good one?

I guess that these are objects that people covet, they're not just cameras. You can't really covet ordinary stuff. Something has to be special to be "coveted".

[burt]

photokina is turning out to be a real disaster.

if you want me i'll be over at the fuji booth...

[Stephen F Faust]

Regarding the "M", something that I haven't yet seen discussed: What happened to the bright line illumination window? (Still present on the M-E pictured at the top of the article, but not on the M10, err.. M).

It's conspicuously absent from the M, which brings up a number of questions (will the bright lines be electronically overlayed? Absent altogether? Without a bright line window, is it really a rangefinder?) etc...

[Daniel]

More on the 24MP sensor: http://www.azosensors.com/news.aspx?newsID=4741

Pixel pitch of 6 micron. Linear full well capacity >40K e, 76dB SNR, 14 bit column ADC. By my guesstimate, at base ISO they are getting about 6.3 e equivalent read-out noise.

Cheers,
Daniel.

[Kenneth Tanaka]

Hasselblad has kinda been gone for a long time, mostly since the digital era began. Yeah, I know they have a line of MF digitals but their fate was largely sealed when they decided to close their system.

Recall that Hasselblad has had a new private equity owner for a year now. So it's not altogether surprising that Hassy would announce such rather silly and vacuous fashion news at Photokina this year. Seems rather like yet another in a growing line of oblique acclamations for Sony, eh?

[Marc Rochkind]

I'd call it the M Mark X D10 10D.

[Kettlehelmet]

DPReview seems to say Leica refer to this iteration of the M-nothing as the Typ 240. It would not surprise me if that is derived from the number of megapixels on the sensor. Can't seem to find it inscribed anywhere on the body, maybe on the bottom plate somewhere?

As for Hasselblad - wow. Just "wow". And this during an economic global recession.

I'll be fine with my M8 for a while longer.

[Will]

On the bright side, Mike, I've read about three new Zeiss E-mount primes that may be enough to pull you over into an NEX-7. Un gussied-up, obviously.

[cb]

1956 Continental Mark II

[Maybe, but that's not the one I'm thinking of. —MJ]

[hugh crawford]

one-off, super-deluxe, overbuilt, extremely expensive, jump-the-shark wannabee luxo cruiser" that he sat on to paint?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Andrew_Wyeth_painting_en_plein_air.jpg
well compared to a regular jeep I guess.

[Nope, that's not the one either.... MJ]

[Ken Sky]

What idiot would buy the Hassy Lunar and then show how foolish (and rich) he/she is?

[Harrison Cronbi]

That 'blad...it doesn't look so much like a re-branded Nex-7 as it does an actual Nex-7 augmented with acres of plastic as part of some child's school craft project. It looks like a complete and utter joke. Gone Wrong.

[Miku]

That M-E is just sad. It's old design by todays standards and the price should be a lot less to make any sense. I just hope this all results in cheaper M9 in the used market, so I can buy one again. In the meantime it's going to be fuji-x series for me.

[Ken White]

Sorry I hope you won't think this comment is too acerbic.

You managed to work in three dinosaurs that are either extinct or quickly heading in that direction. All while painting a thick coat of nostalgia for your readers and wringing hands.

We are way down the road with technology. Companies can choose a path that will lead to an uncertain future or a certain grave. The message of these three companies is to choose wisely.

[Dave Stewart]

Hmmm... maybe I shouldn't have knocked £20 off the price of that secondhand Olympus VF-2 electronic viewfinder I'm selling. Hadn't counted on budget Leica buyers wanting it for their Leica M's (their X2 viewfinder is allegedly just a rebadged Olympus VF-2). Then there were all those new Olympus models announced yesterday... without viewfinders. Heck, maybe I should put the price up!

[Kalli]

By the looks of it, Hasselblad's target market is yacht owners. I'm assuming they'll bring out a limited edition model with real gold accents in the near future.

Does anybody remember the Vertu super luxury mobile phone brand Nokia launched? The new Hasselblad reminds me of Vertu although, to be fair, at least Hasselblad started off with a good camera. I'm sure the price tag makes up for it being a tarted up (pimped? Is there any gender neutral way of saying this in plain language?) to the point of obscenity NEX-7.

[Oskar Ojala]

I agree that the M-E doesn't make any sense. Sure we can talk about rangefinder appeal, but the truth is that there are pretty great cameras to be had for less than $3000, so spending five and a half grand for yesteryear's Leica (remember, 230k screen, no LV, no AF) doesn't seem exactly sensible.

I also am somewhat horrified at the new Hasselblad prototype. The H5D looked decent, though not revolutionary by any means. But the Lunar doesn't seem to make much sense. But I hope that cooperation with Sony could bring some fresh development.

[Geoff Wittig]

Given Hasselblad's contempt for their own customers (i.e., orphaning the owners of their flagship medium format D-SLR by changing it to a proprietary closed system unable to take 3rd party backs), it actually makes a certain sense for them to go all in. Turn their product into a pure 'Veblen good', rather than even pretending objective utility.

[Richard]

Another great name falls to the wayside. In my film days we shot Mamiya's, perfect for portraiture, however we new that those shooting Hasse's had a slightly better camera and slightly better lenses, even if you had to use a No 1 soft on close ups. What we see today is not a company trying to save them selves in a rapidly changing market but a company who has lost there way completely. Hasselblad is no longer about building something that is "photographically" better but simply making it look prettier. "We pimp your camera". This is more then just fleecing money out of stupid rich people, this is bringing a great camera name into disrepute, destroying years of high quality craftsmanship and the pursuit of achieving better cameras. Here is your Nex7 sir we added a bit of wood for you so the other Sony buyers will know you have a bigger______ (add your own word).

[marcin wuu]

I love the look of this Hasselblad turned Nex-7. Reminds me of the laser guns in the sci fi shows from the fifties... Certainly, tastewise not worse than Pentax K-01. Also, it appears they want to do something along this lines to the new a99.

[lucas]

Leica M -- while not completely adverse to the new naming convention, I can't help it remind me of the Fritz Lang movie.

[robert e]

Also, I note that the retro "Visoflex" name has been revived for the EVF. Which, btw, looks and specs an awful lot like Olympus's VF2. Is it one and the same?

But anyway, a reminder that the rangefinder-to-awkward-SLR thing has been done before, by... oh, yes: Leica.

However, I can see how the prospect of "M11, M12..." etc., would seem a tad unwieldy for Leica's branding brains. Maybe, a la Nikon and Canon and others, they feel multiple digits are less prestigious. But they'd already used "MD" (which anyway would have been the butt of jokes about Leica's customer base, and otherwise should have been used beginning w/ the M8). But just "M" is a copout, and reminds me of Coca-Cola Co.'s misguided attempt to downsize one of the most successful brands ever to simply "Coke".

And what's the next "M" going to be called? And why even touch "S2, etc." at all?

btw, I think the intention is to offer the M-E alongside the M9 and M9P. Don't ask me why.

[Mike C.]

Mike, Mike, Mike... You have finally disappointed me. I was so looking forward to your ROTFL-worthy take on the new Hasselblad, especially with the gift of those recycled 1960s audio-kit knobs.

But perhaps you're right merely to shake your head in sadness. That is truly one awesomely bad piece of Hasselbling. What were they thinking?

Mike

[Soeren Engelbrecht]

Probably what really happened at Hasselblad was that their CEO read some of your articles on Veblen Goods here on TOP and thought to himself: "Hey, that sounds like a useful concept..."

Seriously, though, it amazes me that the press release talks about a collaboration to "achieve technical and engineering breakthroughs in various photographic technology challenges" - and then they announce THIS ?!?!

[misha]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC, Kodak used a Belgian made chip in its first dSLR.

[Chris Livsey]

No where I can see is the absence of an AA filter mentioned for the new M, previously responsible for much of the quality from the M8/9 range. With the Nikon offerings bringing this to the fore the silence is odd but what a fuss about hitting iso 6400 as if this is cutting edge. When you see what Hasselblad are doing though you wonder if Victor would own up on the flight back from Photokina to being the camera.

[robert e]

I suppose that by the "more digits = less prestige" logic of camera naming, no digits at all must seem ultra-prestigious. Perhaps some day the new Leica will have no letter either, just a dot.

[Mark Roberts]

I note that the Leica "M" has live view. I can hardly wait for the first sightings of someone shooting with an M, holding it out at arm's length, squinting at the LCD in the daylight. The howls of sacrilege should be impressive indeed!

[Jamie Walling]

Me thinks the reason for the new naming convention is an acknowledgement that they will now need a new model every year. It took Leica more than a half century to have 7 models. With Digital's requirement of annual updates, in the not too distant future they they might have the Leica M48. Not quite as nice as the Leica M8.

[Jonas Yip]

Somebody probably answered in the comments awaiting moderation, but if not: the framelines on the M(10) are illuminated with an LED instead of the illumination window.

[Arun]

Ack, a $5,000 camera, with a $100 18-55mm kit lens on.

Stupid (and poor) me, that would be perfectly in line with the thought process of the target consumer of this monstrosity.

[Øyvind Hansen]

Did they make the M-E ugly on purpose?

[Rodolfo Canet]

@Stephen F. Faust

In the 'M-nothing' the framing lines are LED-iluminated as in the M9-Titanium. No window is therefore needed.

The sensor will be key for the success of the M. Somehow it has now become an 'standard' CSC (CMOS, live-view, spot and matrix-metering, EVF, loupe and peaking to help focus...) and so it competes against all those cameras already able to use M-lenses. For the moment, its only advantage is being full frame. If the sensor does not live up to the expected standards the camera may fail in the market.

As for the Hasselblad debacle... I couldn't believe my eyes!

[Lukasz Kubica]

My God, what Hasselblad just did id SO pathetic ... There is literally NO added value in that design. It doesn't take a camera company to make a wooden grip ...

[Henning]

The Leica M - v.10, intro 12, prod 13, model 240 - will have LED framelines similar to the M9 titanium special edition shown a could of years ago. How they might be manually selectable has not shown up on the radar. Leaving off the lever seems stupid to me, especially since they made a big deal of previewing other focal lengths in years and models past.

The M-E seems identical to the M9 except for the lack of the lever and the various shell identifiers (no lettering; grey paint) that let everyone know that this is the 'cheap' model. Why not just keep producing the M9 and reduce the price? Seems a lot more saleable to me.

The big thing in my estimation, since I never was an R shooter, is that finally the new M is likely to have up to date processing capabilities with the Maestro chip, and lower noise at higher ISOs as well as a decent LCD. Seems like on the third try they might truly have a digital successor to the great film cameras.

[Michel]

If I purchase my Hassy through one of your links will you issue a retraction?
;-)

[Michael koryta]

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/09/18/apples-jonathan-ive-to-design-a-single-uber-limited-edition-leica-m/

[Marcus]

When you categorize cameras the next time, the new Hassleblad wins ugliest hands down!

[Dan]

As was pointed out above, Apple has been doing this for many of its products - the iMac, Macbook Pro, Mac Pro, and now iPad... and those are all on yearly or nearly-yearly release schedules. I believe that some true Mac aficionados refer to their Macs using model numbers like the ones listed on this page:

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1635

[Player]

Well it's about time; it took Leica long enough to figure this out though. The lowbrow chronological numbering system is perfectly fine for Canon, Nikon, or Pentax, but since all Leica Ms are superb photographic instruments, what's the point of trying to distinguish between perfection. Simply "M" will suffice.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Now this is interesting. 3/4 of the images claiming to be the the "m10" have the frame illuminator window -- but the one on the Leica site does not, and I have to consider that to be definitive now that it's been announced.

Might make sense to use LCD rather than ordinary optics illuminated with environmental light -- but it's weird they don't address that, so I understand how deeply puzzled people are!

[Ludovic]

Am I the only one who kept reading "CMOSIS" as "ΦMOSIS", or did you moderate all the others out?

As for the Hasselbald... if Aston can do brand-bastardization (to wit, the Cygnet, or the latest phone) why couldn't Hasselblad?

(Carl Blesch is right about the iPad - yet, to many's surprise, Apple didn't follow suit and gave a number to the new iPhone.)

[caleb courteau]

Sounds like Leica is taking a page out of Apple's playbook. Macbooks never had specific names for new models, and Apple dropped their numbering system on the iPad line after the iPad 2. But yes, annoying all the same.

[Jack]

Mike,
1. The 911 has remained the 911 for 40 years.

2. If Leica dropping the numbers keeps the resale prices up, I'm OK with that.

3. The iPhone 5 will be the last numbered phone, Steve told me.

[Bernd Reinhardt]

Mike, hold the sarcasm, you know you want one.

[Kevin Purcell]

The release of the Leica M also makes the (previously oddly named) Leica M Monochrom name more understandable.

The Leica M Monochrom CCD sensor is made by Truesense Imaging (neé Kodak) so one might imagine them using a CMOSIS sensor in a future Leica M Monochrom. I presume these will move together in future.

I presume the lack of an Leica M10 is a trademark issue: someone already holds a trademark in the camera business on M10 (and wasn't willing to sell or asked too much). The irony of Leica forcing Olympus to change the Olympus M1 to Olympus OM1 has already been mentioned.

[John Camp]

If I were sure that Hasselblad had a genuine marketing disaster on their hands with the new 'bling, I might invest in a fully pimped-out model, leave it in the box, and see what it might be worth in 10 years...but what about the batteries?

[Pierre Charbonneau]

The coming Leica M looks promising: weather proofing, slightly more pixels, more powerful buffer, better battery, optional electronic finder, etc... I will probably buy one.

But oddly enough, I do not find it very pretty... I guess ugliness is fashionable.

[Jeffy]

I guess Fuji will soon follow and start naming their firmwares "the NEW firmware."

[Sarge]

What Michel said.

Comment of the month... because of Mike's riposte.

[Rob]

Some really unfunny sarcasm Mike.

The Leica M is the only way you are going to get full frame in such a small package. You may not want FF, or you may be happy lugging around a clumpy DSLR, but that's beside the point. If you want it it, this is it. If you are wedded to other concepts, fine, but why be tedious about it?

Really though, I just don't understand the negativity. On paper, at least, it is a real improvement on the M9, which is a camera admired by many who use it, addressing almost all the longed-for improvements yearned for by some. It hasn't even gone up in price!

Everything about the time tested rangefinder is there, only now there is a much better screen, live view, which will likely be better than on almost all DSLR's, and if you want to, when needed, you can use a macro, a telephoto or a zoom, and it will still be lighter than any FF DSLR.

Though the add on VF is not the most elegant of solutions, it adds flexibility, and unlike the one in the Fuji or Sony, can be upgraded when EVF technology improves.

The price is high as always with Leica, and I'm not even sure if I'll buy one, even though I really do miss my old M6's. I currently use a superb, but clunky Canon 5D11, and I'm yearning for something smaller, but when I look at the Fuji and Sony alternatives there are always important things missing - only an EVF and large kludgy lenses in proportion to the body in Sony, some strange artefacts and suspect manual focusing in the Fuji, and decreased focus isolation in all APS and M43 cameras. The Leica still stands out.

[Steve Caddy]

I think Jack is onto it.

The M line needs to keep pace with electronic evolution, but that evolution happens at a speed that renders devices 'out-dated' far too rapidly for the Leica price point. You don't want to drop $7-10k on an M10 and feel like you need to do the same again in three, four or even five years. Reduce it to it's system name, 'M', keep the system up to date but don't rub it in the faces of the older edition owners.

[Bear.]

Mark Roberts - the big advantage of Leica's live view is that critical focus for studio/tripod shooting is possible - and critical framing too - both of which are not possible with a external viewfinder and rangefinder camera. It adds versatility.

I was not a fan of the 18mp CCD sensor in the M9. But 24mp is enough for my purposes; and hopefully the CMOS sensor is a good one. With the added possibility of an EVF and R lenses, for those rare occasions longer lenses are need - e.g. travel - an, um, M might well find a home with me.

[Bryce Lee]

Apple has their "i"
Leica has their "M"

Oops...

We have "The M"

Mike Johnston, far more preferable;
consistent and always identifiable by the
company he keeps and retains.

As for the others you have your numbers game,
however "we" know better, and always did.

[Earl Dunbar]

So Leica and Hasselblad are now officially irrelevant to actual photography. TLR Rolleiflexes are still being made, I can buy film and chemicals for my OMs, fixed lens RFs and Chamonix. Anyone see the irony?

[Rich Chen]

The Porsche 911 has kept its name across a half century of revisions, and Porschephiles refer to them by the internal model number, most recently 964, 993, 997, 991.

Leica has dubbed new M Typ 240, and the M-E Typ 220. So there you are.

[Armand]

Hi Mike,

My concerns are:

1. Focussing the R zoom lens say a 280 or 180 through the EVF won't be fun if I am not mistaken. Would be difficult with a 2x or 1.4x APO extender.

2. Can we use 3 Cam Lens on the R-Adapter M? Maybe without EXIF lens recognition

Too much money to spend just to use R lens. Going the Leitax route with D800E seems to be a better solution for R shooter who wants digital. Otherwise stick with the Leicaflex and R bodies for film.

For color, I like the M9. MM seems to be better for B&Ws although I prefer Tri-X.

I do not care about the videos on DSLRs and compacts.

Thanks

[James Liu]

Wait. So this costs like a used M3 plus how much film and processing and scanning again?

[Alex]

So from now on I can get a cheap(ish) leica M, stick my Olympus VF-2 on it to save more money and get the adoring looks from the uninitiated?
I think I rather spend my money on booze, women and a Pen!

[raizans]

we all know that leica is going to make us wait 1 1/2 years for a prettier version of the m-e, right?

[Tim Auger]

I don't think the Stutz Blackhawk is much worse than a lot of the concept cars that Detroit stylists have perpetrated over the years ... although it is appalling to behold, as is that camera.

[Ed]

So, will MacDonalds (McDonalds? However you spell it) now sue them for using "M" as a trademark.

[Roy]

Re the Leica and Hasselblad launches. In a word: decadence.
Roy

[Chris Lucianu]

One afterthought, now that Google has gulped Nik:

The Monochrom came bundled with SilverEfex 2.

Will the new M-E come bundled with Snapseed? Or is that reserved for the M only?
Or will there be a Leica-specific version of Snapseed, dubbed
Das Wesentliche: Schnappsaat,
for a scant USD 199 (iomega Bernoulli drive only; download option for merely USD 365) ?

Presumably, the one-off M extravaganza to be designed by Sir Jonny Ive next year will be the last Leica issued with a Mac or iOS version of Snapseed, before Google decides it's all Android.

[CF Salicath]

I guess Leica is going for the same naming-model as Apple, having different series of devices (MacbookAir, -Pro, iMac, iPod Classic, Nano etc.) and the same names for new versions of each, just specify with time of release, eg. "late 2013". I can't see the problem with this logic, except you will have to specify release time in adds for the devices. I think it is far tidier than Nikon/Canons seamingly random logic.

[andy]

I used to have a digital Leica, the M8.2. I felt like a fool, frankly, carrying around over $5K worth of gear, even though I bought it used. And that was when the image quality was arguably as good or better than APS-C of the time. When I'd be shooting in New York or Chicago, I had a number of people come up and ask is that a Leica? They were organized into two distinct groups. Middle-age guys who looked like college professors and 20-something kids who were going to get a BA in fine arts. Sold it to the next chump on ebay, UV/IR filters and all.

So who really uses these things anymore to create publishable work? Seriously, who does? It's not all the chatterers on DPR and Leica Forums. Does anyone know of a non-subsidized working photographer who actually uses an M9 as a primary working tool?

I'm not trying to be mean or provocative, but I know a lot of working photographers and no one has one. I've seen them a lot in Hong Kong, and know that they sell in Japan, but here in the US they seem to be the exclusive province of the stereotyped upper-income suburban professional.

[Andreas]

"...M9... Incredibly good digital files—when I got the shot..."

"...but ultimately only appreciated fully by a few well-heeled collectors...".

"... D800... Has a flash system. In fact, it is a full system."

Pardon? I finally jumped the wagon and bought a used M8. Far from perfect, but I don't see why you can get the shot with an M3, but not with an M8, despite the annoying wake-up time. Actually I like the M8 more than I thought I would, although I hate all the design-flaws that Leica should have avoided, especially Leica. But I love rangefinders, and Leicas are the only digital RFs at the moment, so no choice.
Finally, if you appreciated an M3 I cannot see how to enjoy a D800. Neither why you suddenly need a flash-system. Was the M3 a system-camera? If you like RFs and the style of shooting that they lend themselves to, there is just not a single reason that speaks for an SLR. Really weird.

The problem with Leica is sure not the camera-design, but that they are the only company at the moment that has the guts to produce real cameras (RF, labelled dials for aperture and shutter-speed, done), yet sell them as luxury goods.

[Kevin Purcell]

The CMOSIS PR

http://www.cmosis.com/news/press_releases/new_leica_m_uses_cmosis_24_mp_cmos_image_sensor

outlines some of the reasons for choosing CMOSIS rather than say Sony.

They seem to be:

1. Exculsivity. Custom product made for Leica only.
2. Made in Europe" i.e. Designed in Belgium; Fabbed in France; (packed in Asia :-) and installed in a German camera. Helps with marketing.
3. Technical issues in dealling with (very) off-normal rays of the sort you get from the edges of wide-angle M and R lenses.

The final point is most interesting.

The problem with (very) off-normal rays from non-telecentric lenses is they hit photodiodes at an angle they reduce the amount of photoelectrons they create (causing vignetting) before they pass into an adjacent photodiode (causing crosstalk). Leica needs to deal with this sort of issue (more than other camera makers) because they have legacy M mount lenses.

[Jack]

Mike,
For those of your readers who really want to understand the new M, I would suggest this well illustrated link from Photokina:

http://www.reddotforum.com/content.php/278-Photokina-2012-Day-1-The-Leica-M

Seems Leica has it pretty well figured out. This will sell pretty well for a niche camera. I hope some reader orders it via your Amazon link. After all, if you don't like it, there is a 30 day return policy that a friend actually used on returning an M8. Note that the M is not on Amazon as of this morning, but they do have one M9 left.

[Sam Scherf]

Please don't make fun of the "M-1". I trained on an M-1 rifle preparing for the Vietnam War. Don't figure out how old I am. ;-) Sam

[PWL]

Well, I've been a Leica shooter for 19 years, and I DID rush out to buy the M9 when it came out....

But I'd have to agree with your comments about the New M (let's call it that) being "a lot closer to a conventional mirrorless camera" and a "passable imitation of an ordinary DSLR."

Yes, I'm sure the New M is a wonderful camera, but I'm not rushing out to buy one. At the risk of being a Luddite, seems to me that the New M has lost one of the characteristics which made Leica Ms so attractive to a certain set--their bare-bones minimalism (albeit very well-made minimalism).

The nice thing about a classic M was that all you got was a shutter speed dial, focus and aperture ring, and a built-in light meter (I started out with the M6), but other than that, it was up to you to work to get the shot right. The classic M forced a photographer to rely on his or her own native skills, and gave one a photographic "work out", so to speak. Certainly kept your skills sharp and in shape, and did not forgive slackness or lack of expertise. Yes, shooting an M was fun for the kind of person who would like road-racing in a stripped-down, manual-shift 1950s MG sports car, rather than tooling around in an auto-everything Lexus...

True, the M9 has auto exposure and a few other features, being digital and all, but it was just enough, and not too much to keep it from being the classic Leica DIY camera (I've used mine in manual mode most of the time, anyway). Yes, a Leica M was all muscle and no fat, so to speak, and a welcome vacation from your hyper-automated, do-everything DSLR...

But with the New M...Live View? Video? add-on EVF? I dunno. Never cared for video on a still camera--don't use it--and Live View on a rangefinder just seems kind of superfluous to me. I mean, all these features are pretty much standard on cameras costing 1/7 the price of the New M (the Olympus EM-5 comes to mind--and a pretty good camera it is, too).

So, while the New M may be a wonderful camera, I'll hold off for now (aside from the fact I don't have a spare $7,000 lying around). Just doesn't seem like that much of a "real M" to me. So I'll just soldier on with the M9 for now--and if I really need those "new features" the New M has, I'll just grab my EM-5...

[cb]

Lunatic!

[Andreas]

But, but, if the M (or ME) has no frameline selector it is uninteresting or me, because then I can't use the 40 Rokkor without modification, which I can't do, because I also use it on the lovely CLE ;-)
This would be an epic fail - sorry for saying epic, hehe.

[Ri chard Newman]

So when is Leica coming out with the digital 'R' camera?

[`/1nc3nt]

Disillusioned old European Brands.

Long time ago, I remember a marketing
lecture about the strength of old european brands and why they can hold and compete globally, even with a very high premium.

I am not sure whether this mindset is still valid now, but I think that's what Leica, Hasselblad thinks. Package anything, name anything, anyway they will buy our brands (not our products).

PS: I like Hasselblad brands and interested in build a brand new set of classic 503, but OMG this Hasselbling announcement really changed my mind.

[Peter]

@Richard Newman,

I'm not sure if that was facetious or not, but they already tried like 10 years ago with the digital-modul-R.

[Henry Rogers]

Mike, Lets forget about the horrible Hasselblad!

Don't be too quick to sneer at the Leica ME though. I doubt very much that anyone will lose face using one just because there is a posher model, with lots more pixels, on the way. After all nobody rubbishes users of second hand Leicas just because they are cheaper than a new one. The real test will be whether it's any good as a camera, in combination with the lenses which many potential buyers probably have already. Get somebody who buys one to write you a review. Leica really should get rid of that "go faster" red dot though. My 1959 IIIg works perfectly well without one!

[Kevin Purcell]

What impact does the Leica M-E have on the M9 second hand sales price?

Does it push the second hand price down because the M-E is essential the same but newer camera so its worth more than a second hand mint M9?

Or does it push the M9 second hand price up because it's "top tier" M9 not the "second tier" grey-topped camera?

Inquiring minds (with too much time on their hands) want to know.

[Henry Rogers]

I've been curious about second hand prices too! I hope to have the chance to chat next week to someone who is currently at Photokina. I've forgotten what price M8s were new but they, especially mint ones, still command quite good second hand prices, regardless of the scare about screen failures.