The perennial question about the M7 provoked some wild and wacky thoughts about fantastical futuristic Leicas. But seriously: what new camera would be most useful? How about a worthy successor to the CL/CLE? A kind of a hybrid with the minilux P/S. Lots of folks seem to be opting for the Contax T3, but is a P/S enough? If Leica were to produce a new super P/S/CL replacement here's what I would like it to look like:

* Should have rounded ends like the LTM, M, C1, C11.

* Not too big, not too small.

* Blend of retro style and modern functionality.

* Leica script on top like the C1 and classic Leicas.

* Large viewfinder.

* Manual control, good range of shuter speeds.

* Fast, sharp lens. If a zoom, 28 to 70 or 90.

* Fast and non-fiddly handling.

* Fast focussing and fast shutter release.

* Accessory flash. No need to have one built in.

There! Not too much to ask, surely?

-- David Killick (Dalex@inet.net.nz), October 15, 2001

Answers

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. All I want from Leica is a digital M camera. It should/would be no bigger than an M with a motor. And would be at least as quiet at the M camera is now.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), October 15, 2001.

This is I guess a wrong answer to a right question but as "replacement" I'd like to see an M 2/75 mm.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 15, 2001.

Bring back the non-TTL with brass top and real Vulcanite. Also re- release the M6J as a standard issue.

-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), October 15, 2001.

An M2-type, manual camera with an easy loading feature. Basically, a fully manual, meterless camera with a bright, uncluttered viewfinder. I have an M6 and an M2. Both are great cameras, and the M6 is admittedly convenient with its built in meter; however, I usually grab the M2. I like the feel of it and it's just more fun to use.

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), October 15, 2001.

Here's another demand for a digital M. Dear Mr Cohn: we do not need a number of extras no other camera manufacturer ever thought of, but we'd like to have it soon and M6 + motor-sized.

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), October 15, 2001.

I want a economy M for less than 1000$. A .72 viewfinder where the outer edges represents a 35mm, + a 50mm and a 90mm frame permanently visible in the viewfinder. The lack of frameline preview and coupling should make it less costly to produce. Also a modern "replace if it breaks" metalblade shutter would make this model less expensive. 1 model and one color.
Most Leica entusiasts will hate it for the more noisy shutter, and Leica will not loose too much M6 sales. It should be targeted as an entry level camera and a backup for those who can't justify the price of an extra M6.
Also I want an entry level F:2.0 50mm lens. When Canon and Nikon can sell decent 50mm f:1.8 lenses for under $100, then Leica should be able to make a good one under 500$ eg. the 69-70 summicron design in a polycabonat barrel.


-- Niels H. S. Nielsen (nhsn@ruc.dk), October 15, 2001.

A digital M camera? I don't like that idea to be honest. Digital sucks relative to film to be honest. I prefer old school not convenience...

I would definitely want to see the following changes for a new camera:

A Leica R9 which returns back to a titanium body similar to the Leicaflex SL2 in looks and designs. Reliable workhorse. Add some solid manual features with "an autofocus detector" which means that the camera doesn't have autofocus but a signal which can tell you whether the image is in focus or not. That would be a blessing.

Brrr... digital... whew I'm back to the beginning :)

-- Alfie Wang (albert.wang@ibx.com), October 15, 2001.

I put my oar in for a Leica M Digital body. I love the Leica M for its lenses and would be very happy to continue using them on a high resolution digital body.

I don't need a built in preview screen or a million bells and whistles. The traditional Leica rangefinder and viewfinder are just fine. Responsive operation, capacity for100 high rez images, (6000x4000 pixels is adequate), FireWire interface for fast upload to imaging system.

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), October 15, 2001.

An M3 with a built in meter, or an M2 with a built in meter. According to a few Leica repairmen I have talked to, however, a camera would have to sell for over $6000 just the body if they were to try and make one today with the hand craftmenship of the earlier Leicas. How about a slighlty smaller .72 M6 with user selectable finder lines, 1 at a time, and no finder flare.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), October 15, 2001.

An updated 90mm f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit. Maybe an APO/ASPH version, just as long as it was no bigger than the original.

-- Bob (robljones@home.com), October 15, 2001.

Seems that a digital M may have a lot of follwers; I have had this idea since more than a year ago, and I don´t think a M digital is a much dificult accesory, there just need to be the rigth stuff to develop it, and not necesarily from the Leica house; but would be the best of course.

My idea is this: thake the M body,(any one), take off tha base plate and back door, then a back door with a digital sensitive presure plate goes intead of it, and batteries and the rest of the stuff goes where the base plate, but bigger, as a motor driver, I don´t know much about electronics but I know all this is posible, the most dificult thing would be to relate the mecanical shutter of the M and the digital sensor of the back door. Do you get it?

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), October 15, 2001.

Glad you asked!

Here's what I would like (the Leica IIIh) :

1. IIIg size M mount, with 90, 50, 35mm frames a la Canon P. Let's call it the Leica IIIH!

2. Swing open back, removeable.

3. Shutter OM-2/OM-4 type automation OTF plus manual 1-1/1000 + B. Led exposure indicator like Pentax MV-1/MX/Voigtlander Bessa R.

4. Use OM series type winder/motor drive.

5. Add on trigger advance like Voigtlander Bessa T. Hell, make it use the Voigtlander unit.

6. TTL flash hotshoe.

7. Black finish, Leica script on top plate. Did I say black finish?

8. Pentax LX type strap lugs so I can hang the damn thing the way I want to.

9. Carl Zeiss 50mm f/2.8 Tessar T*, fixed, black, 40.5mm filter (ok , I'll agree to 39mm).

10. Street price for body has to be below $850.

Ok, I'll take 2!

-- Tony Oresteen (aoresteen@lsqgroup.com), October 15, 2001.

Just dreaming, uh? Leica AG doesn't care what we think, you know !

My dream: revamped M3 with 1/4000 metal mechanical shutter (same as FM-2n's), swing back door, FM-2n's film threading, film rewind crank, digital MR-like accessory clip-on light meter, 1/250s flash sync. And, please, don't even try to "fix" anything else. Most specially regarding the viewfinder.

In summary, I'd like Leica to concentrate on what they are good for: simple, mechanical, solid, trustable, compact photographic tools that allow you to build a system in time, serve two or three generations and don't became obsolete as soon as a faster processor, a larger pixel count sensor or a new battery type hits the market (i.e much faster than your investement has had a chance to make any sense . . .)

My 2 cents . . . on dreaming.

-Iván

-- Iván Barrientos M (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), October 15, 2001.

1. Zooming viewfinder, isolated framelines from 28 to 135mm. 1.0x magnification at 50 mm. 2. Same quick load, but hinged bottom plate (so I don't have to use my third hand to hold it) 3. Quieter shutter (tell me why not?) 4. 100 g. less weight. 5. DX coding and an ISO dial with bigger and more accurate markings. 6. Dimmer LEDs especially in low light.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), October 15, 2001.

An M6 with a user-customizable finder, so as to include only the wanted frame lines. For Example, one would be able to leave out the 75mm and 135mm lines. You should also be able to reconfigure it in the field, when desired.

And like Tony, I'd like the traditional Leica script on top, where it belongs. And how about black paint?

Definitely include the rapid rewind crank. The old pull-up knob of the M2/M3 may be aesthetically better, but I get impatient with my M2 now that the M6 has spoiled me.

A CL-sized camera with modern M6 style metering would be nice. But I'd like the finder to work with 35mm lenses, and probably even 28mm. They can leave off the 75mm and 135mm frames to de-clutter the finder, and to avoid exceeding the limitations of the short rangefinder base. Then a tele-90 f/4 like the Rokkor-C to complete the picture.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), October 16, 2001.

New Leica I'd most want to see? I'm not picky, I'd like to have a current m6TTL in black with a 35/1.4 asph on my doorstep tomorrow. But hell I know that ain't gonna happen, an th' resta oughta wise up too...

-- Dave Doyle (soilsouth@home.com), October 16, 2001.

Digital M ? Why??? Is the quality that we get from the top digital cameras so good that we miss the quality of the Leica lenses? If yes then I guess I am doing something wrong!
If tomorrow Leica would announce a M6d (or DigiSix) with a 5 Mpixel sensor then the cost of the body would be -at least- $4000. Would you give this money for a digital camera that will be outdated in 6 months? I would never, thank you.
What I would like to see in a M7 :
1) The Leica logo engraved on top. (too expensive -they said- ha!)
2) Shutter speed in use visible in the viewfinder
3) Aperture priority mode
4) Back to the non-TTL size immediately.
5) Special finish that can not be scratched.
Well, just my opinion again...

-- Jordan Koussis (jordan@koussis.com), October 16, 2001.

A self-timer. A lighter titinium body. 1/2000s.

-- Damond Lam (damond_lam@hotmail.com), October 16, 2001.

Am I the only happy camper? I love my M cameras just the way they are. Thank you very much!

I have cameras with and without the "Leica" script and have noticed no differences in negative quality nor in ease of handling. I prefer the quiet rubberized cloth shutter to any metal one. Even with the mirror locked up, shutters with metallic blades are not that quiet. This does limit my top speed but I do not mind.

Why all the complaints about the 2mm increase in height for the TTL? Have you ever used a TTL? It is much easier to meter with and adjusting the shutter speed is an easy one finger operation. My TTL is my main camera and I would not trade it for two M6 classics.

I also have good news for anyone who wants a less expensive M camera. There are hundreds of thousands of them out there. Why on our very own pages a M6 sold for $1000 and a M3 is listed for $550. What do you want: one free in every box of Corn Flakes?

Finally, if you want a *^%£@! special finish, go to a local hardware store, get what ever you want and DO IT YOURSELF. Are the Nikon discussion groups full of bitter reproaches to Nikon because you cannot get a F5 in candy apple red? Do people refuse to buy Canon telephoto lenses because white clashes with their ensemble. H***, no other camera manufacturer even offers any choice in regualr production finishes!!!

There that feels better.....

PS: It is possible to have individual frames removed if you want. PPS: If you are having trouble loading a M camera, practice. I can load mine in the dark and so can you if you want too.

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), October 16, 2001.

Just in case anybody happens to be collecting the statistics here, my answer to your question "What new Leica would you most like to see?", is "Another M6TTL, please, but with a self-timer". (Thanks for reminding me, Damond -- I have always wanted a self-timer here -- but have given up talking about it any more.)

Mike

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 16, 2001.

Make it a rangefinder FE2 with Leica lenses--1/4000 top shutter speed displayed in the finder, aperture priority, self timer, zoom finder.

-- Haim Toeg (haim_toeg@bmc.com), October 16, 2001.

I agree fully with John C. I too love my Leicas for what they are. If I want a top line digital camera there are a number to choose from already on the market, so why have Leica even further stretch their limited (compared to companies like Nikon and Canon) resources. Polaroid USA just went under, primarily from the debt they have incurred trying to compete in the digital market. If they can't do it, I doubt whether Leica can.........

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), October 16, 2001.

Polaroid did not go under. They are in Chapter 11 reorganization, which many companies have undergone and continued to do business. They will probably pare back their product lines, but they are expected to be here in the future. Most analysts dinged them for going digital (which has replaced a significant piece of the "instant" market) way too late.

As for Leicas of the future, isn't there some obscure animal skin that hasn't been used yet for camera coverings?

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), October 16, 2001.

John, I think you are missing something: We are here because we all love our Leicas as they are now, or else we wouldn't be bothered to talk anyway. Still it's human privilege to ask and search for improvements. After all it is our personal taste and it doesn't mean that it would be better for all the others too.
The "Leica" script would not make any difference in handling or negative quality of course, but, wouldn't you prefer if it was still there?
Would you be less happy if you could see the speed in use in the viewfinder?
Have you ever used a non-TTL? It's 2mm (or is it 3mm?) smaller -that is 1/500 metres smaller!- and you dont have to put it to "Off" position to avoid your battery drain (and let's not start talking about TTL feature in such a synchronization speed!).
I know many people that pay more than the price of a new TTL to buy a new non-TTL body -when they find it-. And don't forget that Leica almost went bankrupt when they changed the classic size of the M series (with the M5). Size is always important, especially among diehard M users.
A finish that is difficult to be scratched doesn't mean that it should be candy apple red colored. And in Nikon and Canon discussion groups they DO ask for improvements -all the time- much more than we do.
Again, my opinion only.

-- Jordan Koussis (jordan@koussis.com), October 16, 2001.

Digital hardware is a drain on all companies - rapidly dating and declining prices coupled with a recession is a recipe for severe difficulties. Kodak has similar problems with its digital lines - they persevere because they believe that one day we will all be digital and then they will have us all as customers. If they don't watch out though they will have the same problems as Compaq and CPU chip manufacturers. This is a workable business when consumer and investment confindence is high, but very difficult when it is not - at least until the advances have stabilised meaningfully. I think Leica is wise to be very, very cautious.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), October 16, 2001.

John, I think you must be the only person to write H*** instead of, well... H***.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), October 16, 2001.

Jeff - technically you are correct about Chapter 11. But check out Polaroid USA website - "Going forward, Polaroid and its lenders have agreed to accelerate and intensify our exploration of the sale of ALL or parts of the company." Unfortunately being in the 'biz' I've had a chance to be quite closely involved with whats going on. For the last 4 weeks Polaroid has been trying to find a buyer for parts of its company (primarily film, which Fuji expressed interest in). However it seems that the lenders want the buyer to also take on the debt incurred (mostly in the digital division - film is still making money), which has, as of this week scared off Fuji and the other interested buyers. Not a lot of hope is seen in the industry at the moment for Polaroid USA (Polaroid claims there divisions in other countries are doing oksy). But what I said still holds. Digital is an incredibly volatile market. What I design today as cutting edge technology and ship tomorrow is often obsolete by the time it reaches the customer. Talking to a VP from Konica he stated that for every digtital camera they place on the market their are two or three that never see the light of day because by the time they're developed they have been eclipsed by cheaper versions from other manufacturers that 'beat them to the punch'. I'm sure most manufactures run into this problem and I truly don't think Leica has the financial resources to deal with it.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), October 16, 2001.

John,

Hasselblad now offers blue, red, yellow Hasselblad 503's....

Voigtlander is offering a "limited" run of Bessa T's in Blue, grey, olive, and black....

Didn't Leica offer gold, safari, etc colour cameras?

I just want a IIIg in black!

Cheers,

Tony

-- Tony Oresteen (aoresteen@mindsping.com), October 17, 2001.

A 50mm only (but with removable lens) as an entry point- Sort of a M6 junior. The lens to be removable so you could put it onto a M6 if you wanted. Only have framlines for a 50mm like an old LTM.

I'd buy one in a flash - could have metal shutter etc as far as I am concerned. No need for fancy metering, no need for a flash bracket - a modern day IIIc. And CHEAP!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please??

-- Adrian Morgan (mourgesnospam@dingoblue.net.au), October 18, 2001.

I'd like the new M7 rangefinder to have the features of the current M6, plus:

1. mechanical and electronic mechanisms similar to the new Nikon FM3A, 2. quick-load film back, 3. new 43mm f/2 lens that can be retracted into the camera, and 4. brass body (no paint).

-- Ron Gregorio (rongregorio@hotmail.com), October 18, 2001.