I know this topic is explored scantily on Stephen Gandy's Cameraquest site but it certianly is worth entertaining further.

As a Leica M user what improvements would you like to see on the next M camera? Personally, I would NOT welcome AE on the next M as I like the "antiquated cloth shutter" just the way it is. If Leica really wanted to make a statement it would design from scratch a leaf shutter body so that you can flash synch at all speeds but I think their R&D budget prohibits this.

My own nitpicks. I would like to see the LED indicators replaced with LCD for the sake of preserving battery power. I want the TTL circuit for the next TTL to work off the SF-20 flash unit if that unit is mounted (again saves battery power). I also think the engineers at Leica should study their old M3 design to figure a way of eliminating the rangefinder patch flare that so plagues M6s. I think its a matter of adding the rangefinder window "ledges" that were present on Ms when they still had brass top-plates. It would also be nice to eliminate the rotating ISO dial selector (a pain to use on the go) and re-locate this to a dial that can be easily accessed on the side of the camera (maybe under the shutter speed dial?)

Any other suggestions?

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), January 10, 2002

Answers

A leaf shutter body is surely impossible without redesigning all the lenses. If you put the leaf shutter in all of the lenses then this would be a complete redesign too and very heavy and expensive. Bad idea! Otherwise your suggestions seem pretty uncontroversial which is good.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), January 10, 2002.

The purist in me says..."leave it alone, it is fine as is." But lately, I have been doing a lot of pictures at full aperture in good light for a desired effect (very narrow depth of field), and I am finding that in this pursuit, my camera of choice is an SLR with a top shutterspeed of 1/8000th of a second. So, the practical user in me sees the need for some updating.

I guess I could just get a Hexar RF and hope the rangefinder problems reported are exaggerated, since the top end of that camera would entice me to shoot wide-open where errors would be noticeable. I am waiting for next month to see if the rumors are true about the new M type camera with more updated feature ala the Hexar. If this camera is produced by Leica, it would be important to continue to offer the traditional M for those times that it is all the camera you need. The new camera should be a compliment to, not a replacement for the M.

I am getting some good stuff with my Nikon now at f/1.something @ 1/8000th, but I am always thinking about how much different the results would look if I could have done the same shots with a Leica lenses. Maybe soon...

I'm sure someone will mention neutral density filters. I know they would help, but it is another thing to carry and play with in rapidly changing situations. A step-less shutter with a broader range is just so much more user friendly to me.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), January 10, 2002.

1. Higher shutter speeds 2. Larger 135mm frame without specs.

-- Tony Brookes (gdz00@lineone.net), January 10, 2002.

Well, firstly what I wouldn't change:

1.Shutter design and speeds - the cloth shutter works superbly and 1 sec to 1/1000 covers 99.99% of the photography for which the M is suited.

2.Body construction and mechanical innards - ergonomically, asthetically and functionally superb.

3.Viewfinder system - .72 is perfect.

4.Meter - if you want an in-built one, the M meter is all you need.

Things to change:

1.Leica quality control and construction needs to return to the good old days - out with the plastic, in with the brass and engraving tools!

2.Take out the TTL electronics - simply unnecessary - the M is an available light camera - flash no thanks.

3.Replace the horrible PVC plastic cheap covering with a modern rough Vulcanite type material.

4.Return to the proper brass engraved top plate.

5.Put back the condensor lens that used to prevent the RF flare.

6.Give "corners" to the 35 and 50 frames and "sides" to the 75 frame.

7.Bring back the all metal sculptured wind lever.

8.PLEASE bring back the self timer!

9.Replace the red dot with a black one and bring back the LEITZ name.

10.Offer black paint as a standard option.

Or alternativly start re-building the M4 and M2 alongside an all- singing all-dancing M7 TTL AE AF Motorwind etc, etc - there would then be a choice for those of us that desire the perfect rangefinder camera as opposed to an electronic box of tricks constantly improved (I don't think) for the sake of it.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), January 10, 2002.

I would like to be able to meter without having the shutter cocked. I would also like to be able to shut off the diodes after I have made my exposure decisions. (I know, I know. Use a handheld, throw away the batteries.)

So does this boil down to an on/off switch for the meter?

-- Hil (hegomez@agere.com), January 10, 2002.

Yes to eliminating r/f patch flare and to a selftimer and also to a real on off switch. The TTL flash metering is nice to have while not essential, but if you use flash at all an r/f camera is a great tool. All the stuff about vulcanite and engraved top plate is in the realms of pure aesthetics so not really relevant to actually taking photos but I suppose not irrelevant to some Leica buyers.

I would like fuller frames for the 135mm frame I must say. I guess 1/2000 might be nice, but I have never used this speed on my R6 yet so I am not convinced it has any real value to me. I think that Al should try out the Hexar - I think this is the only reliable way to get very fast shutter speeds i.e. with electronic shutter.

The meter being unable to operate is a useful reminder that the camera is not wound on.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), January 10, 2002.

I wonder how many people might buy just one leaf-shutter lens for the regular body--a 35, probably, based on most people's preferences. When they figured out how to synch it with the FP shutter, they could put in second-curtain synch at the same time, probably. I think both of those things might be rational upgrades without trampling the current concept too badly.

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), January 10, 2002.

With all the hype of AE, faster flash synch, and higher top shutter speed being what I thought I wanted in an M, I bought a Hexar. Interestingly, I found that I preferred metered manual to AE, used 1/2000th one time I think, never used 1/4000th that I can remember, and never bothered with a flash on the Hexar as it had no TTL. So, in conclusion, leave the M just as it is! If Leica can get 1/2000th top speed without changing the present shutter much, by all means do it -- but don't give us a vertical-travel titanium FP shutter ala Nikon FM. A 1/125th TTL flash synch would be nice on rare occasion for my style of shooting, but again, not at the expense of giving up the current quiet, robust, and relatively trouble-free shutter.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), January 10, 2002.

Look at the number of people drooling over mint M4's, both chrome and black paint. Simply re-start production of these fine pieces using exactly the same materials as used in the originals & price it at the current M6 TTL level. I doubt that there would be any problems selling all that would be produced. I'd be first in line to purchase one. My own $.01 1/2 :-)

-- Ron Snyder (STUDIO1401@AOL.COM), January 10, 2002.

I'd like an M6 with the Nikon F5 meter, shutter, exposure modes and flash circuitry. For me the important things about the M's are 1) rangefinder focusing 2) the lenses 3) size.

I'd love to have a rangefinder i could just focus and then hit the shutter release. Unfortunately the contax G series doesn't fit the bill or I don't fit it. I used it for a year and had no luck with focusing it.

Well, that was enjoyable. Now back to reality...

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 10, 2002.

In reality, I wouldn't buy another M even if it did have all those features. It would be horribly expensive, I'm sure.

My next camera will be digital.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 10, 2002.

I agree with Giles P almost entirely. 2 things I'd like to be improved - 1. the eye relief for glasses wearers - I'd like the screw in glass to be flatter - almost flush to the body allowing me to get a few mm closer 2. I'd like the m grip to extend the whole width of the body - it's always kind of irritated me that it tails off as if they're saving money on the plastic, and anyway it looks silly. As for a leaf shutter lens - can you imagine how much they'd want for that?! Anyway shutters in lenses means one more thing to go wrong (my Hasselblad experience tells me)...

-- steve (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), January 10, 2002.

As someone who thinks that the M3 is still the best Leica, I'd say that the main improvement which would make the M system more useful would be an M6D (or whatever you want to call it):

Get rid of the ugly, canted rewind and the plastic film advance, and install a 6 megapixel full-frame sensor with a ISO range to 3200.

(Hey, we're all dreaming, anyway . . .)

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), January 10, 2002.

Viewfinder lines with corners like the M-3, which change to show 100% of the image at the distance focused.

-- Wilhelm (bmitch@home.com), January 10, 2002.

Mike:

From experience; full frame is good but 6 isn't enough.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), January 10, 2002.

I agree with Giles right down the line. I would be happy if Leica had made the M6J as a normal production camera with a more reasonable price.

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), January 10, 2002.

I am happy with my TTL now that I put the old style advance lever on it; great camera! I only notice rangefinder flare if my eye is not centered properly, center the eye and it disappears. My advice to Leica would be to hire Tom A. and put the RapidWinder and SoftRelease into regular production. Best two accessories I have ever used.

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), January 10, 2002.

Simply! The money it costs.

-- iņigo (iso25000@yahoo.es), January 10, 2002.

Giles, you wrote:

"9.Replace the red dot with a black one and bring back the LEITZ name."

How about NO dot. Just a philips head screw to adjust the vertical alignment of the rangefinder a la M4?

Ahhhh, that would be bliss for me!

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), January 10, 2002.

How about...

Re-introducing the M2, with:

1) built in M6TTL style metering in view-finder (ie. 2 tringles and centre dot), big dial like TTL... (but w/o flash metering!).

2) Bring out model with 3 frame lines only. ie. Either Wide: 28, 35, 50. 'Normal': 35, 50, 90 or High: 75, 90, 135. Simple is best, as they say in good design.

3) Motor-M capability

4) Yeh, if at all possible faster shutter speed

5) Loading system like the M6

[ Get rid of all the horrible plastic bits!!! - yuck ]

Everything else about the M2 - KEEP! Like..the nice sexy advance lever, self-timer, engraved top-plate, round film-rewind....

That should be the Classic M7, IMHO

-- sparkie (sparkie@mailcity.com), January 10, 2002.

Does anyone think Leitz (sorry Leica) get much feedback such as this and do they take note?

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), January 10, 2002.

...er..forgot to say they should bring out THREE or more models for dedicated usage and not just the One. ie. either a 'Wide' body, Normal or 'High Mag' (with the variant viewfinders) just like the 3 viewfinder combinations of the M6TTL. The rational being that we will all end up with 2 or more bodies anyway. Sooner or later. right? If they can design the viewer thingy to show 4 or 5 framelines then we can include for the 21, 24 and 75 lenses.

-- sparkie (sparkie@mailcity.com), January 10, 2002.

Sparkie,

I think if you had framelines for the 21 mm the effective baselength of the finder would make it VERY hard to focus accurately. How about increasing the # of frameline templates in the rangefinder mechanism so that each template has only 1 frameline?

Simple is better right?

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), January 10, 2002.

Wheeee! Here we go again...!

As an M4-2/P user, I keep waiting for something to really 'sell' me on an M6+. Here are some things Leica could do for ME, if possible.

1. Restore UNBROKEN 28/35 frame lines at the bottom of the frame - repositioning LEDS slightly if necessary.

2. Restore M2/M4-2 90 frame with 8 segments and near-corners

3. Available 1.00x finder with 50/75/90/135 frames. Like Giles, I prefer the .72 for general use, but 1x would have its place. The .85 (and M3) just don't get there for me: they make the 35 frame harder to use or leave it out anyway, but still doesn't let me shoot with both eyes open - I end up with THREE images in the RF patch - one the wrong size. Leica has said it's doable.

4. Do SOMETHING to the design of the TTL shutter speed dial to give it more panache - diamond-knurled rim, little depression in the center (a la the pre-M6 dials). Right now it looks like the plastic dial off a 1985 Nikon N2000. Yeah, it's cosmetic - but notice I'm NOT bitching about the size, position, or direction of turn.

5. Leaf shutters - well, I understand the desire. Leica should certainly keep up with Nikon/Canon/Contax/Konica. If THEY ever offer leaf shutter lenses for their pro-level cameras, Leica should not be left behind. Until then, I can live with 1/250th flash sync - see below.

The above all assume the same basic M3-6TTL body and shutter, and I don't want that line to go away.

But in ADDITION:

6. I would jump at a Hexar RF-style body that had a .72 (or larger) finder and RF reliable for 90/135 lenses - doesn't matter to me WHO makes it. Fast shutter for daylight work at medium apertures, 1/250th flash sync, motor. I'd prefer it to match the specs of the Contax G2 over the present Hexar: +/- 1-stop bracketing, 4 frames-per-second, AE lock that STAYS locked over multiple exposures if desired, rewind that can be programmed for leader in/leader out. I can live with a 1x body if that's all that's available - I need the motor more for the 90 and 21 than for the 35.

For AE I'd like a full-frame (center-weighted) metering pattern. If they can also integrate an M6 style semi-spot via a switch I don't object. Lockable AE would make this less necessary.

For those who feel all these gee-gaws belong on an SLR - well, I disagree. I LIKE rangefinders. I LIKE no mirror shake, compactness, the RF viewing itself, low weight, the availability of compatable mechanical bodies - and, of course, Leica lenses. I don't see any cultural, artistic, or technical reason why I can't have those things PLUS the newer conveniences to use in some situations. There MAY be economic reasons why Leica can't deliver them - and I'd understand that.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), January 10, 2002.

I would eliminate the ISO dial on the back and replace it with a frame to hold the film box tab. Obviously, replacing the self-timer with the meter was the best trade-off. I probably used my M4 self- timer twice a year. But an accessory self-timer could be designed. It would slip over the side of the camera and would work like a car door remote. You'd hold it in your hand and a small solenoid would press down on the shutter release. When through, you'd slip it off and put it back in the camera bag.>>>>I've wished that the tripod socket was more in the center, but there no doubt is a reason for its off-center location.>>>>The M grip adapter would incorporate a tripod quick release base>>>>The 1/50 sec flash sync is really too slow, but as other people have observed, if it requires a complete remake to fix, just leave it alone!>>>>Never owned the M6, but things that have batteries need an auto shut-off feature or you go through batteries too fast. That always bothered me about flash units I've owned.>>>>There might be some quicker way to change filters, rather than screwing them on and off. Magnetic? Velcro? Bayonet Mount? >>>>Do Leica marketing people monitor forums like this? They'd be foolish not to! (Think of all the good laughs they'd miss!)

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), January 10, 2002.

Improvements to the M6:

1. An OFF SWITCH for the damn meter: most of the wear that I put on the shutter-speed dial is from twiddling the wretched thing back to "B" so the battery doesn't drain in the camera bag, and then having to twiddle it back to a usable speed to actually take a picture. This is surely the stupidest omission Leica ever made.

2. Go back to the M4 viewfinder which, unlike the M6 one, is absolutely immune to flare.

3. While I'm at it, go back to the M4 viewfinder with its 50mm ONLY frame and slightly greater magnification: the best 50mm viewfinder ever. If I can afford three grand for a 75 Summilux I can afford to buy another camera for it...

4. Oh, hell: just put a meter in the M4 and forget all the other "improvements" in the M6. I never use my M4 because the M6 is so much more convenient for real picture-taking, but the M4 is the silkiest piece of machinery I have ever e

-- Nicholas Hartmann (polyglot@execpc.com), January 10, 2002.

For those of you who wished for a uncluttered viewfinder, DAG can remove the frameline sets you do not want. They may be able to modify the frameline shapes but you would have to ask them.

The ISO dial is on the back because there is simply no where else to put it. If you have ever had the top plate off an M camera, you would realise that ever spare nook and cranny is used for something.

Tom A. is working on a battery compartment lid which will have a on/off switch in it. Coming soon hopefully.

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), January 10, 2002.

design from scratch a leaf shutter body so that you can flash synch at all speeds but I think their R&D budget prohibits this.

Uh guys, the original post referred to a leaf shutter in the body not leaf shutter lenses. A great idea because all M lenses would theoretically be compatible. I would love to have a camera like that but I wonder about vulnerability to shock. One can always dream...

-- Fred Sun (redsky3@yahoo.com), January 10, 2002.

>it would design from scratch a leaf shutter body so that you can flash synch at all speeds<

Anybody here ever seen a Copal #3 shutter on a LF lens? One that allowed clearance for 35 negative area would be even bigger! And BTW, the max shutter speed on a Copal #3 is 1/125th... Improbable idea, me thinks.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), January 10, 2002.

Given an M6TTL the only real improvements I would like are:

- less flare in the rangefinder focusing patch - a meter on/off switch separate from the shutter speed selector

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), January 10, 2002.

All I want is for someone--preferably but not necessarily Leica--to design either a digital body or digital back with upgradable sensor and software, with M-mount, so that my substantial investment in Leica lenses feels more secure over the long-term. I just ordered some Novoflex adaptors for my Leica R lenses to fit EOS bodies for just such a reason.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 10, 2002.

My dream of a new M camera would be similar in all aspects to the current M6 like size, shape and weight, but with these differences:

-a higher sync speed like 1/250. -a simple AE mode with exposure memory lock on the shutter release ā la "R"

As for all this jazz regarding the cosmetics, like the finish and sound of the older M3/M4, it seems to be the desire of people who look more at their camera than taking pictures with it. In the last 21 years, I had one M3, three M4s, one M5, two M4-2s and 2 M6. They were great and yes, they had "panache". But my current M6 TTL is, by far so far, the best "M" I have used. Pierre Charbonneau

-- Pierre Charbonneau (charbonneaup@videotron.ca), January 10, 2002.

Letsee now,

1) A larger viewfinder, with more eye relief for the glasses wearers. 0.91 or greater, a la the M3. (If you've never used the M3 with both eyes open, you're missing a real treat)

2) An indication in the viewfinder indicating if the camera is wound.

3) Loose the meter, and give me back the self timer.

4) A larger lens opening, so the next generation Noctilux doesn't vignette.

5) A digital back, to clip in as a replacement to the film pressure plate back, whenever digital photography is necessary. (This would also give you back the meter. It's resolution should be at least 3600x2400 (About 26 Mega pixels, if it's a color back.)

6) A rewind knob like that found on an Alpa.

On the off chance that someone from Leica is actually reading this, I will not buy an AE Leica. Or an AF Leica.

-- Tom Bryant (boffin@gis.net), January 10, 2002.

_ A modern 90 or 100 mm macro lens for the visoflex _ And perhaps 200 mm for the same Higher flash speed An easier meter to use . I am not a spot fan That should do it for now . Oh yes get rid of the rangefiner glare . tx

-- Don Bonamer (b3435@webtv.net), January 10, 2002.

I would like to take all the people who want to change, and ruin, the King, and send them to Afganistan, never to return.

-- Glenn Travis (leciaddict@hotmail.com), January 10, 2002.

Relocate the hotshoe more to the left for better ergonomics when using external finders. I would say directly above the built-in finder so there will be room on the other side to engrave "Leitz". :^} Notice how the new zoom finder leans to the left? Even Leica got the point.

-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), January 10, 2002.

........I use a CosiVoit double hotshoe for this purpose but if my suggestion above makes the M6 ugly then add the M3 window dressing to compensate. :)

-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), January 10, 2002.

Digital. Some sort of REAL digital M camera.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), January 11, 2002.

"I would like to take all the people who want to change, and ruin, the King, and send them to Afganistan, never to return."

Glen, please please please send me to Afghanistan. I'm stuck here and dreaming of it. You can send me a cheque, my email addres is below.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 11, 2002.

Another second here for Giles' recommendations. I don't particularly crave a self-timer on it, though. And I agree with John: the old- fashioned screw head would be welcome in place of the dot, red or otherwise.

Another idea: modify the frame selector lever to select only one of the two brightline frames at a time. Like clicking it in for the wider frame, and out for the longer one. So you get 28, 50, and 90 in one position, and 35, 75, and 135 in the other.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), January 11, 2002.

Oops, that won't work, I guess. 35 and 135 are on the same cam. OK. How about 28, 35, and 50 in position "W" and 75, 90, and 135 in position "T" (?)

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), January 11, 2002.

All I need more is a self-timer (I think).

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), January 11, 2002.

Giles is right on. Were there such a camera available, I'd put my order in straightaway.

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), January 11, 2002.

Every thing has been said. I should want to have a cental tripod screw, may be an incorporated right hand gripp (which will give some place for batteries...), a real independant switch on/off of the lightmeter, not great changes AND a removable digital back! Best regards, Alain

-- alain.besancon (alain.besancon@chu-dijon.fr), January 11, 2002.

we all hava a camera body we love, and we love it very much, so that we spend so much of our lives shooting rolls through it, but we all want to change it, improve it, but we can be so unconscious of itīs design, that we ask for simple and at the same time amazing things this design canīt do. donīt pay much atention, itīs 3:15 am and Iīm drunk.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), January 11, 2002.

All I want is the M2 back in production, perhaps with M6 loading (i.e. rapid loading) system. That's all, really!

No.2 in the wish list is a digital M or digital back--the latter to be used with the M2, of course. 12 Mp would be just fine. And there's space 'below' the M body proper for the electronics and the CompactFlash slot.

If we get a digital M body, it should have a shutter with 30 - 1/16,000 sec. (all X-sync with rear 'curtain' sync as standard), a true spot meter & evaluative metering, and shiftable program & manual exposure mode. As we've gone all-electronic by now, we can integrate a viewfinder that shows only one frame at a time, whose size changes according to distance; it should be 0.58 magnification for 28 & 35mm, 0.72 for 50 & 75mm, and 1.5 for 90 & 135mm.

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), January 11, 2002.

> How about increasing the # of frameline templates in the rangefinder mechanism so that each template has only 1 frameline? Simple is better right? <

Yep, eggxactly John

-- sparkie (sparkie@mailcity.com), January 11, 2002.

None! They have cheaped them up enuf already.

-- Al Henry (J Henry@provide.net), January 11, 2002.

I'd immediately swap my trusted and beloved M6 classic for a M7 that would:

integrate motor, modern shutter, DX and AE capabilities ā la Konica RF; offer spot/average/matrix metering options ā la R8; offer an intelligent AE lock system ā la Contax; offer TTL flash management; offer variable magnification viewfinder (0.58, 0.85, 1.0); maintain current telemeter base (with better flare control) offer lcd in viewfinder w/shutter speed, exposure scale, nr of frames.

It would obviously maintain Leica's high build standard (like the R8), and be supported by a roadmap for future digital M developments.

There are no good reasons for substantial size increase (except maybe some thickness at viewfinder level for the variable magnification management) or radical aspect change.

Only tricky requirement from a development point of view is the variable magnification viewfinder.

-- Jacques (jacques.balthazar@hotmail.com), January 11, 2002.

The conclusion seems to be that many people are broardly happy with the current M TTL, a few would like an "improved" all electronic model (basically an EOS or Nikon F in the M body) and a large number of us would like a return to the simple old M2 or M4.

Surely by continuing to offer just one model which has very minor "improvements" every now and again Leica is missing the boat somewhat?

Is it not time to expand the M range a la the Nikon F series or EOS range to cover all tastes from basic light tight box to electronic box of tricks?

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), January 11, 2002.

"Is it not time to expand the M range a la the Nikon F series or EOS range to cover all tastes from basic light tight box to electronic box of tricks? "

If Leica had the financial resources, R&D staff, etc., that Nikon/Canon have, then this might make sense. But they don't.

I want a digital body that will mount M (preferably) or R lenses. Lose the Rotpunkt, put a switch on the battery, beyond that they should leave the camera alone; they've done enough damage already.

As far as I'm concerned, the M6TTL is the best Leica M camera I've ever used (and I think I've used 'em all on one occasion or another). Also, IMO, the M6TTL may be the worst M camera Leica has ever made. I suppose they could figure out a way to cheapen it further, so I don't want to encourage them.

What's this recurring obsession with self-timers? Buy a Hama screw-in thingie for $20 and through it in your bag. Are there really people out there who use a self-timer regularly? Why?

-- Robert Schneider (rolopix@yahoo.com), January 11, 2002.

Nothing from Leica but I hope Konica RF will have .85 viewfinder (no need for .72 vf). In addition, but not importnat, to have TTL with 1/250 sec flash sync. Better flash with fast flash cycle time.

-- kenny chiu (amchiu@worldnet.att.net), January 11, 2002.

Robert - "If Leica had the financial resources, R&D staff, etc., that Nikon/Canon have, then this might make sense. But they don't"

Can't you see, what many of us want is for them to rebuild the M2/M4, how much R&D does that take for goodness sake - just dust off the old plans and start filing that brass!!!

Sorry but self timers (built in, not those sticky out top retro accessory things) are incredibly useful.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), January 11, 2002.

Giles, I'm again right on your side. And I wish they'd finally stop saying they need the space (for batteries etc). It was a long time ago that the very first M6 dropped by, and since then the amount of volume an M really needs must have dropped considerably.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), January 11, 2002.

After reading all the responses in this long post, it becomes obvious why Leica takes 20 years to make any changes to their cameras. If they actually tried to cater to their customers, they'd have to have about 30 different variations of the M camera on the market at the same time-the company would be bankrupt within 6 months. The rumors of the new camera in the post several above this one suggest the next generation M will be almost exactly like an M6TTL but with an "A" on the shutter dial.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), January 11, 2002.

Andrew - good point! However I think they could make three (maybe four!).

1.Rebuilt M2/M4 2.M6 (TTL) if necessary. 3.M7 AE, TTL, motorwind. 4(Perhaps) Voigtlander Bessa/Leica CL type economy RF M compact.

That would surely please most of us :)

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), January 11, 2002.

"Can't you see, what many of us want is for them to rebuild the M2/M4, how much R&D does that take for goodness sake - just dust off the old plans and start filing that brass!!! "

I see clean, used M2's and M4's for sale all the time, and for far less than a new one would cost. Add $200 for a CLA and the camera (particularly the M4) would be as good or better than new.

As far as the M2/M3 advance lever, buy one from Leica service. Someone in this group has put one of these things on an M6. Check the archive. Though I think the M4-style swivel advance lever is the best manual advance lever ever put on a camera. A great design. Horses for courses. . . .

I fail to see how engraving would make any camera a better picture-taking tool.

"Sorry but self timers (built in, not those sticky out top retro accessory things) are incredibly useful. "

OK, I'll bite: How?

-- Robert Schneider (rolopix@yahoo.com), January 11, 2002.

"I fail to see how engraving would make any camera a better picture- taking tool."

Robert, you are right of course, it has no intrinsic effect on picture taking. However it is symbolic of so much of what Leitz USED to stand for and just one of many aspects of modern M's (see various points above for others!) that a great many of us miss.

Self timers? Well on my M2, sorry but I do like to take pictures of my family with everyone included - it is possible to do this without creating the stereotypical "timer" shot!

Also, it allows the shutter to be released vibration free.

If set on "B" it provides a 2 second shutter speed!

It just looks "right" and balances the look of the M!

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), January 12, 2002.

I have just one wish: Shutter speeds in half stops! In low light, when the lens is completeley open the adjustment of the shutter in full stops is too coarse. For example, 1/60s is too short, 1/30s is too long, so I have to close the lens for 1/2 f-stop. Result: Adjustment takes longer than necessary I can't use the lens at its fastest (and expensively paid) f-stop I get longer exposure times than necessary with the risk of unsharp pictures.

-- Thomas Haller (thomas.haller@web.de), January 12, 2002.

Interesting thread! Improvements? Reality first: yes, a meter switch, but designed into the rewind lever. Try this: hold the camera as if you're about to shoot, then locate the rewind lever with your right hand middle-finger. See how natural that is? Now, imagine just giving it a little tug in the direction opposite that for engaging rewind, which would activate the meter regardless of whether or not the shutter has been wound.

Also, 90mm framelines with corners! And a way to attach the motor mid-roll, without needing a darkroom!

Now for the fantasy! A re-designed auto-Visoflex, with its own meter, shutter dial coupled to the M-6, and line of dedicated lenses, starting with a 65macro and going longer.

A series of three leaf-shutter elmarits (35,50, and 90) with a gear-coupling to an idler which would swing out from the M's lower curtain drum as these lenses are mounted, or when the cameras speed dial was set to "B-S" (Bulb-Shutter), after which user speeds are set on the lenses. Setting the Cameras shutter to its regular speeds would disengage the lens-shutter, and focal-plane shutter would come back into use. I've had M's apart and this looks possible!

Most importantly, if the R+D required to actually do any of this stuff would ever jeopardize all the good things about the M-6 in any way, then I'd say leave well enough alone!

-- John Layton (john.layton@valley.net), January 12, 2002.

I have heard from a good source that Nikon are about to release a rangefinder the size of the M6 with all the good bits of the F100 (matrix,spot,AE,etc),but it will take Leica M lenses.This is why they re-released the S2(?)rangefinder from the 60's,they were drumming up interest.He(my good source...)says it has a rubberised body over titanium body and thumb wheel control. If it is true,I want one.

OK,you will ask-the good source works for Fuji UK.Nikon collaborate with them over film issues(dx,etc)

-- Phil Kneen(Isle of Man,UK) (philkneen@manx.net), January 12, 2002.