Will the new M7 be different enough from the M6TTL to cause people to actually buy the camera. Personally,an aperture-priority feature doesn't seem particularly advantageous. Couldn't I just select the aperture I want manually, and adjust the shutter speed accordingly?

-- Richard Fulco (calcinc@mn.rr.com), February 19, 2002

Answers

Yep, you can do that on any Leica. How else can you do it, in fact, in the absence of any automation. Aperture priority will be the first occurance of any kind of automation whatsoever for rangefinder Leicas. It would make photography more spontaneous for some, not much of an advantage for others. Why don't you think it's advantageous?

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 19, 2002.

AE was the great advantage of the CLE - - (which had an "average" exposure to set the shutter speed). AE has the capability to let you set the apature for whatever DOF you want, and then concentrate *only* on the focus and composition of what you're trying to capture. Yes, for deliberate and studied clicks of the shutter with today's M series, setting the apature and then fiddling with the shutter speed may be approtiate; however, many of us instinctively set the shutter speed, then turn the apature ring to center those little red lights. It's faster!

Just a thought

George

-- George C. Berger (gberger@his.com), February 19, 2002.

If you don't think that an electronically timed shutter and aperture prioity AE in a Leica M series camera is enough to warrant a new model designation, Leica is doomed.

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), February 19, 2002.

The AE and new shutter are only minor things when viewed throught the glasses of the rest of the photo world. For a lumbering sloth like Leica, they are giant steps towards becoming up to date with all the newest 1972 technology.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), February 19, 2002.

Aperature priority will only of interest IF it is incorporated into a body with a full information view finder.

-- Don M (DMALDONADOMD@ECXITE.COM), February 19, 2002.

Yes, this is certainly a Leica M7! New features such as AE and electronically controlled shutter are innovative from Leica's standpoint although Nikon did this a long long time ago...!

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), February 19, 2002.

A decent question IMO Richard! They could have simply called it an M6AE... But why didn't they??? I suspect the marketing gurus at Solms decided it was best not to even take a chance on tainting the reputation of the successful M6TTL. Of course it could be they simply wanted to avoid any confusion altogether...

Nonetheless, I suspect people will buy it -- I know I would have a few years ago -- because for many AE simplifies picture taking. However it is not nearly as accurate as careful and definitive manual metering -- and I have become so accustomed to using the manual meter, it is like having automatically-locking AE already built-in!

;-),

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 19, 2002.

I think the M7 designation came from the marketing department, not the engineering department. It's their way of saying "Now, this is *really* a new model!" The addition of AE is a help to quick shooting (but you still have to know what the meter is reading and the principle of tonality)but the biggest advantage to low-light shooters is the ability to set the lens wide open and have the stepless shutter adjust to it. With the current M6 setup you sometimes need to stop down a half stop to null the meter if the exposure is in-between shutter speeds. It remains to be seen whether the new model will cull as many or more supporters than it chances to lose from the many people who specifically like the M6 for its non- dependence on batteries. Perhaps it was just an excuse (people not wanting to admit they want a Leica for the snob appeal) but I recall a common reason why many people did not embrace the Hexar RF was that with dead batteries it's a paperweight (as anyone who has used a camera with a "backup mechanical speed" knows, it's darn near useless). From my viewpoint, once you go electronic, go all the way: high-speed shutter, higher flash sync, built-in motor, etc. We'll see if the M7 is a hit or a miss. Leicas have sold well before simply because they're Leicas.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 19, 2002.

Hey, aren't you all the same group of guys who killed off the M5?

-- Mark (Leica_M5@msn.com), February 19, 2002.

Different enough to be called to be called the M7? Sure.

Why? Because IMO the percentage of frames that will be exposed with it using the new automation will be considerable. Far more at least than were exposed using the TTL provisions of the current model. That alone, coupled with the pressure from the marketing folks, merits the "7".

If the unofficial "specs" are anywhere near correct it would truly be a departure for Leica. Not revolutionary though. That happened in the 20's. The nay-sayers will declare they are creating what amounts to a $2,000+ P&S body (sans AF so far). On the other hand, some pros whose lively hood depends on speed, may now be tempted.

The winners? The new "white box on the shelf" group. Don't knock them, they help keep the company afloat. Leica knows it, and they benefit us users.

Those with the disposable income who can't operate any of the current Ms (like my wife for example) can now take the camera off their chest and produce, if not acceptable images, perhaps properly exposed ones. Thereby impressing their coupon clipping friends.

Those who will appreciate the benefits of a more accurate shutter and in a wider speed range, even when not in the AE mode.

Finally, the battery and film companies. Less life and more shots.

The losers? The M6 TTL. Once initial demands are met, and the lines are geared up to produce all the finder/finish combinations possible the M6 TTL is history. There simply is no need for it. As I understand the M7 specs, just switch off the AE, and you have not only a M6 TTL, but a better one with the expanded speeds. I would not be surprised to hear that M6 TTL production has been suspended if not mothballed. I remind you of the dearly departed (manual) R6.2.

Take heart though folks. No Leica message boards are likely to go belly-up. I would predict at least a year of give and take discourse on whether or not its worth a damn, if not the increased price. Deals on the remaining new M6 TTLs will probably be good. Many of them and the older M6s which are used will hit the market at good prices.

Even those who lobbied for the M7 can now set their thoughts and opinions to what the M8 should be able to do. Lets see: Program exposure, autofocus, etc. Think someone at Leica isn't thinking of those (and all the new lenses they would require)? Give it 10 to 15 years.

The only surprise in these quarters is they didn't wait till the 50th birthday of the M. Perhaps they didn't think they had time to wait though. Then maybe they're saving the digital back for that......

Jerry

-- Jerome R. Pfile, Jr. (JerryPfile@msn.com), February 19, 2002.

Yes, there is enough new (apparently) to call it a new model number (which there clearly was not with the M6TTL). I passed on the M6TTL because there wasn't enough new there. But the M7 (reputedly) has aperture priority AE and something akin to "full-synchro flash" (with the proper flash unit) as well as a (presumably) more accurate electronically timed shutter. Those are significant upgrades, the only negative being the absence of full batteryless shutter speeds. For me, I'll get TTL flash with the M7, which I don't have now.

The full synchro flash capability alone will make daylight fill flash feasible, which it was not with flash sync speeds limited to 1/50 sec or less.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), February 19, 2002.

If it's OK to call an M2 an M2 and not an M3W (wide); and OK to call it an M4 and not an M3 FR/TL (fast rewind, telephoto lens) then it's OK to call it an M7.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 19, 2002.

Bob is spot on, the addition of AE (plus other un-confirmed features) is by far the biggest change in Leica M specifications in it's 48 year history.

Discounting the diversion into the M5 of course!

There, I've just totally contradicted myself!

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 20, 2002.

i can't understand those people calling the demise of "real" photography due to the introduction of a new leica m model. first, noone presses you into buying it, second, usually leica folks care so much for their camera, that you will be able to buy a nearly new m6ttl in 20 years. noone really knows yet, how the m7 really looks and handles. there are a few occasions in my photographic life, where i would love to have automation on my m6. shooting from the hip, for example, or above the head. so stop moaning before you know the cause.

-- stefan randlkofer (geesbert@yahoo.com), February 20, 2002.

Why is the launch of every new Leica always a matter of outrage and dissappointment to so many? When the M3 came out, it was seen as near-heresy to depart so radically from the design of the screw-mount body (now it's universally regarded a 'classic' and the best loved 'M' model). When the M4 came out, many saw it as a "cheapened" version of the M3 (now it's considered by many as the most practical 'M'). When the M5 came out, people shunned it because it was considered too big and not Leica-like (now it's the favourite collectible 'M', judging from prices). When the M6 came out, it was seen as a cheapened version of the M4 with a gimmickry built-in meter (now it's the most popular 'M' ever, judging from production quantities). And what happens now as the M7 is announced . . . ?

-- Hoyin Lee (leehoyin@hutchcity.com), February 20, 2002.

What use AE? On its face it would appear not much in a rangefinder. I use the shutter speed as a base for most shooting. For the type of shooting the M is great for you need sufficient shutter speed to stop action and know how much to stablize the camera. For me depth of field is not a great priority. I do use the hyperfocus settings, though,and this would help with AE. One point made above' which is very good, is that AE needs corresponding viewfinder info as to shutter speed to really be helpful. I second that thought.

-- Bob Haight (rhaigh5748@aol.com), February 20, 2002.

Hoyin makes an excellent point about outrage eventually turning to adoration over new Leicas. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out.

As for the moniker, I think M7 is totally warranted- the change fom a mechanical to electronic shutter is pretty significant, if you ask me. That alone is enough of a change that it deserves a new name. Happily, the lenses will work. As for how useful it is, well, that remains to be seen. AE without a stepless shutter, a lock, and viewfinder readout is useless. Will the new camera have all of these? If so, ok. Will the new camera flash synch higher than 1/50th? I will wait another few days and find out. Also, from all reports I've heard, it still doesn't go above 1/1000, which is a real shame when introducing a new shutter altogether, especially in 2002.

Personally, I don't want an M camera with an electronic shutter, even if it is more accurate- I vastly prefer not to depend upon batteries. I've never had a problem with my battery dependent cameras (partly because I always carry spares) but I use my Leica when I want great images made by me with no electronics, no noise, and no fuss.

But I am interested in watching this bit of Leica's history, and perhaps I will own and even love and M7 one day. Hoyin is right, after all.

Three or four more days and we'll know what this M7 is for sure.

-- drew (swordfisher@hotmail.com), February 20, 2002.

Apeture priority is convenient in that you don't have to set the shutter speed by hand.

I work in AP most of the time, and adjust the expsoure compensation for the light instead of twiddling shutter speed because you can generally set that once for a few shots instead of resetting it all the time.

-- Pete Su (psu_13@yahoo.com), February 20, 2002.

Why in the world would anybody buy an "M7" film camera as is being described? It's a solution for which there is no problem. You want automation? There are a slew of automated film cameras that do it better than Leica ever will.

An M7 digital camera...now you're talking!

-- MikeP (mike996@optonline.net), February 20, 2002.

Mike P. None of those "automated film cameras" take Leica M lenses, of which I have a slew. On the other hand, I don't really care about a Leica M7 digital, since I don't do digital photography. :-)

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), February 20, 2002.

I use film and digital; they each have advantages. I use an M2 and M6 as well as a Nikon F100 and a Nikon digital. I just can't see any reason for an automated M6-type film camera. Doesn't the Hexar take Leica lenses? To me it just seems like a minor change that doesn't really do anything better than the camera already does without the "automation."

Whatever...everybody hated the new Porsche 911 when it came out in 98, now it's "great." I expect it'll be the same with whatever Leica does - I might even buy it!

-- MikeP (mike996@optonline.net), February 20, 2002.

The question is not so much whether there is enough new for the camera to merit the name change to "M7", but whether there is enough new for people who already own M6 and/or M6TTL cameras to want to buy/trade/acquire an M7. My guess is that people buying their first M camera will certainly prefer the M7 rather tjhan an earlier model if they can afford it.

I think people who already have one or another form of the M6 will for the most part want an M7. Even if they say they don't want one now, it's only a matter of time before they buy one. I think it will sell. Sure, if you're an SLR user, there's not much revolution here. But if you're a dedicated rangefinder user, there are significant new features.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), February 21, 2002.