Chris Nicholls of the Camera Store has been let loose with the Leica M-D. He’s no Leica fan but came away with a relatively positive view of the camera. As with many reviewers, though, he feels there should be some additional features—for instance, a dedicated exposure compensation dial, a choice of exposure options other than the standard centre-weighted. Neither of these options are available on any Leica M, stripped down or otherwise. Nor is in-body stabilisation, which Chris feels would improve the versatility of the camera. Again, in common with many reviewers, he objects to the fact that the M-D is more expensive than other models in the range which do have more electronic gizmos (including a screen).
Much of this misses the point. The M-D is aimed at the purist and, in this respect it is truly targeted. If you want a screen then buy an M262 or one of the other cameras in the range. If you want stabilisation and a dedicated exposure dial you’re out of luck. Look elsewhere. As for price, the M-D is always going to be a niche product, a low-production model and the costs have to be amortised over a smaller number of cameras. Higher price is the result; but those who really get the M-D philosophy will pay the price.
On balance, though, Chris recognises the M-D for what it is. He doesn’t wholly understand—probably because it isn’t his sort of camera—but he accepts that it does have appeal.
- Read the Macfilos review of the Leica M-D
- Subscribe to Macfilos for free updates on articles as they are published. Read more here
- Want to make a comment on this article but having problems? Please read this
It is an interesting camera. The absence of the screen improves tactility and diminishes vulnerability, which both are good things. Since I’ve entered the world of the digital M I love to shoot wide open most of the time, so checking focus is the main reason for viewing the screen. Otherwise I have no problem living without it. I also prefer the flush, solid metal ISO dial, over the slightly protruding plastic one on the M7. But I wonder why Leica didn’t opt for the addition of an auto ISO setting on the ISO dial. Like the RAW-only choice that was made, auto ISO with a fixed minimal shutter speed of 1/focal lenght would have been fine for me, and would have added to the versatility of the camera. Also Leica could have implemented the format function simply by pushing both buttons of the camera simultaneously for for instance at least ten seconds, in a way similar to the Nikon pro cameras.
Agreed, especially in relation to the well-crafted ISO dial. As far as the auto ISO is concerned, I would also have welcomed some method of achieving this. I suspect the reason it isn’t there is simply down to the difficulty of setting the parameters in the absence of a menu screen. However, I tend to agree with you that a fixed auto setup would have kept most people happy. The same applies to the format although I regard this as less of a problem. I am now quite used to doing this (when necessary) on the Mac.
By coincidence, there happens to be an interesting read today on the subject of (the lack of) image stabilization by Ming Thein, https://blog.mingthein.com/2016/08/19/stabilisation-is-good-but-only-up-to-a-point/. Pay attention to the last paragraph, where he mentions the susceptibility to sag of lenses and cameras, regardless of manufacturer. A non-issue for Leica M 😀
Thanks, I will take a look. Experts do say that image stabilisation detracts from image quality but I have no definitive experience to call on. I really don’t miss it on the M because I always set the maximum shutter exposure pretty high in the auto ISO box. This doesn’t always work on other cameras–such as the Panasonic GX8 I have just acquired. While you can set the ISO range there is no way to limit the speed. I’ve had a few spoiled shots in low light where the speed went down to 1/8s and caused blur. Even the stabilisation couldn’t cope with that.
I too fell for the Panasonic GX8 recently. The fact that my wife photographs with a Panasonic G6, so we can exchange lenses, the Leica form factor and the compactness and weight advantage of the lenses made it a logical choice. I must say I am quite happy with the camera and the results I get, but the absence of a shutterspeed limit with auto ISO is an obvious omission.
Glad to hear that. The lack of a speed setting in the ISO parameters is probably my only serious complaint. Panasonic isn’t alone. I think (but am not sure without checking) that the Olympus PEN-F is the same. The Leica DG lenses are superb, I agree.
I think Chris Nichols did a fairly good review aimed at someone who uses a current APS C mirror less camera.
I also like Chris’s reviews and I agree with the point you make. It is very difficult to forget your personal prejudice and think in terms of the target audience – and the audience for the M-D is an odd bunch. I include myself in it
His reviews are ok but sometimes he misses the point. The camera is what it is. Otherwise it would be something else… Since when has any Leica film camera had in body stabilisation ? I think is is exactly what people want. I’m gonna get one, in fact if I had the money I would get the M60, in all my 50 years as a photographer I think is the most beautifully designed camera I have ever seen. Pure and simple. If you need all the extra bells and whistles you are just using technology to make you look good. I like the digital era and I am no Luddite but choose the camera you want for your way of working. Stop trying to review camera A and turn it into camera B. My dream camera would be the M60 Monocrom. And as regards price maybe it is expensive, but they aren’t gonna sell thousands. Bugatti Cheron ain’t cheap either.
Gary
I agree entirely with your comments. I love the M-D and we should not be pushing for more features. As Chris points out, if you want more for less money just buy the M262. The point you make about the M60 is valid. But assume it is an M-D, add a 35mm Summilux, with a bit extra because it will be a collector’s item, and you come to about the same price as the M60 is selling for now. It should be possible to buy the kit edition for £7,500 which is something of a bargain!
I hate to say it, but one way that the M-D might become a collector’s item would be if the model were discontinued. Rarity is one of the key factors in determining collector value. Originality is also a factor and so the M60 will always have that as a ‘first’. As I have said before on this site, it is probably too early to determine the long term collector value of digital models, but there is a nascent market for very early digital cameras. I am very sorry at this stage to have got rid of a 1997 digital camera some years ago.
William
I have thought for a long time that there is a growing market for classic digital cameras. I always cite the Leica Digilux 2 which is now 12 years old but still commands upwards of £600. Similarly, the original digital PEN I bought recently is enjoying some new popularity in the wake of the PEN-F introduction. Nor does the M8 show any signs of falling off its perch and the M9 is winning back converts who had previously upgraded to the M240. The fact is all these cameras are still capable of superb photography–especially the M9. The M-D, because of its simplicity, will always remain a good bet for canonisation (or should I say Leicaisation).
As with cars and all other products, a lot of dross will be lost on the way, but the trick is to identify cameras as keepers before they become recognised as classics. I would certainly now hang on to Digilux 2s, M8s and M9s and I am not going to rush to sell the M-D.
Most of the cameras mentioned still have very good current user value as they are all excellent cameras. It would be a much longer term before a true collector market would emerge in which such cameras would be collected as historical artifacts. Perhaps the Digilux 2 is about entering that phase now. I’ll put a word in with the Pope for the M-D!
William
Yes, that should do it. I’ll settle for a beatification for the moment. I presume you have a direct line to Himself in Rome.
You are quite right on all this. I do wish non-Leica reviewers would stop banging on about price. There’s not much can be done with a camera that is more or less hand made in an expensive western country. Apart from anything else, the rangefinder mechanism alone costs between $750 and $1,000, a cost that mirrorless camera manufacturers don’t face. And, as you rightly say, within any sector there are cheap, premium and luxury marques that attract different audiences. Thank goodness we have Leica to offer a real alternative.
He is one of the younger generation, but he still manages to get some fine photos with an ‘old fashioned’ camera. He mentions my main issue with the current M digital cameras, the badly designed exposure compensation, which slows up using the camera. He wants the same type of compensation that is to be found on the Fujifilm models, just as I do. He also mentions another issue about centre-weighted exposure which makes the current Ms very sensitive to light and makes using the camera without the screen even more difficult. While this might seem to make it more like a film camera, with negative film (particularly black and white) you get a lot of latitude whereas digital is more like slide film in my experience.
I think that he does get what the M-D is about, but he concludes that the camera is not for him. Price is a big issue for most people, particularly in North America, where they seem to talk about little else. On this side of the pond, price is a ‘vulgar topic’. If you have to ask etc.
William