Short update on the Leica Mini M rumor. I got feedback from trusted sources and they confirmed that the image and specs I posted yesterday are correct.
One more thing: Quite many people argued that the Leica Mini M image must be fake because of the 28-70mm FF equivalent marks on the lens while the front of the lens says “18-46mm”. I just want to remind you that actually this confirms that the image is real 🙂 Because the past Leica Digilux series had exactly that kind of “double” markings. See the images of the Digitlux 2 at Amazon (Click here). The camera has a 7 – 22.5 mm lens (marked on the front of the lens) and a zoom ring with the 28 – 90 mm equivalent mark. To make it easy for you I show you the image here:
So have peace. That’s the camera Leica will announce on June 11! It is going to challenge the Hasselblad Lunar in the category “most non-sense camera of the year” 🙂
59 Responses
I am sorry to see this – very disappointing. Many of us have old M-mount lenses from the film days and would like an inexpensive M camera on which to use them at their native focal length. But the 240 and other M bodies are just too expensive to justify with other family expenses, mortgages, etc. A modest real M body without the rangefinder but electronic finder would be perfect!
Dump those lenses or else look for (now discontinued) Ricoh cam.
“[…] at their native focal length”
If I’m not mistaken the GR M module is APS.
Yes, that is correct. The choices then are: Used M9/p, MM, and the new M (full and not mini). All expensive. Hence the earnest suggestion to dump the lenses.
That’s what I did… My m6 was a joy to use, but when I got my Ricoh grd III I switched to digital only. I’ve waited patiently with all my M lenses for something to come up, even tried the GXR mount…
With this I have lost all interest in Leica, their FF bodies are probably great (never had a chance to use one), but MiniM has a different name to me and is called Fuji X100s.
Notabene, isn’t it funny that Leica’s MiniM camera doesn’t have an M-Mount?
You use them at their native focal length on any sensor, but I assume you mean use them at their intended field of view on a full frame (135 format) sensor? I don’t imagine you will see a sub $1500 or $2000 full frame mirrorless camera. Maybe see what Sony does next year.
secondhand Epsons …..great with old lenses
The one so far for that is the MM which also happens to be the best digital M ever. A pity that it is atrociously priced and out of the hands of many potential RF exponents who would put that to good use.
Available readily in a Leica boutique store near you! 🙁
I agree, I would love to have a Monochrom, but the cost is just too high to afford with other family commitments.
Opinion: if Olympus or Panasonic introduced a micro 4/3 true monochrome camera at reasonable price (<$1000 perhaps?), I think there would be decent sales. Casual users look at you as if you are nuts when you say you want a true B&W camera, but there are still plenty of former B&W film users out there who would be interested.
Yes, I agree. There will be a larger sensored possibility soon. Keep your eyes open and wallet closed. 😉
What larger-sensored option? From whom and when? Now you have me interested. As for keeping my wallet closed, no problem. Mine does not have much in it…..
Nightmare continues….
If i want a zoom lense i will buy Panasonic 12-35 F2.8.
Spend money to spend money ,i prefer drink it in champagne.
TIPA 2014:
The nominees for Most Nonsense Camera of the Year are:
Hassy Lunar – The Hassy Lunar is nominated for it’s exquisite build and exotic materials at the same time delivering the photographic performance of a camera five times cheaper while also having no lens designed or manufactured by Hasselblad themselves.
Leica Mini M – The Leica Mini M competes in a non-existent market of slow zoom fixed lens APS-C cameras of which it’s price is near the rather revolutionary Sony RX1.
I fully agree that the Lunar was not created from a photographer’s point, but more likely as a way for Hasselblad to boost revenues in order to survive. One correction, though: Hasselblad have never designed nor manufactured a lens. Their primary lens partners have been Zeiss, Fuji, and Kodak.
what a HUGE miss from Leica if this is true. In the Leica ad, it should have been labelled, Micro 2 M, really the only difference between this and the X2 is the zoom lens.
Leica is teasing us too much on the possibility of a FF fixed lens or M mount FF mirrorless. We can only dream.
I guess,we have to wait until someone else makes a FF mirrorless – Sony, Fuji or Ricoh?
Sony is already working on the FF NEX and its first batch of matching lenses.
Stay tuned.
There is nothing coming from the Fuji camp or the Ricoh camp so, Sony can have that market to itself so far.
The RX1 shows that Sony can truly make it happen.
Leica Mini M : 18-46mm f3.5-6.4
Canon G1X : 15-60mm f2.8-5.8. MUCH smaller lens.
Fuji X : 18-55mm f2.8-4. About the same size, excellent IQ.
Enough said.
Actually, according to early reviews the Lunar actually has horrible build quality and much lower material quality than the NEX-7 from which it was based. There is a lot more cheap plastic used (don’t be fooled by the pictures, most of it is actually plastic). The knobs and buttons have a much cheaper feed than on the NEX-7.
Although the lens and sensor (and price) don’t seem that good … the design looks great. Would be nice to see if they have a neat and tidy layout on the rear of the camera.
As an XPro1 owner, I’m sick to death of all the buttons and the wacky combinations of presses needed to do anything with that camera …. would welcome some well thought-out design into this market.
If it is anything like the full size Leica M series, the controls and the UI will actually be pretty bad. Luckily, you don’t need to dive into the menus much because there aren’t that many options to actually change.
“As an XPro1 owner, I’m sick to death of all the buttons and the wacky combinations of presses needed to do anything with that camera …. would welcome some well thought-out design into this market.”
what do you mean? you have aperture ring on the lens, you have shutter speed dial on the top plate, you have exposure comp on dial on the top plate and shutter release button on the top plate – what other buttons and combinations are you on about?
Nice looking camera, I would consider buying for 800 Euro.
For over 2000Euro I would expect OVF IS and 2.8 constant aperture.
Let’s wait and see the final info at launching day.
I might appear stubborn, but I won’t believe it until I have seen it officially presented by Leica. This lens is so slow it does not make any sense on a fixed lens camera.
I agree. That would be the slowest lens ever on a fixed lens camera, no? So, I guess Leica is breaking new ground again! 🙂
In fact if it’s not a bad joke,that camera not need a teaser never…not good for Leica’s image.
Slow zooms like this have always been the norm… fast zooms are not the norm. Leica competes with itself. This will sell…just not to those who are serious about photography.
I’ll take this instead:
Fuji XE-1 with the 18-55 mm F2.8-F4 OIS lens.
Same “gestalt” as the mini-M, only I get…
A faster lens.
Greater zoom range.
OIS.
EVF.
The ability to mount other lenses.
Half the money left in my pocket.
So it’s m4/3 sensor, 18-46 = 36-92mm equivalent f1.8?
Leica Mini M : 18-46mm f3.5-6.4
Canon G1X : 15-60mm f2.8-5.8. MUCH smaller lens.
Fuji X : 18-55mm f2.8-4. About the same size, excellent IQ.
Enough said.
even digitlux 2 has a built-in viewfinder.
what a loser …….leica cant buy a clue, have cosina remake a new digital rf ….put a low cost , basic full frame sensor rebadge it al la panny lumix minolta cl
price it at 2500 dollars and watch a billion dollars roll in
The M-mount patent run out a long time ago. Only Leica’s reputation prevented other manufacturers from introducing a M-mount because nobody wanted to be blamed to be the Leica-killer. Now, Leica has overdone it and nobody would regret another manufacturer producing M-mount full frame cameras. Leica still can sell it’s lenses or their M bodies to the ones who want a Leica.
Well, you are being quoted by DP Review http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05/29/is-this-the-new-leica-mini-m , which just stops short of confirming that the image is real. Congrats!
I am surprised they did this! They always said they are “against” posting rumors.
That is developing into a kind of a pattern. They already published E-P5 images you leaked, so now we can conclude that whenever they post such a thing, the rumor is 100% true. Because they’ve already got the camera and are testing it, so they know what it looks like.
As for why they’re doing it – I suppose they want to divert some traffic back to their website in a similar way they did with the comments. You stole the element of surprise from them with your rumors and leaks.
Still hard to believe … the lens looks like a photoshopped Panasonic m43 zoom.
Which kind of makes sense; Leica work closely with Panasonic on some products, so I wouldn’t be surprised if the basic design is from an existing m43 lens which has had its aperture compromised in order to fit it onto a (larger) APS-C sensor (while keeping the same m43-like size).
I still wouldn’t touch it with a barge-pole; but really looking forward to reviews talking about the “Leica magic” 🙂
FAKE!
100% Fake!
Any chance that it’s an interchangeable lens camera with the lens showing as the “kit” lens?
No. Leica follow their tradition in design. The lens release would be visible in the same place as on the Leica M if this was a camera with a lens bayonet.
Any chance that it’s an interchangeable lens camera and the lens showing is the “kit” lens?
Why didn´t they use the fantastic FT Lens Leica D Vario Elmarit 2,8-3,5/14-50?
Let me do something crazy and be the only one who defends this camera. In my opinion this is the perfect successor of the Digilux 2.
I do not care about red dots on my camera but I like a clean design and a no-nonsense user interface. I want to have direct access to shutter speed, aperture and focussing (incl. AF/MF choice) and I want to be able to mechanically select and view those on the top of the camera (and not just on the screen or in the viewfinder) before I put the camera to my eyes. Which other comparable camera can you offer that?
I want to have a superb mechanical zoom lens from 28mm equiv. wide angle to a short portrait tele and I do not want to change lenses. (I am not the only one: a lot of people buy ILCs and then just stay with the kit lens.) Of course everybody wants a fast and small and light zoom lens with a large sensor. However, nobody can beat the physics, and this lens is a compromise between performance and size/weight. The Fuji X Zoom which is basically one stop faster (let’s not start ridiculous discussions about 1/3 stops) is almost twice as big as this Leica lens (200cm3 versus 120cm3 estimated). Smaller and/or faster serious zoom lenses only come with smaller sensors. Perhaps Leica should have decided to go for a smaller sensor (4/3 or 1), but then the outcry would have been even louder…
The only thing I miss is an integrated EVF, the add-on evf is the weakest point of the camera.
PS: I will not talk about the price, we already all know that Leica asks mad prices, so the regular outcry everytime Leica presents a new camera has become quite boring now.
if this is indeed not a fake, how is the aperture ring on top plate going to work,as this lens is not a fixed a fixed aperture?
I guess it will work as most zoom lenses with aperture ring have been working for decades: If you choose f 3.5 the lens will simply become slower (until 6.4) at its long end, no big issue. You are right, in this case the information on the top plate will not be correct.
Hold on, where is the aperture ring? I can only see the focus ring and the zoom ring… 🙁
People are silly. This looks so nice !
The lens is not bright so it’s complete garbage ? Not all of us shoot for the sake of creamy crummy bokeh in all shots.
I much prefer to have 3 “primes” in one with outstanding quality than a zoom with horrible distorsion and low sharpness at its end.
What is a bit sad, I agree, is that Leica had so much potential to throw a ground breaking product at us. Sad they didn’t have the balls.
Yeah, the Lunar stole the thunder from Leica!
They are trying hard to catch up though! 😀
The Lunar seems to be a ridiculous rich man’s copy of Sony’s NEX.
Which compact APS-C zoom camera did Leica copy?
Hold your horses! They have not got to the APS-C size, yet! That is where the Lunar outwits the “Mini M”! 😀
[The nano M and the micro M are “rich man’s copies” of Panasonic’s cameras.]
Bob,
I’m seeing a bit of conflict in your response.
1. People ARE silly. But, in this thread, not so much. The lens is not ‘bright’ — correct. Which seems to put this camera smack dab in the middle of an already crowded pile of ‘others.’ What distinguishes this camera other than price?
2. “Creamy crummy bokeh.” Seriously? Okay, fine. Here’s the thing, though: a camera with a faster aperture doesn’t force bokeh upon you. It gives you the CHOICE. A slow camera with a limited range gives you limits. In such a case, the CAMERA is making decisions for you with those limits. You don’t want bokeh “in all shots?” Close your lens. But, what you DO get in a camera with a slow lens are imaging characteristics that are the same as what you’d get from a cellphone.
3. You say it looks “so nice,” yet you then indicate you’d prefer to have primes than a zoom.
4. You say the respondents are “silly,” yet you then agree with their consensus: that a ball-less Leica had “so much potential” — that they wasted.
No, the camera isn’t “garbage.” No camera is garbage. They’re all capable of creating SOMETHING. The issue is that this particular camera will be far too expensive for what it offers. I think a great many people/consumers feel almost ‘offended’ that Leica continues to foist these late-to-the-game devices upon the market. Leica was once known for handcrafting cameras and lenses to be used by skilled photographers. Now, they wrap a designer ‘brand’ around a Panasonic and charge 4x for it. But, hey — they’re solvent now, right?
Still believe that is fake, the Leica webpage has been updated with a caption that says: “Hear the rumors? Get the truth. June 11″