(FT4) Leica makes a mirrorless camera. (FT2) A Panasonic GF clone?


Our friend Valentin Sama from DSLRmagazine got some info from his reliable sources. It looks like Leica could soon announce their mirrorless camera. Valentin doesn’t know if Leica will make a Panasonic GF1/2 clone or create a new system. It’s very important to know that:
1) Leica has to choose between Panasonic and Sony sensors because Kodak doesn’t make the CMOS sensors at all!
2) Last year Leica said they will not join the Micro Four Thirds group because the sensor is to small.

But meanwhile Micro Four Thirds has become very popular and Leica could have changed their mind! We were told from our sources that Leica will get rid of the expensive and complex rangefinder system of the Leica M9.

– The Leica mirrorless system will allow you to take use of the Leica R lenses (Click here to see them on eBay).
– The Leica M9 at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, Olympus US store, FocusCamera, eBay

If Leica joins MFT you will

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • “We were told from our sources that Leica will get rid of the expensive and complex rangefinder system of the Leica M9.”

    Your sources will be wrong about this. Leica not producing and offering a complex rangefinder system is like Mercedes not offering luxury cars anymore.

    • On the other hand the rangefinder styled pro m43 slot hasn’t been filled by anybody and it is quite dubious whether or not Panolympus will do somethink about it. There really is a niche for a deluxe manufacturer like Leica. Which doesn’t mean that they would give up on their fullframe rangefinders. But there is a great opportunity for them to diversify their product range and seize a market that is obviously waiting to be taken…

    • ty

      Could not agree with you more on this. The M system will not go away in the near future.

    • Zaph

      Pretty sure that he doesn’t mean that Leica won’t be producing an M9 anymore, but that THIS camera will be less complex. A Leica Jr, or M9 Lite.

  • Alex

    I agree – if it was the same source – then “news” is pure rubbish

  • GreyOwl

    Stranger things have been known to happen…………..

  • I made a prediction that Leica would join M43 more actively on my blog:


    Would be great if they did!

  • Well, technically speaking, Leica cameras are ALREADY mirrorless…

    About you survey: I am actually interested in body AND lenses ^_^

    • Chris

      Technically, they’re not: http://www.photozone.de/slr-vs-rangefinder

      • Ouch, too complex… I’m taking your word on this, there seems to be half a dozen reflecting parts. My mistake ;)

      • This compares (film) SLR vs (film) rangefinder. Besides the film-based discussion, you might want to link something more relevant, i.e. (digital) mirrorless vs (digital) rangefinder.
        ‘course they are not the same, but they are pretty damn close!

      • MP Burke

        Thus a Leica M7 is a non reflex but a Leica M9 is a reflex??
        I think you’ve interpreted this article on Photozone incorrectly. Prior to the digital era Leicas were termed (interchangable lens) non-reflex.
        The category non-reflex contained various cameras, such as Mamiya 7, Linhofs and panoramic cameras , with or without rangefinder. Reflex cameras are those where the subject is viewed via a mirror and also includes the twin lens reflexes, such as Rollei and Yashica 124G.
        I used to think this distinction was quite simple, but apparently not.

  • JZ

    MFT in Digilux 2/3 design would be the solution.

  • Leica have already release many cameras without rangefinder. And not only in collaboration with Panasonic, but also by theirselves (what about the R or S systems?). So I see no real problem in removing the rangefinder for a new CSC…

    Regarding the rumor, a Leica mirrorless APS-C system makes no sense for me. Rebranding Panasonic cameras and design lenses would be much more cheaper and profit margins higher than designing something new from scratch. They already have one CSC, the Leica M, which is full frame and enough compact, so why to bother in doing the same think with a Sony sensor with less quality except for high ISOs?

    Let’s hope they have tested the new G3 sensor and were satisfied with it. :)

  • Igorek7

    Just a speculation, but imagine a Leica M9-style (say M10) camera with a hybrid rangefinder-electronic viewfinder and a FF-sensor supporting fast framerate (live view).

    • I can: 15000 euros.

      Quality, affordable, reliable: choose two.

  • you know my name

    Leica have several times ruled out joining the micro four thirds group. Therefore this is more likely to be a Leica R mount that has been rumoured to arrive, supported by comments from Leica management.

    • Leica R flange distance is just too big for a compact system camera. I think it is 47mm, while Leica M is 27mm and m4/3 20mm.

      • you know my name

        Yes but they do not have the issue of AF with it, so in some ways its simpler to have an M body with an R adapter. While its true you can do this right now with a Leica M, the platform isnt well disposed to the R mounts longer lenses.

        The answer for them is an EVF M mount and R adapter. The adapter just becomes an extension of the barrel that virtually all SLRs have anyway, and they have the versatility of utilising M lenses on the same camera.

      • Archer

        New R is going to be mirrorless (total guess), but it seems to me that’s the only way to use R and M lenses.

  • 43photo

    well, an m4/3 leica body that can handle my Olympus SHG glass… would be a very, very interesting offer. I really hope Leica will develop a m4/3 body to use with all that nice voigtlander, carl zeiss and Olympus high end glass…

    • ZDP-189

      “1) Leica has to choose between Panasonic and Sony sensors because Kodak doesn’t make the CMOS sensors at all!” – Well, Kodak are scaling back, but aren’t they still producing stuff like the KAI-29050? If Leica move on from Kodak they should consider further cooperation with Panasonic or undermine the relationship.

      “2) Last year Leica said they will not join the Micro Four Thirds group because the sensor is to small.” I am sure they’d be more than happy to supply their name to Lumix glass.

      “But meanwhile Micro Four Thirds has become very popular and Leica could have changed their mind! We were told from our sources that Leica will get rid of the expensive and complex rangefinder system of the Leica M9.” Exsqueeze me? That’s the best part of their system. Cosina and Fuji would love to take their place (and probably could).

      @43photo LoL. Thanks. That made my evening.

      • Absolutely true: You can take extraordinary pictures with a Leica M. But the greatness is not on the brand name, the sensor, the software inside. Greatness is in the rangefinder and the quality of the glass, and I bet it would be very difficult to get the same results if you take the rangefinder and the glass out of the system. Sadly.

        I bet that there is not much innovation to be done when it comes to lens design. 50 years ago, with no computers, it was different, but today, almost any lens manufacturer can design an top quality lens, following a classic design or a new one. Then, it comes to glass quality and tolerances. Everytime you try to make tolerances smaller, image quality improves a little bit, and cost increases exponentially. And that’s why a 50mm Summicron costs €2000 and a Canikon 50mm f:2,0 costs €200.

        So, at the end of the day, current offerings are not the result of what is possible, but what is feasible to market instead, and that means designing with the trade-off between image quality, lens size and price in mind.

        • Medved

          Actually a Canikon f/1.8 costs about 89-99 euro… with autofocus…

          • Medved

            Canikon 50mm f/1.8

  • Ganec

    > Leica has to choose between Panasonic and Sony sensors because Kodak doesn’t make the CMOS sensors at all!

    but it can use their CCD senzor .. Kodak lately presented whole family (with panchromatic sensors), one of which is usable for (micro) 4/3 system…

  • Miroslav

    There are a few more things to add …

    Valentin Sama predicted Pentax will join m4/3 which hasn’t materialized yet.

    Since Kodak is on their way out of photo business, the choice between Sony and Panasonic sensors is between continuing with full frame, going back to APS-C or entering completely new m4/3 territory.

    So far they’ve been using m4/3 group members’ sensors: Kodak and Panasonic. Sony is unlikely choice because I doubt they would continue to use both Sony and Panasonic sensors in their various cameras. But what sensor will M9 successor use then?

    If they make an m4/3 camera, it is more likely they’ll ( again ) rebrand another Panasonic instead of making of completely new one. GF1 is too old, GF2 unlikely ( a touchscreen Leica anyone :) ? ) – if they rebrand any, it’ll be G3. And the G3 will be announced – when ? – soon – in March. So, there you have it :).

  • uth

    how is this… if leica makes rangefinder camera like M series with Auto focus lenses…. ;P

    (but… their price should be…. = =”)

    • Chris

      Or if Zeiss makes a digital Ikon.

  • Considering that Leica just announced great financial results based in part on strong sales of M-system equipment, I find it implausible that they would phase out these luxury tchotchkes any time soon. (Besides, if they did, what would sultans, emirs and rock stars buy for their family snapshots?)

    And a “mirrorless” camera does not necessarily mean a “small” camera (and it certainly won’t mean an “inexpensive” camera.) If they want to offer a solution for R lens owners, a more sensible approach might be to license Sony’s partial-mirror technology, or just re-brand one of their A-series cameras. (Think Leica would never stoop to such a thing? Then you don’t remember that one of Leica’s best SLRs, the R3, was a re-branded version of one of Minolta’s best SLRs, the XE-7.)

    • DonTom

      Sultans and Emirs hire photographers, they don’t care what they use……as long as they do what they’re told.

  • Dana Curtis Kincaid

    I’m certain that Leica won’t, “get rid of”, its mechanical rangefinder system. The EFVs I have tried are still inferior, even the Oly and Sony ones.

  • vromopodarix

    I remember when Leica said that a full frame rangefinder was impossible because the image quality would be bad. Then the M9 came…

    If they do release a μ43 it could be something like X100 with interchangeable lenses, I’ll be VERY happy.

  • Andi

    “I’m certain that Leica won’t, “get rid of”, its mechanical rangefinder system. The EFVs I have tried are still inferior, even the Oly and Sony ones.”

    I like the EFV of the Pana G1 or the Oly Pen whatever much more then the one of the Olympus E-1 or E-520. Especially the last one is just rubbish compared to this sharp big and bright viewfinder my G1 is equipped with…

  • Those results surprised me!
    I don’t understand

    Why would people not want a expensive lecia m4/3, that can use all there current 4/3 lenses plus lecia’s lenses, plus all the lenses m43 can possibly support. Plus grow the system, and push panny & oly to work harder

    And on the other hand…
    We have some m43 users drooling over an expensive not so fast F2 fixed lens $1200 camera.

    don’t stone me, I know the x100 is holy to some people, I just thought more people would be interested in a m43 from Lecia, if they joined that is.
    I would be, especially if it was x100’ish

  • tttulio

    Leica are famous for their Mirrorless. what is this story about joining the mirroless bandwagon?

  • Amateur

    M43 is all about electronic and futhermore software processing. Leica Will not join m43 consortium because electronic is not its forte to say the less.
    Insteed Leica should make a kind of numeric CL. A cheaper body with EVF, M mount but no AF. The only drawback is the size of the sensor wich could be limited to APS-H (Like M8) or APS-C given the ability of CMOS sensors. Thus, APS-C would require special kit lenses (Like CL but for price).

    • If the body specification of m4/3 doesn’t specifically ask for software correction, there wouldn’t be anything to stop them from making a m4/3 body with somewhat perfect lens. Manual 25/.95 is still accepted as a m4/3 lens.

      Imagine, a Leica m4/3 camera that do marvelous with Leica m4/3 lens that doesn’t need any software correction… and do abyssimal work with the rest of the electronic m4/3 lens (terrible correction, bloody slow CD auto focus) ^^;;
      Not really a problem if they target the limited market that think the only thing deserved to be attached to a Leica camera is a Leica lens

      • Though the question would then shift to: why even bother?

  • Arthur

    if leica is going to use a sensor between a panasonic or a sony, my gut feeling says that they will pick sony. But since leica has a close relationship with panasonic, who knows. It’s easy for sony to provide for Leica as sony have capacity to produce ff sensor, we cannot say that for panasonic… so the question is will panasonic produce ff sensor for leica as a bait to keep their relationship. But all this is an assumption that kodak is out of the picture.

  • mochapaulo

    We think too much. We seem missing the “interchangeable” Leica X1. It is the alternative solution of not joining m4/3 but still able to produce a APS-C CMOS camera body which can change the lens. X1 is quite a popular model in China.

    • Archer

      X1 has a fixed lens.

      • mochapaulo

        I mean an “interchangeable version” of X1. A camera body without fixed lens.

  • Borbarad

    No m4/3 etc. from Leica.

    However the rumor is probably true, because Leica still has not declined one “rumor” and somehow seems to be working on prototypes: This is about the Next Leica R Camera.

    See: http://leicarumors.com/2011/01/20/more-details-on-the-planned-digital-r-solution-from-leica.aspx/


  • It would most likely be Fullframe,X1 or M8 size sensor they’ve already formally said they won’t make m43 and for good reason. The image quality for m43 will never be up to snuff for Leica lenses. There are just too many restrictions for a m43 size sensor. Fullframe Leica with better live view but still a RF would be sweet or even just rangefinder styling modern EVF hybrid like X100.

    • pdc

      Much as I would love to get a FF mirrorless with high res EVF, I wouldn’t be too sure of the position “The image quality for m43 will never be up to snuff for Leica lenses”. I have been using an old Summilux-M 50/1.4 on my G1 for portraits, and the quality of the images is excellent, and retains that special Leica feel, especially in B&W. For really low light, I will be using a Voigtlander 25/0.95 on the G1 and GH2.

      • I use modern Leica lenses on an EP2 and although it does produce exceptional daytime images it will never have the DOF, or lower light capability of Fullframe or APS-C. Even the VC f.95 has the DOF of an F2. M43 with Leica can’t even compare to NEX with Leica lenses. The only thing M43 has going for it is a fairly decent lens line up with relatively small lenses. In my opinion M43 is best thing going- “for today”. That will change in the near future. Contrary to popular belief.. lenses CAN be made small for fullframe.
        Lenses for M9 are small … they just don’t have the big heavy fast zooms which is where lenses will be large/heavy.
        Anyway it’s just my prediction…if the NEX had a few more buttons with better lenses… I just see no reason to go M43 except for personal preference of styling/usability. .. maybe slightly smaller slow zooms on the long in. If you shoot mainly long end m43 is actually an advantage with the 2X crop.

        I chose the EP2 over the NEX for better lenses /styling I like/ User interface.. As more and more makers enter the game and improve things like the NEX UI, lenses ect. I think M43 will lose ground.

  • Medved

    Where did you see a mirror in a Leica M ????

    • Agent00soul

      Maybe they looked inside the rangefinder?

      • cL

        Rangefinder doesn’t need a mirror. It’s not through the lens nor it is single lens reflective. That’s why there is going to be a parallax error.

        • Medved

          3 days ago | Reply

          Maybe they looked inside the rangefinder?”

          Thank you cl, some people know one or two thing about range finder =)
          Yes I looked inside a range finder, which obviously you did not…
          Which is not bad thing, but talking about something you’re clueless, is a bit.

  • Per

    Leica M9 is not expensive compared to sililar image quality cameras from Canon and Nikon. The weakness is the focusing system: a) Expensive to build, b)not accurate enough to bring out the full quality from lens/sensor/processing.
    One way or another they need to solve the focusing issues. They have said the 4/3 sensors are too small for their requirements – this is true whatever biased Olympus-lovers say/want to believe.
    There is a market niche cost/performance wise between GF/Pen level and M9 level that can be worth taking. Advanced amateurs (with full wallet) and photo-journalists/artists. For them Leica M9 is too expensive and DSLR too clumsy. The M43 cameras, amazingly good but with limitations dur to small sensor size, are up till now not supported by quality lenses. Some are good, but cannot compete with f.i. the Contax 50/1,7 that I use. However that is manual focus and that” best before” date for manual focusing is long overdue.

    • Medved

      +1 about the focus.
      But it is surprisingly easy when you get familiar with it to manage focus with a range finder. You tend to predetermine your focus. Although you won’t shoot sport with it, but anyway, you won’t shoot with anything longer than a 90mm with a RF. Well I wouldn’t.

      • cL

        Well, longer than 90mm, you’re most likely to focus at infinite anyways…, no focus to mess around. Not a macro body you mean?

        • Medved

          Yeah macro for RF seems to me quite mpossible… Well I don’t know with digital but with film anything closer than 40 cm… forget… Or well I did not try a lot of lenses so… I’m no expert with RF at all.
          About the FL yes 90mm is already long and depending on the aperture you use, a good focus isn’t automatically infinite,(especially if you compare 4/3 and 35 mm…) although you’re right, infinite does avoid a too bad focus.

          • Medved

            Euh I’m not sure if I got your point and if you got my comment right…
            When above I say “anything longer than 90mm” I refer to a 90mm lens. What I mean is RF is definitly not suited for tele, although there are some short tele lenses. And macro actually did not even crossed my mind.

          • cL

            You got to stop replying to yourself…. :-D

            Anyways, Back to main topic. Yes, I got you the first time. 90mm would be 45mm in 4/3 terms right? Well, I used Zuiko 50mm f2 a few times. Maybe it’s my shooting habit and my subject matter, I usually stand quite far way with that lens so everything is inside the frame. I rarely shoot portraits, so yeah, that case, maybe you won’t be focusing at infinite if you want to do a tight-crop.

            I’m not sure RF is good for telephoto either. RF afterall, has very little grip. I think that means “I’m not designed to be used with a big lens!” :-D Funny, I was only looking at Olympus 35 SP recently (yes, I’m trying to get a film camera), and that research gave me a lot of info on rangefinders and how they work. Olympus has made a lot of legendary cameras which are engineer marvels, which I hope people here realize that.

          • Medved

            Sorry bout that, me and IT xD !
            That I can tell you, at least on film, RF and telephoto (at least for me) do not go together well ^^ !

            When I was talking about 90mm, yes in FT it’s a 45 eq, but in 35mm it has shallower DoP, about twice, hence the longer telephoto the harder to focus… Even if the lens has a very precise marking, like leica ones, the problem, is human eyes are not xD !
            Or not in the same way ^^ So it’s a bit: “hum… Let’s guess… we’ll see later.”

            It’s not only the question of grip, Leica M for instance are quite chunky. And lenses for these cameras are made of fewer elements in order not to be to bulky.

            It’s really the problem of framing focusing. But Anyway this system is not intended for paparazzi or sport, it’s more the embodiment of street photography I think. Both people and scapes.

          • cL

            @ Medved

            Yes, longer the focal length, harder to focus…, not to mention the camera shake!!!

            Oh well…, you see, I’m not into street photography, so obviously clueless about that, though I think the proper term is zone focusing, which is something I can’t do, and I won’t do…. When I see a photo that’s off focus by 2mm, it’ll drive me nuts already. Zone focusing? You mean my photo is going to have that “soft and dreamy” look? Forget it. I bought my Olympus to get super sharp photos!

            Anyways…. Let’s see if Olympus 35 SP would work out for me. I’m trying to sell some items and use that fund to buy one. That’ll be a lot of fun, using an antique camera that has mechanics that modern people like me probably don’t understand (like it has an EV of 3-17…, what does that mean? ASA instead of ISO, etc. And I need to brush up my Sunny 16 rule, in case I need to do manual metering, though it is the only RF which has both spot and center average metering even to this date…).

          • Medved

            “When I see a photo that’s off focus by 2mm, it’ll drive me nuts already. Zone focusing? You mean my photo is going to have that “soft and dreamy” look? Forget it. I bought my Olympus to get super sharp photos!”

            Another one hit by the digital era pixel-peeping disease =P
            No, I’m kidding, we all do more or less than with digital cameras… Guess it’s natural.

            About ASA, it used to be instead of ISO.
            Nothing much changed though…
            I have fujiflm rolls at home, 200 and 800 asa. (though some probably outdated, and some the just the empty box). I have an OM-1 and a couple of lenses, but, they’re taking a bit the dust these days…

            About the metering, my OM-1 is still working… but my advice, buy a light meter, even cheap one, film exposure needs less precision than digital. Cause well the camera lightmeter might give you hard times. I have a Zenit, from 1977, just forget about the metering…

            If you shoot still subjects, try get rolls of VELVIA 50 135 or some Kodak Echtachrome 100, in daylight, you’ll be literally stunned by the results. Especially the Kodak is so vivid… (unless it’s Elitechrome, I don’t remember >_<, anyway…)

  • Medved

    I mean…
    Leica is a dead serious company. It’s a German company.
    They make a DSLR system. The Leica S system.
    They make a mirrorless system, the Leica M system.
    They won’t make anything else.
    Leica really literally is a Manufacturer.
    Not a bloody corporate company.
    They do not do much about line extension.
    It’s more about line perfection…

    (And pulling out fixed lens cameras from time to time, like it did in the film era)

  • Dana Curtis Kincaid


    If it’s so easy to make quality glass, then why the high levels of distortion and ridiculously slow F numbers on most lenses? I don’t want to correct for distortion I’n software, FYI, like I would have to do with modern Panasonic and Oly micro 43, the Nikon 24-120, etc.

    Distortion and slow lenses (that are charged a LOT for) are unacceptable.

    • @Dana,

      it is a matter of cost. My point was that design is possible today with computers, etc. The trade-off is not in design. It is in construction and allowed tollerances. But tighter tolerances mean exponential costs.

      So, every lens maker is capable of designing an extraordinary lens. Problem is that the cost of manufacturing it can make it not commercially viable.

      • Martin

        >it is a matter of cost. My point was that design is possible today with computers, etc. The trade-off is not in design.

        It certainly is. One of the most important features of m4/3 is its small size. What does it results in? Design compromises, naturally..

        >It is in construction and allowed tollerances. But tighter tolerances mean exponential costs.

        It’s not only about tolerances. The relatively short back-focus distance of the current mirrorless systems probably constitutes a challenge for the optical design, namely the correction of various aberrations. As an example, the comparison of 2 macro lenses is quite telling – the 4/3 Zuiko 50mm f/2 and the m4/3 Pana-Leica 45mm f/2.8 (with the Leica not reaching the level of the Zuiko).

  • Jonathan

    Quite simply, Leica can not afford to use a 43rds sensor as they have a reputation and tradition of excellence to uphold… they cannot allow Sony or Samsung to best them. On the other hand, they need a ‘lower end’ (relatively speaking) line of products, that will fill up a gap between the X1 and M9. This may represent a large market segment for them.

    Most chances it will not be a rangefinder – not because those are complex or expensive to manufacture but simply because they do not want to cannibalize M system sales. They had such a product (the Leica CL that was made by Minolta) and discontinued it after just one year.

    What can this new system look like? It will definitely have a large sensor (APS-C, APS-H or FF), it will definitely be based on live view (no RF, no OVF, CMOS instead of interline CCD, no mirror box even if they call it Leica R).

    What about AF? My guess is that it will have a register distance short enough to accept current M lenses, but will be announced with AF lenses as well. This will have immediate appeal to current M (digital or film) users, and will create a new market for them.

    Where will this camera be made and by who? My guess is it will be made in Japan, and so will the lenses. Most chances it will be manufactured by SONY.

    Assuming Leica keeps up with the same business model they had in previous joint ventures (Minolta, Panasonic), we should expect the same line of products being sold by both partner companies (Leica CL/ Minolta CLE, Lumix L/ Leica D). An APS-C system by Panasonic does not make sense for many reasons, but Sony fits in quite well.

    Very ironically, so does Olympus! Such a higher end line of products would eventually compensate them for dropping 43rds, and they can keep micro 43rds as a lower end product tier (they need a higher end product tier but have not come up with anything except mock-ups that look strangely leica-like). I doubt this will happen, though.

    • “They cannot allow Sony or Samsung to best them” versus “it will be manufactured by SONY” is a bit
      contradictory, don’t you find? Plus, as you said they need the “tradition of excellence to uphold”.

      • Jonathan

        I don’t find it contradictory at all. Why would you think so, when Leica branded cameras were manufactured in Japan by Minolta (assimilated into Sony a long time ago) and Panasonic?

        Leica is interested in cutting costs so that it can come up with a cheaper line of products. Mind you – cheap is relative. The Leica D and equivalent Panasonic were (from a build quality point of view) much better than anything else Panasonic has ever come out with. I think the Leica branded models were somehow subsidizing the Panasonic models.

        Now imagine a m43 Leica that sells for $2.5K or so with a kit lens (a new Leica D model) that, from an IQ POV, scores MUCH worse than the equivalent NEX or NX (cause Samsung will eventually get a better sensor). Do you think Leica is interested in letting that happen?

    • cL

      They don’t want to use 4/3 sensor because Digitlux 3 was a major flop for them. Been there, done that. I bet if the rumor is true, it’ll be FF inside. Leica makes higher end stuff, so reputation is important. Also, if you read criticism of Digilux, most of them complained it’s made in Japan with red dot on it, some complained it’s too big. Basically, nitpicks, but that’s their customer base…. You need to satisfy your customers, right?

  • Dana Curtis Kincaid


    Hear hear! Leica and Zeiss and Oly (Four Thirds -not the mcro 43 garbage) make me happy. Their lens designs are wonderful. And a Laica M is still my dream street photog camera.

    • Medved

      Yeah euh nothing wrong with that…
      I mean Leica aims for premium brand recognition and so on… You could say Zeiss in the same respect..
      But I don’t get your point regarding FT or MFT…

      • Medved

        I use FT, and gave a try to MFT but too slow for now… or not at my convenience.
        I had the chance to use Leica M thanks to a Friend, but only film ones. I liked it, a bit expensive for an amateur though.
        I tried a lot of systems and ;y other half uses Canon and seriously it’s not a bad one. But I’ more keen to wait for now and amortise my FT gear…

  • Igorek7

    ”‘Of course, we won’t stop with the M9, but it is definitely too early to discuss a successor to this model.’”
    The rest is just a self-PR.

  • AndersN

    This is not about Leica planning a compact non-rangefinder system camera, this is about Leica planning the next generation R system. Leica R users don’t care for pocketability – they are SLR users. Leica is probably cooking up something similar to Panasonic G/GH, i.e. an SLR-shaped non-SLR camera.

  • RW

    I don’t believe that Leica will ever release a m43 camera. It completely defeats the purpose of buying an interchangeable lens Leica if it isn’t compatible with any of their existing lens lineup. Why would they do that?

    The “mirrorless” camera they are rumored to be producing will likely be an update to the X1.

    • pdc

      Wow, some snoots are sure out of joint.
      Doesn’t Leica have the Sx DSLRs?
      Doesn’t Leica have the APS-C based CMOS X1?
      Doesn’t Leica have a series of other compact cameras?
      Didn’t Leica produce the Macro-Elmarit 45mm/f2.8 for Micro 4/3?
      Didn’t Leica produce the Summilux D 25mm/F1.4 for 4/3?
      Hasn’t Leica designed many lenses for Lumix compacts?
      Get real – Leica likes to make money.

      Mirrorless “system” cameras using EVF instead of mirror/prism optical finder
      are obviously the future of camera systems, and everyone will get on board,
      including Leica. The only questions are where they will start – high end,
      enthusiast, or entry consumer, and when will they start?

      RW is probably right – the most logical system camera for them
      would be to step up from the X1 with EVF and interchangeable lenses.
      They can also produce an adapter for their FF lens series.

      • Medved

        Get real Leica makes money yes.
        But Leica isn’t playing in the same category as 4/3 or other.
        They just lend their name for some products.
        In the mind of photographers, Leica is M and S lineup with side thing to collection such as the x1.

  • Thyl

    “rangefinder” consists of two separate terms, range (measurement device) and (optical) finder.

    Leica could well get rid of the range, but staying with the finder, i.e. come up with an M sytem camera in which the focus determination is done electronically, and indicators in the finder advise the user how to turn the focussing ring.
    -less mechanically complex
    -no triangulation base required, ie smaller cameras
    -the optical viewfinder could be made a zooming one.

    See, there is really no reason for Leica to join mft. They can get the same with the M system (except for the AF, but evidently, Leica users can do without)

    • Medved

      Completely agree they do not need anything else than the M lineup for their mirroless system.
      And anyway for af and so on… Come on the beauty of the Leica M IS the mechanical and analogical aspect…
      If you want to shoot SLR Leica, get a R or a S.
      They do not manufacture “discount” or “accessible products”.
      The japs are here for that.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.