Does anybody think Leica were rather arogant in not changing the naming sceme for Ms?

[ajuk]

Forget the issue of whether or not they should have started a new naming scheme, do you think Leica were rather arrogant to think they could never or need to improve on the M7?

 

[ruilourosa]

they could never or needed to improve M3...

 

[cliveh]

Or the M2.

 

[OddE]

Seeing as Leica has manufactured both analog and digital cameras under the M prefix, I can't see any reason why they shouldn't be able to keep mixing the two - if there ever is another analog M, there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to call it the, say, M13 or something like that. Or am I completely missing your point?

 

[clayne]

With the release of the M8/M9, Leica has only gotten more arrogant.

It tends to go with the territory that those cameras attract.

Me personally, I'm cool with my M4 and pre-ASPH Summicron 35.

 

[tony lockerbie]

Don't care what they call them....shows how good the M2/3 were in their day....and still..

 

[fstop]

Does anybody think Leica were rather arogant in not changing the naming sceme for Ms?

In the grand scheme of things I'm sure Leica not only knows or can justify how they decide to name their product line. I don't think its up to people who can't be as detailed oriented as Leica.

 

[BobD]

... do you think Leica were rather arrogant to think they could never or need to improve on the M7?

I don't know what Leica thinks.

 

[semi-ambivalent]

Seeing as Leica has manufactured both analog and digital cameras under the M prefix, I can't see any reason why they shouldn't be able to keep mixing the two - if there ever is another analog M, there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to call it the, say, M13 or something like that. Or am I completely missing your point?

If they waited a couple revs they could do another of their endless special editions. It could be, oh I don't know, black maybe. Call it the MI5.

s-a

 

[John Koehrer]

Years ago I used an M60, it would blow any of the others mentioned away.

Walk softly and carry lots of ammo.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

If they'd called their models something like "MOS Terminator XXX Super 5 Plus", placed labels such as "digitally activated GO Button" next to the shutter release and given them a plastic lens mount ("Technocomposite advanced mount" of course), they would have sold lots more...

 

[John Austin]

Arrogance? - It is their camera and they can call it what they like, even Gerald - Hmmm, I like the idea of a Leitz digicam called Gerald

 

[Ian Grant]

Is it arrogant to keep their model numbers simple ? Other manufacturers make it to confusing often having different names in the US to the rest of the world.

At least with an M series Leica you know lenses are compatible with all models, they have the same basic layout of functions.

Ian

 

[Mackinaw]

How about the Nikon F, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6?

Jim B.

 

[NB23]

How about the Nikon F, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6?

Jim B.

Now that's downright insulting!!

 

[zsas]

I don't understand the question, the M line is a line differentiated by the M (as in mount) and number/letter. Did Leica say the M7 is the last film camera? Didn't they re-introduce the MP in 2003? I think their simplicity of naming is elegant

 

[BrianL]

I am confused what the question is asking. M stands for the lens mount and the # for the camera in the series. Mixing analog and digital in the numbering series is okay with me and less confusing then say the numbering series of Canon and Nikon or even Olympus dslrs.

Most companies numbering system is at best confusing. Changing a model for the sake of change makes no sense. Imagine if in 1963, they change the Corvetter to Mako Shark as was bounced around; only a couple of years later the name and design would not mesh so, possibly forcing GM to rename the car, maybe Chevette or Vega and then a few years later something else. A total loss of the continuity of history.

 

[EASmithV]

Arrogant? Leica? Naturally.

How about the Nikon F, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6?

Jim B.

At least Nikon was sensible enough to create a D series for digital and leave the F series for film. You don't need to worry about the prefix determining lens mount as they all take the same.

Years ago I used an M60, it would blow any of the others mentioned away.

Walk softly and carry lots of ammo.

If they'd called their models something like "MOS Terminator XXX Super 5 Plus", placed labels such as "digitally activated GO Button" next to the shutter release and given them a plastic lens mount ("Technocomposite advanced mount" of course), they would have sold lots more...

Careful, you're going to offend some Canon guy

 

[Dinesh]

Arrogant? Leica? Naturally.

Get a grip!

 

[fotch]

Arrogant? Leica? Naturally.

At least Nikon was sensible enough to create a D series for digital and leave the F series for film. You don't need to worry about the prefix determining lens mount as they all take the same.





Careful, you're going to offend some Canon guy

The D is for dumb! Just kidding. I own a D and a bunch of F, and Leica M's, it gets worse with the budget models in both brands.

 

[Someonenameddavid]

M stands for "mess sucher" or "messucher" which translates to split image rangefinder. M3 has 3 frames for different lenses, M2, two. The M4 originally four (I think) then it gets messy.

 

[mhcfires]

Years ago I used an M60, it would blow any of the others mentioned away.

Walk softly and carry lots of ammo.

I have a Leica M2. The Browning M2 was a really cool one, too.

 

[msbarnes]

I don't find anything arrogant about the naming.

The only possible argument for arrogance, to me, is the price.

 

[Lee L]

M3 has 3 frames for different lenses, M2, two.

M3 has 3 framelines, 50, 90, 135.
M2 also has 3 framelines, 35, 50, 90.
M2 was introduced after the M3, with simpler construction in some aspects.

Lee

 

[clayne]

M4 has 3: 35, 50, 90