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

[ajuk]

Arrogance? - It is their camera and they can call it what they like

Don't remember saying they couldn't.

 

[ajuk]

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.

It's difficult for me to explain but I thought it was really strange to me that of all the companies it would be Leica who wouldn't change the numbering scheme for digital. Most companies seemed to change their numbering scheme for digital even on lines of compact cameras that most people wouldn't care about, If I'd have been asked to guess what company was least likely to do that I probably would have said Leica.

M8 to me seemed to suggest that it was just as much a replacement for the M7 as the M7 was for the M6 rather than a fundamentally different sort of camera and with a die hard traditionalist clientele it seemed a bit weird. The reason I brought this up now is I'd said that the numbers would start to go up quick maybe once every 5 years, but no they're going up much quicker than that. I hope that even if you disagree with me you can see what I'm getting at.

As for your second point, There's a difference between creating a ridiculously confusing naming scheme and changing it for a different kind of camera, I'm not sure what your argument is.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

It's difficult for me to explain but I thought it was really strange to me that of all the companies it would be Leica who wouldn't change the numbering scheme for digital. Most companies seemed to change their numbering scheme for digital even on lines of compact cameras that most people wouldn't care about, If I'd have been asked to guess what company was least likely to do that I probably would have said Leica.

M8 to me seemed to suggest that it was just as much a replacement for the M7 as the M7 was for the M6 rather than a fundamentally different sort of camera and with a die hard traditionalist clientele it seemed a bit weird. The reason I brought this up now is I'd said that the numbers would start to go up quick maybe once every 5 years, but no they're going up much quicker than that. I hope that even if you disagree with me you can see what I'm getting at.

As for your second point, There's a difference between creating a ridiculously confusing naming scheme and changing it for a different kind of camera, I'm not sure what your argument is.

I think your main misunderstanding is when you said that the M7 was a "replacement" for the M6 and the M8 a "replacement" for the M7. Even if the M6 (and 7?) is now out of production, the M7 was intended to be an AE M instead of a metered M, certainly not something which would make the M6 in any way obsolete (that is Canon logic). Along the same lines, the M8 & 9 are simply digital versions of the M cameras.

 

[clayne]

Same thing with the M3 and the M2. Chronology and numbers do not match up there either.

 

[BikoBikoBiko]

Same thing with the M3 and the M2. Chronology and numbers do not match up there either.

That's the point i wanted to make. I'm no Leica fanboy (as in i know very little about them) but it seems to me that Leica have been playing fast and loose with their naming for a long time. I can't see why they (and apologies if I have this wrong) decided to release a 'budget' M3 and call it the M2 or why they changed the metering on the M6 and called it an M7.

 

[one90guy]

As someone else posted, my M's were 16 and 60. Both were well made, handy to have, and fast "shutters":^)

 

[Moopheus]

Don't remember saying they couldn't.

But you are complaining anyway. Product naming is just about branding and marketing. It has very little to do with the actual product. At least the cameras are still actually made by Leica; there are plenty of products out there carrying names of companies that no longer actually make anything (in some cases the original companies went out of business and the names were picked up by other manufacturers).