Yes, the new Leica M-D Typ 262 camera will not have a LCD screen

Leica M-D Typ 262 camera
The first pictures of the upcoming Leica M-D Typ 262 camera are now available online courtesy of www.rangefinder.com.hk.

More info on the Leica M-D Typ 262 camera:

  • The size and shape of the M-D will be the same as the M Typ 240/262.
  • The lack of a LCD screen makes it feel smaller in the hand but is physically the same size.
  • The top and bottom plates are rumored to be made from brass.
  • The official announcement is rumored for the beginning of May.
  • EU retail price: 5,940 Euros (around $6,700) - basically more expensive than the M Typ 262 model (currently priced at $5,195) even though the M-D will not have a LCD screen.
  • Same sensor as the M 262 model.
  • Strap lugs (the M 60 did not have it)
  • Thumb dial

Via Leicarumors.com

This entry was posted in Leica and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Sean

    It seems a shame that without the LCD they couldn’t make the body closer to the size of the M7. The digital bodies are all so think compared to the film bodies, it would have been nice to see a thinner camera

    • Hubertus Bigend

      If you look at the Leica/Minolta CL/CLE, you wonder why even a film camera has to be as big as an M7.

      • Licheus

        They certainly should have made it smaller, but the Leica shooters are a conservative bunch and refuse anything that bears a less-than-75-percent visual resemblance to the eternal M3 thus nothing in Leicadom could get a fresh start from the scratches again.

        On the other hand, both the CL and the CLE sacrificed the rangefinder base length (i.e. focusing accuracy) for the small profile. I’d say they are not the perfect examples on the subject, at least not better than the wonderful Cosina Zeiss Ikon.

  • Eno

    The next Leica after this camera, may feature a “lack of sensor” too, and my cost double in price. :))

    • BP2012

      Why not. Most of Leica users does not need sensor at all.

      • longzoom

        Exactly! Red dot is enough for my dentist, at least!

      • Eno

        :))

    • ogotaj

      Well , this would be somehow inconvenient. However I think I have a great idea for next Leica product. A digital camera that can take only B&W pictures, has no LCD and … get ready… has no viewfinder. The idea would be to better simulate principles of camera obscura where you just have to figure out a bunch of things ou and keep your fingers crossed in hopes of getting a decent picture. Such product would be still advertised as ‘choice of professionals’ and pushed for $8k. Just because 😉

      • Eno

        :)) a good one!

  • Ievgen Nedrygailov

    I didn’t know that brass is so expensive these days. Probably, they use brass of premium class.

    • James Donahue

      I think they get the brass from old shell casings from the Army

  • Jeffry De Meyer

    What is the point?

    • to simulate film cameras, less weight, more battery power, no chimping 🙂

      • If you are going this far, bring back the wind lever like in the Epson R-D1. No motors to conk out, and even more battery savings. Leicagasms would ensue…

      • No chimping being the keyword.

  • HotDuckZ

    Slim-it, slim-it

  • Paco Ignacio

    So they take out features and still increase the price.

    Logic…

  • CHD

    The best feature of this camera is that it’s a rangefinder with no LCD….this way you can take some once in a lifetime travel photos and then find out when you get home that the rangefinder was out of calibration.

    • Licheus

      Smart, yet it’s been so since the inception of rangefinders (or all analogue cameras). Just think about it: you ended up with still having taken the pictures (blindly but happily), most of which will likely be usable as one don’t always shoot wide open and (for an experienced Leica shooter) scale focus anyway. Otherwise the lifetime trip’s memory would be impaired by the constant, painful realization that you KNOW the rangefinder needs adjustment but unable to find “the nearest technician” (who’s willing to operate on a digital Leica in the first place). Not wanting to upset the wife, you keep that to yourself, but the inferno of “not being able to nail all your wide open shots made at ISO 100, 1/4000 and f/1.4” would be gradually burning away that Buenos Aires afternoon that ought to be perfect.

  • CHD

    Personally I think that if you’re going to get rid of the LCD then the camera should at least have an EVF…that said, if you’re going to get rid of the screen then why not make the camera smaller? Seems to me that Leica got lazy on this, they are reusing the same basic body instead of slimming everything down.

    • Bo Dez

      No they are not being lazy – do you know how much more expensive it would be to slim it down?

      • CHD

        Yes, I realize there is a cost…which one would think would be covered by selling these things at $7000 a pop. It seems to me that it’s a lost opportunity, the lack
        of LCD would be one way to slim the camera.

      • Nawksi

        No, how much?

    • I think they want to retain minimum basic size. For big hands maybe or durability reasons.

  • ogotaj

    Leica seems to be lately in the business of providing solutions to problems that do not exist.
    They started with Monochrom and as much as everyone got excited about it l, few people noticed that consequence of removing Bayer filter is lack of ability to adjust channels in postprduction. So if you may want to darken the sky a bit you better carry the yellow filter with you. Needless to say I can swith my Nikon DSLR in an MC mode and shoot away in B&W and still have more options in postproduction.
    Then came a digital camera with no LCD. Yet again you can take any decent camera those days and will be able to turn off LCD for whatever reason you want to do it.
    Leica is not innovative with those products. There is nothing those cameras can do that other digitals these days cannot.

    • disqus_P80JGtaFvi

      Did you use Leica Monochrome actually or just played with it in the store? The B&W on that camera is so good that you hardly need much processing. I have the Monochrome camera (M9 generation) and i use it more than i use the M9. Just knowing your photos will all be B&W is changing your perspective and style of photography.
      About the new camera i also have mixed feelings and feel a bit intrigued by the higher price when compared to the LCD version.

      • ogotaj

        As you can probably guess I’m not a Leica/Monochrome user nor I could admittedly afford one. I am merely on a quest to understand advantages of some Leica products and in some cases I just don’t see those.
        You say B&W output from Monochrome is so good it does not need any post. This may be certainly true for yourself and a group of other people but many photographers would prefer to have such option. Just as they would prefer to have an LCD even if they don’t ‘chimp.’
        So let’s say you take your M9 and use some postprocessing, be it presets or otherwise. Would you be able to simulate Monochrome output this way? Most likely yes and you have to go through few extra steps but at the end of the day your M9 is a more versatile tool after all.

        To put thing into a better perspective, imagine Leica could somehow develop a film camera that can be loaded only with B&W film. How many Leica users and avid B&W film shooters would say it’s a feature that is not improving on their experience?

        • disqus_P80JGtaFvi

          I did not say you don’t need any post processing. Please read again. I said “hardly needs much processing” post processing is an important part of the process after all.

          • ogotaj

            OK so it “hardly” needs any processing but once you need it your options are limited. I love B&W output from my Ricoh GR but I did not get this camera just for this preset nor would I be happy if I could only shoot it this way and have limited postprocessing possibilities.

          • That’s you. Seems leica is not made with you in mind. Anyway it is never meant to be a universal do it all. It seems they are actually discouraging users who want options. And of course seeking those with money.

          • sysph

            Paying more for forcing you to think. Perfectly reasonable. You could pay less and think on your own, but it’s nice to have a choice.

          • Price is altogether different factor. But the move is sound and intelligent. If one considers him/herself PURE photographer, this is the ultimate test. Still unlike film you can tweak the image in post to a much greater degree. So it shouldn’t be as difficult as shooting TP e.g. This is what I wished Df would be ‘ along with manual focussing.

        • It’s a less is more thing.

          I think Voigtlander would do well to bring out a digital rangefinder in the same vain.

          I actually prefer the styling of the Bessa RX models to the Leicas…

        • Nawksi

          Except B&W film shooters typically carried filters (e.g. a yellow filter) with them.

          So if disqus_P80JGtaFvi doesn’t need to post-process much, it’s either because he/she always carried, and used, physical filters with his M9 Monochrome, or he/she didn’t carry or use colour filters, and believe that the B&W photos coming from his camera are good enough because he doesn’t know enough about B&W photography to really care?

  • Why the fuck would anyone want to make a camera from brass?
    Honestly, that is a step down from magnesium.

    • Derp

      Leicas where, minus some expecations, made from solid brass for the past 100 years. Its heritage, and its quality. I would never buy a camera thats made of some cheapo magnesium alloy. My cameras are all solid brass, and they will always be.

  • John Galt

    Only for Chuck Norris

  • vousplaisentezouquoi

    Well, a new camera for show-off

  • Back to top