I have had the DMR for a few weeks now and shot about 900 images. Of these, not a single one has exhibited a problem with red hotspots. And I don't know what the deal is with saying it is unable to reproduce reds. I have shot a bunch of shots of the fall leaves here and it seems to do very very well with reds. Particularly if you convert the raw files using flexcolor. I have found that ACR does not give results that are as good. It is most certainly a professional level tool, and anyone who disagrees has not spent time using it. It is NOT a photo journalist's DSLR though, so it does not need full weather sealing, 8 frames per second, AF or extremely high ISO performance. The DMR (and the R9 system as a whole) is designed for more contemplative shooting. It is much more of a studio camera or a tripod camera than a hold the camera in the air 3 feet above your head and try to snap photos of a celebrity camera. I am not criticizing the Canon cameras or saying they are better or worse than the DMR -- I have not used them enough to make a direct comparison. What I can tell you is that the DMR produces spectacular photographs, is extremely pleasant to use, and is a wonderfully engineered bit of tech.
I bought it because I had a bunch of R lenses and an R9 and I don't need or want autofocus. If I really really need a full frame 19mm shot, I can take the back off and shoot it on film, but the 19mm on the DMR works out to be about a 24mm lens, which is wide enough for me and the things I use the DMR for. If I really needed even wider than that, I could buy the 15mm.
Francesco -- I think you also stated "the r lenses are not the same caliber as the M lenses". I am paraphrasing, but if this is your opinion, then you are wrong. The lens lines each have their strengths. The 50mm and 35mm summilux ASPH lenses are better than their R counterparts, but not by much. The 19mm and 15mm R lenses are as good or better than the M superwides. The area that the R system really shines though, is in the telephoto range. The 100mm APO Macro elmarit R and the 180mm APO elmarit R are probably the two best lenses I have ever used. They excel in every area -- they are sharper than any other lenses for 35mm, and they have incredible color saturation, great flare resistance, apochromatic correction into the infrared range, great bokeh, extremely high build quality and excellent ergonomics. There is quite literally nothing to criticize on these lenses. I have not used any longer lenses, but if you talk to nature photographers like Douglas Herr, you will hear them rave about the 280mm lens and the APO telyt system. The telephoto zooms are also supposed to be astonishingly capable (cf Erwin Puts). I have not used them, so I cannot report personally.
In any case, this has been extremely long, but I wanted to really hammer the point home that to criticize these things without using them is an unwise course of action. If you have extensively used both then fine, criticize away, but until you have it does not reflect well on you.
As for the whole Leica bandwagon thing, I use and enjoy many cameras and lenses in both the M and R system, and I wish the best for Leica. I like them as a company. This does not mean that I will only use Leica or will choose their products whether they are good or not. I also use Voigtlander, Canon, Mamiya, Hasselblad, Horseman, Zeiss, Konica and Russian cameras or lenses, so I am not dyed in the wool Leica loyalist. I use what works and what I enjoy, and the DMR definitely fits on both counts.
