AP review of Digital Modul R

[fgianni]

I have just received my weekly copy of Amateur photographer, and has a review of the Digital Modul R.

If the M digital is going to be anything like that we'll be better off holding on our Epson RD-1.

 

[Fred]

From my brief look at the conclusion the main problem points are the internal reflection on some images and an 'iffy' white balance. The reflections could be a problem but the white balance is not something that maybe can be ironed out with a firmware fix.

It's worth checking also the DSLReXchenge sister site to this one (see the cool links on the left) and read some real user comments from Jorge.

On another thread there was discussion that the digital M would have a new sensor that was not from Imacon who provide the DMR chip.

I'll wait and see what the new Digital M does before I decide if that is the way to go in the future but not on my current budget. I guess the RD-2 may well be out sometime then as well. Interesting times ahead.

 

[fgianni]

I'll wait and see what the new Digital M does before I decide if that is the way to go in the future but not on my current budget.

Of course, but when we are all waiting for a product, the only thing that we can do is speculate using whatever information is available.

 

[Ben Z]

The reports I've seen from real photographers using the DMR, whose pictures I can see and verify they know how to shoot, not a photo magazine directed at consumers who mostly can't afford a DMR. They all have very positive things to say. Several of them are also users of Canon 1DS-II and not simply Leica fetishists who would swoon over a cowpie if it had a red dot. The only complaints I've heard thus far of a substantive nature are high-ISO noise and the slow frame rate, which kind of cancel each other out in significance in terms of appropriate uses for the camera.

I bought a full set (R8, 15, 21, 35, 50, 90, 2x, 28-70, 70-210) for less than the DMR's original $5000 price. Then I handled the DMR and recognized that it made the R8 bigger and heavier than I could stand for a travel camera, my main use. I also realized that for the cost, the slow frame rate and high-ISO noise would further limit the usefulness for me, and I'm not one who can afford two full digital SLR systems. By that time the price of the DMR had already skyrocketed another $1000, which was the final deal breaker. I also had plenty of time to shoot the R stuff with film and was not impressed that it was any better than my old Pentax SMC screwmounts, in fact the SMCs flared a lot less in shots with the sun anywhere in front of me. So I sold the entire R8 system. That doesn't mean the DMR is not good, just that it wasn't good for my needs.

BTW, Imacon doesn't make the chip for the DMR, Kodak does. Imacon did the firmware etc. The specifics of the Digital M being bandied around on forums come from 3rd-hand repetition of things Stefan Daniel said in response to questions posed to him at the LHSA annual meeting. It is unclear whether the chip in the Digital M will or won't be the same as the DMR., only that the firmware will be done by an unnamed German source, not Imacon. There is also speculation that the Digital M will sticker for under $5000, which seems worthy of skepticism since an MP based largely on amortized tooling and technology dating to 1984 now costs $3300.

 

[ywenz]

And we all know Kodak has been known to make some great imaging sensors... <<chuckle>>....

 

[naturephoto1]

I can not comment regarding the review of the Leica R DMR, and the actual performance on the digital material. But, I did see what looked to be some extremely high quality out put at the Leica Booth at Photo Plus East several weeks ago. I also got to handle the module on an R9 (will fit my R8). It certainly is no lightweight and does increase the size of the camera, but so does a motor winder or motor drive for the R8 and R9. I hope that it really performs well because someday I hope to have one for my Leica System.

But, I am sure that our fearless leader, Jorge can make some comment regarding the DMR and its performance since I believe that he has one with his Leica R9 and his R lenses.

 

[bobofish]

Naturephoto,
No offence, but seeing things at a photo booth, a great camera does not make.

The camera companies (especially video) REALLY know how to play up the strengths of their products, and downplay the weaknesses. Just look at some of the Canon and Nikon brochures, you'd think those lenses were good enough to write onto computer chips.

And for those of you that are somewhat video savvy, the Sony H-Z1 (a great camera for what it is) is portrayed as being just as good as any $100,000 Panasonic ENG camera in the brochures and video downloads....unfortunately, the reality is....somewhat less than that. From the brochures, you'd think you could pull stills off the camera and print straight to 8x10...ahem.

 

[fgianni]

The reports I've seen from real photographers using the DMR, whose pictures I can see and verify they know how to shoot, not a photo magazine directed at consumers who mostly can't afford a DMR.

AP readers are not only Amateurs (despite the name) and is considered one of the most authoritative photographic magazines.

Also we all know that nowadays Leica stuff is more for us amateurs than for professionals, lets face it: you could play footie with a Canon 1V, 1D, 1DS (mark 2 or not) and the camera would still work perfectly, they are environmentally sealed, so together with L series lenses you can really take them in the most hostile environment, the photographer might not survive, but the camera will.
You can probably drop them in water, pick them up and start shooting again, can you say the same for the R9 with digital module R and Leica lenses?

And I am sure Nikon has stuff as good as the Canon gear (except maybe for the full frame sensors)

We amateurs, and the collectors, are the ones that support Leica, the great majority of the pros are using Canon and Nikon gear.

 

[MP Guy]

Here are some DMR pictures

 

[MP Guy]

here are some more

 

[MP Guy]

And some more 🙂

 

[naturephoto1]

Naturephoto,
No offence, but seeing things at a photo booth, a great camera does not make.

The camera companies (especially video) REALLY know how to play up the strengths of their products, and downplay the weaknesses. Just look at some of the Canon and Nikon brochures, you'd think those lenses were good enough to write onto computer chips.

And for those of you that are somewhat video savvy, the Sony H-Z1 (a great camera for what it is) is portrayed as being just as good as any $100,000 Panasonic ENG camera in the brochures and video downloads....unfortunately, the reality is....somewhat less than that. From the brochures, you'd think you could pull stills off the camera and print straight to 8x10...ahem.

Bobofish,

I never claimed that seeing things as in the case of the DMR and the Leica R 9 did a great camera make. All I said what I could see appeared to be of very high quality output and that I had the opportunity to hold it. I was basing my observations on my own digital output photos from Leica 35 mm up to 4" x 5" from transparency material (particularly from Velvia 50 and Provia 100). My printer, Bill Nordstrom (LaserLight Photographics and Founder of EverColor Fine Art has been my printer for 11 years) outputs my work on a Chromira Machine up to just shy of 40" long and if we need to print larger print on a LightJet 5000.

I suggested Jorge post something because he had the DMR along with a Leica R9 and Leica R lenses. He has used the equipment and certainly could add to the discussion.

As to the quality of new Leica Gear it is certainly to Pro level but is lacking certain things as we all know including autofocus (or at least confirmation which we have been asking for for about 8 years). There is still a rather small portion of the Pro market that use their equipment (including myself). However, mechanically, all their equipment has a certain feel in handling and focus. We know that the special seals are absent from their cameras, but I still like the R8 it is my favorite Leica R series camera with the exception of weight. There is also no question to the quality of their optics.

 

[fgianni]

We know that the special seals are absent from their cameras, but I still like the R8 it is my favorite Leica R series camera with the exception of weight. There is also no question to the quality of their optics.

Well special seals are one of the things that sets top quality PRO equipment apart from Amateur equipment, don't get me wrong, I love my M4-P and would love to be able to afford more Leica gear, only if I had to make a living from photography, I'd probably go for one of the EOS-1 cameras (digital or not), or their Nikon counterpart, simply because a pro wants to know that, no matter how harsh the treatment and the conditions, his equipment will always work. I am sure that any Leica (M or R) cannot stand half the abuse that an EOS 1 can.

Since I am an amateur I can afford to buy a lemon like the RD-1 (BTW mine is back at Epson for a faulty shutter, what a surprise) which is of course a joy to use, but less reliable than FSU gear, if I were a pro I would not touch the thing with a bargepole.

 

[naturephoto1]

The R and M cameras are probably a lot tougher than you may think. Obviously the rubberized cloth shutter and the the rangefinder of the M series cameras tend to be some of their weak points.

Somewhere around 8? years ago I dropped my modified R4S camera with a 35mm Summicron on asphalt. There was some damage as I remember to the camera mount, inside pentaprism and to the front of the lens as I believe. All things considered relatively minor damage. All repairable for as I remember a rather nominal Leica repair of perhaps $300? Everything was fine with camera and lens after repair- worked like new. Of course Leica checked everything and made all the adjustments.

Also, unless things have changed, the shutters in the R series Leicas are supposed to last at least 100,000 cycles with minimal wear. The new R8 s and R9 s have real heft to them and they are rugged. This was also true of the much older R4 through the R7. The R4 was known to have some electrical problems at least initially, which was why the R4S and the subsequent R4SP cameras were introduced.

Additionally, the brass on aluminum focusing helicoids of the Leica M and R lenses are self lubricating requiring very light oil lubricants as opposed to the much heavier greases required of most of the older manual focusing minolta, canon, pentax, nikon, etc. lenses. The Leica lens helicoids have/had tremendously long lives- they can often easily last much more than a professional lifetime of usage.

Of course, just like any other cameras, lens, automobiles, etc. the equipment does require periodic maintenance including a clean and lube.

Whether the Canons can take the abuse that you suggest, I would never want to subject any camera to much abuse.

As tough as my Linhof Technikardan 45 S (greatest complaints of users is the folding and unfolding of the camera on the collapsable rail/bed and loosening of the locks) may be, I would not want to beat it up. It has the fit, finish and precision of my Leicas.

Treated with some degree of care and respect, you can get extremely long professional life out of all this camera equipment.

 

[Ben Z]

Obviously the rubberized cloth shutter and the the rangefinder of the M series cameras tend to be some of their weak points.

Also, unless things have changed, the shutters in the R series Leicas are supposed to last at least 100,000 cycles with minimal wear.

Actually the M shutter is one of its strong points. The drums and springs are oversized meaning the spring tension can be kept low, and the curtains travel at a fairly slow clip (the speeds are varied by slit width accomplished by the second curtain release timing) compared to some other FP shutters. It's not uncommon, so say the techs, for a Leica M shutter to go more than 500,000 cycles with minimal if any wear to the parts. The chief reasons for shutter failure in the M cameras is age and disuse. The modern lubricants can stand much longer periods of inactivity without gumming up. In addition, the curtains and all other parts of the M shutter can be replaced individually whereas the shutter in R3 and later R bodies is modular and replaced as a unit. In terms of # of cycles until significant shutter parts wear, the M leicas share the top honors with the Nikon F, although the F has the edge in terms of less sensitivity to lubrication the Leica can be adjusted more precisely at the higher speeds. A Leica and an F can both be adjusted to less than 10% tolerance at 1/1000 but the Leica will stay there and the Nikon will setlle back to around 1/750 in s short time.

 

[naturephoto1]

Ben,

Perhaps I was a little hasty, but my reference to the weakness of the M shutter was in fact in regard to the disuse and drying out of the shutter. Obviously since the M cameras have endured for over 50 years of production the shutter must be very sound. But, from what I understand they do (as do the R shutters periodically need adjustment).

Also, I know that the rangefinder can need adjustment on the M cameras occassionaly as do the Mamiya RF cameras and also as do the focus of Leica R cameras (when mine was repaired, it needed to be readjusted focus at infinity was off).

Just the same, I still consider both M and R series cameras and lenses beautifully constructed mechanical marvels with silky smooth operation that are very rugged and up to day to day professional service.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I read a really bad review of "Brazil" (the movie) when it came out. I also read some good reviews of "Moulin Rouge" (also the movie), with Nicole Kidman. I can tell you that I liked "Brazil" and still do, and can't stand "Moulin Rouge".

Sometimes it's better to see things for oneself. Jorge's samples from the very beginning have made me wait for the time the next-generation DMR becomes a bit more affordable. Otherwise I would already have had the Canon 5D.

 

[fgianni]

I read a really bad review of "Brazil" (the movie) when it came out. I also read some good reviews of "Moulin Rouge" (also the movie), with Nicole Kidman. I can tell you that I liked "Brazil" and still do, and can't stand "Moulin Rouge".

Sometimes it's better to see things for oneself. Jorge's samples from the very beginning have made me wait for the time the next-generation DMR becomes a bit more affordable. Otherwise I would already have had the Canon 5D.

Even if I totally agree with you on both Brazil (one of the greatest films ever) and Moulin rouge, form most of us reviews (possibly with samples) are the only way to choose what to buy next.
If I had £2500 to spend on SLR equipment I would definitely get the 5D to complemet my 20D, of course the next generation DMR might be better, but so will be the next generation digital EOS.
The good thing about next generation stuff is that it is going to be almost invariably better than current generation gear, the bad thing is that you can't buy it, and when you can it is not next generation anymore 😀

 

[ywenz]

And some more 🙂

they look nice but at these web resolutions, they could have just as well been shot with a Canon digital Rebel.. at least with regards to the dynamic range, the DMR looks to be just as piss poor as the current crop of DSLRs

If I had £2500 to spend on SLR equipment I would definitely get the 5D to complemet my 20D, of course the next generation DMR might be better, but so will be the next generation digital EOS.

Ditto, given that you have lenses for both EOS and Leica R systems, anyone who picks the DMR over the 5D is a mad man.

 

[fgianni]

Ditto, given that you have lenses for both EOS and Leica R systems, anyone who picks the DMR over the 5D is a mad man.

Well not sure about the mad man, but since it is not too difficult to adapt the 5D to take R lenses, you can draw your conclusions.