Are we finally there?

kshapero

kshapero

South Florida Man
Local time
2:27 PM
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
10,064
Location
South Florida, USA
View My Gallery
I notice here and elsewhere that as usual the typical digital camera becomes obsolete within a couple of years. But maybe there is one exception...the M9. Could it rival other Leica greats and have a run of 15-20 years? I think it could. One case in point: the Epson R-d1 seems to still have legs. What do you think?🙄
 
I would indeed not be surprised if that will be the case. It is the first digital camera that I own where the results I get simply do make me no longer lust after the next newer, better toy etc. I don't care anymore, this digital tool is close to perfection for me.

Because of it's digital nature it will never enjoy a 15-20 year run without change. What will happen is that the camera will stay the same in essence, but over the years the sensor will be replaced by better sensors and I would also not be surprised if in the future we see a combination of the old fashioned rangefinder/viewfinder we know combined with some Fuji X100 type of projected additional information.

I am actually selling lenses because the M9 has made me more focused. It is the digital camera that got this time pressed guy back taking more pictures and finally figuring out which focal lengths suits him and which don't . It is the biggest personal expenditure in my life (except for house/car etc) that I have never regretted or even doubted for a second.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
140 years for a production run of a film camera? I don't think so.

Wait, you say -- the original question was about a digital camera production run lasting 20 years. Well, that's essentially the same thing. Digital camera years are like dog years; digital cameras go obsolete fast.

What I could see is Leica offering an upgrade service, like what they did with their Barnack bodies, so you'll see things like what was originally an M9 that's been incrementally upgraded to an M9.17 or an M26 or whatever it will be called.
 
As long as Moore's law applies, and new sensors are being developed, new digital cameras will replace the previous model every few years. The same people who love their M9 today, will upgrade immediately when the next generation M with a new sensor is released, be it for higher sensitivity, dynamic range, less power consumption, etc., etc.

Roland.
 
I'm sure they'll keep releasing upgraded models, but the M9 pretty much satisfies all my M needs. I think a lot of film devotees feel the same way. I won't have any particular pangs when the next version comes out.
 
I mean other than firmware and sapphire upgrades and such if Leica starts to play the "game" (HD video, etc.) they will never win. It is a tight spot they have carved out.
 
I think the sensors will get better and that electronics will get smaller. Probably the M9 will be the same size as an M3, more limted by the optics and will not require a thicker body.

I do not think the M9 will go for a 10 year production, unaltered. The M9.2 will be tweeked, and the M10 will be evolutionary. More megapixels means smaller element size.

Maybe they will come out with a Monochrome version.
 
My M8 would only become obsolete if e.g. the battery died and I couldn't get a replacement or my lens broke and I couldn't buy any m-mount lenses any more.

It still works just as well as the day I bought it.
 
You can always get battery packs rebuilt. They usually are made from standard size cells, and companies specialize in refurbishing. I can still use my 14 year old Nikon E3 DSLR with it's EN-3 pack.
 
I guess you need to define "obsolete", if you're happy with the images an M9 produces now, chances are you will be in 20 years. Whether the M9 will still work or even be repairable in 20 years is anyone's guess. As electronics get smaller, they get more difficult to repair, which is bad news for digital cameras, but maybe Leica will keep producing the appropriate bits.
 
A couple of years means two years to me and DSLRs have a longer replacement cycle than that now. When the replacement for the D700 finally shows up it will be 4-5 years after the D700's intro. I do not think the M9 will survive 15-20 years unaltered for reasons others have already mentioned. Unless there is a huge/revolutionary improvement in a new model your old digi cam is not immediately obsolete and it is practical to skip a couple of generations before up grading. I can understand it when current M9 owners say that they nave no plans to automatically upgrade as I feel the same way with the D700, it is more than adequate for my purposes. I am guessing that the R-D1 still has legs because if you want a DRF and don't splash for an M9 you have few alternatives and as a bonus it is still a viable camera output wise.

Bob
 
So when camera manufacturers all have sensors in their cameras that have usable 6400 ISO performance and the dynamic range matches film where do they go from there because currently that's the attraction for people to upgrade in many cases ... genuine tangible improvements in sensor technology!

The D700 is a great camera that will endure for quite a few years because it was so far ahead of the game but in creating such a good camera have Nikon cost themselves potential sales to people who are so content with the camera that they see little reason to change or upgrade in the near future?

Leica are pretty lucky in many ways because there are probably quite a few features that can be added to the M design to keep offering reasons to upgrade ... live view is one that comes to mind.

Alternately ... just paint it white or offer a titanium version I guess! 😀
 
n5jrn said:
140 years for a production run of a film camera? I don't think so.

Wait, you say -- the original question was about a digital camera production run lasting 20 years. Well, that's essentially the same thing. Digital camera years are like dog years; digital cameras go obsolete fast.

What I could see is Leica offering an upgrade service, like what they did with their Barnack bodies, so you'll see things like what was originally an M9 that's been incrementally upgraded to an M9.17 or an M26 or whatever it will be called.
Click to expand...

Linhof have been producing cameras since 1887. The technika was prototyped in 1934 and still going strong. 80 years ain't bad. And Cooke have been making camera lenses since the 1890's and still the best at what they do.

Leica? Mere kiddies by comparison.
 
Last edited:
"The xxx camera finally fits all my needs" is what I read since years in various comments shortly after a new digital camera had been released but still all the same people - more or less - "upgrade" to the next "improved" model shortly after it will be released.😉

With the M8 / M8u / M8.2 the reason for upgrade to the M9 was already clear, crop-sensor and IR-filter requirement became obsolete. With the next digital M it should be improved high ISO and corner performance when using wide-angle lenses. After that a totally new sensor-technology might be available.

The R-D1 is the only digital camera to my knowledge, where people cannot update because there is no other all-dial controlled digital RF that takes m-mount lenses.

So ... we are not there (yet). 🙂
 
Cameras only ever become obsolete when people stop using them or they fail to deliver on the expectations of the user.
The only reason most Dslr's are upgraded every couple of years is that functions the user wanted previously and couldn't have become available or functions the user thinks he should have, become available.
The M9 will get updated, everyone knows that. At some point the high iso barrier will lift. It will as Brian says, be the size of an M6, get weather proofed, bigger lcd, etc. Improve the white balance....as if !
15-20 yrs? maybe, because Leica's R&D takes forever and they just don't have the resources of Nikon or Canon to improve on their products as quickly.
The D700 along with the D3 were a leap in performance that has taken a while for others to close on. They are still the high iso cameras that everything else is judged by and only really surpassed in that feature by the D3s.
I can honestly see me using my D700 for the next 15-20 years and think the exception to the rule is the D700 and not the M9.
 
It's interesting that whenever digital technology/performance or camera longevity/design gets discussed the D700 seems to have become the elephant in the room!
 
How many other people have 15 and 20 year old Digital cameras that are still working?

One Point Six MEGAPixels, Baby! 80MByte internal SCSI drive still spinning!

I could use the M9 for 20 years. But i might retire the Kodak.
 
As Brian said earlier, sensors will improve & the Leica M0.0 will have to do a better job at high ISOs.

Bur for those who thought TX was fast enough, upgrading won't be urgent or compelling.

Kirk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom