Digital M confirmed and more.....

[Trius]

I thought when the DCS14n came out that I read they were sourcing the imager from a company in the Netherlands. Of course, there were a lot of problems with the original DCS14n, so maybe they went back in-house.

If Kodak's imagers are good enough for the Defense Department (I seem to recall reading that they equip the USA's spiffiest spy satellites) I figure they'd be good enough for me, too -- although as you note, the kinds of prices the DoD can pay are considerably beyond my budget, and possibly even the average Leica buyer's budget as well!

AFAIK, Kodak makes their own sensors, but perhaps not all nor all components of a sensor assembly. I was in a local camera shop when an Oly rep introduced an E-1 customer to an EK employee, who had entered the shop, as "the man who made the sensor for your camera".

The EK unit that was working on the next generation Hubble has been sold to ITT. I have two friends who work there. If I tell you any more I'll have to kill you. 😀

Trius

 

[skimmel]

Hi again all. In response to Skimmel's question about the reliability of info from Bakers, they do seem to be pretty trustworthy. Very old-fashioned personal kind of camera store. The reason I found out about the Digital M rangefinder was because i originally went in enquiring about the RD1. They told me the reason they didn't stock it was because of the upcoming releases from leica...... and obviously as an "official" retailer they are unlikely to stock the only real competition. He gave me the impression that it would be released this year and I was told that the replacement for the d-lux was just a couple of months away.

Thanks Guillaume.

 

[jlw]

The reason I found out about the Digital M rangefinder was because i originally went in enquiring about the RD1. They told me the reason they didn't stock it was because of the upcoming releases from leica...

Good to know, but on the other hand, this does sound like the tactic that Microsoft has made notorious as "F.U.D." (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt.)

The way Microsoft does it is say, basically, "Don't make the mistake of buying our competitor's product, which is available right now and has the features you need. Instead, wait for our product, which will be out real soon now and will have so many more features that you'll kick yourself for not waiting."

Then, after they've either bought out the competitor or put it out of business through F.U.D., they bring out some buggy piece of crud and you're stuck buying it because you have no alternative.