Digital M

jlw, a 10MP APS sensor in a $700 camera with 24-120mm/effective is a "non event?"

Yikes! Seems kinda' exciting to me...but I've only been living photography for 54 years now.

"Non event" compared to what? The Minolta SLRs and the cute, fragile rangefinders that Leica peddled? Or the $6000 digital R kludge with chip no better than Sony?

This Sony (and others from Panasonic) may be non-events for people who love handheld rangefinders (me), but people who think SLRs are mini view cameras will buy buy buy.

There's no way Leica's going to produce a digital rangefinder. Epson's measured the interest, even Leica's capable of doing the math.
 
ywenz said:
There is no way this digital-M will surpase film in the way that the current top of the line digital sensors could not. Mainly... dynamic range.

I understand brand loyalty, but you're being a bit too optimistic here. Leica is dead broke and you're telling me they will somehow squeeze out enough research dollars to develop a sensor that is superior to Canon's ?
Click to expand...
Leica Ad Hoc announcement dated 8/3/05
"The new shares from the capital increase of Leica Camera AG, Solms, are going to be placed completely thanks to the shareholders high disposition to subscribe. The exercised subscription rights and the further desire for subscription permit the issue of all 13.5 million new no-par value shares at a price of 1.70 Euro each....The authorised capital will be increased by 13.5 million Euro to 15 million Euro, as the arithmetic contingent per share amounts to 1 Euro. The inflow of capital will amount to 22.95 million Euro."

Leica isn't "dead broke". They may not have the capital to do original chip development but they have enough to get a digital M built and to market.

Unfortunately, you are probably right about dynamic range.
 
ywenz said:
I'll believe it when I see it... but I've stated my case.




There is no way this digital-M will surpase film in the way that the current top of the line digital sensors could not. Mainly... dynamic range.
Click to expand...


Dynamic range is, in the digital world, a matter of photoshop skills. The current sensors of all major brands, if used in RAW mode and processed correctly far surpass any film in dynamic range. The superiority of film is in the artistic rendering.This link: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-contrast-masking.shtml
provides insight in one of the many ways of contrast management in digital photography.
 
Last edited:
Djon wrote:

"A $6000 digital R kludge with chip no better than Sony?"

You've tested it then? I'm reading very different conclusions from pro photographers who are using it. Still waiting to get a review unit from Leica but I think you may be selling it short a bit prematurely.

Sean
 
Hi Jaapv,

You're right that RAW conversion and post-processing can have a large effect on dynamic range but the cameras themselves (and the lenses!) can make a big difference.

Cheers,

Sean
 
Sean Reid said:
Hi Jaapv,

You're right that RAW conversion and post-processing can have a large effect on dynamic range but the cameras themselves (and the lenses!) can make a big difference.

Cheers,

Sean
Click to expand...

How do the lenses make a big difference in this regard? The Digital SLRs uses the very same lenses used on their film counterparts. I'd say the lens is actually the equalizer between the two mediums. It is in fact sensor technology that has the most cruicial deciding factor here.
 
Sean Reid said:
Djon wrote:

"A $6000 digital R kludge with chip no better than Sony?"

You've tested it then? I'm reading very different conclusions from pro photographers who are using it. Still waiting to get a review unit from Leica but I think you may be selling it short a bit prematurely.

Sean
Click to expand...

Well said.

If you follow the Canon forum a bit on Fred Miranda .. there is something very interesting happening.

- a couple of years ago: Full Frame 1DS ..... Halleluja
- Geeze the Canon wide angle lenses are not good enough for full frame :(
- Next step: buy Zeiss lenses with adapters for the 1Ds
- Next Step: sell the Zeiss lenses and buy Leica lenses with adapters instead
-Last step .... sell the 1Ds + adapters + remaining Canon glas And buy a R9 + DMR , probably keep 1Ds as a back-up

So Full Frame was not that important after all?
And the 16MP does not outperform the 10 MP sollution?

Interesting ........ i will settle for a 10MP Digital M with a cropfactor!

Han
 
jaapv said:
Did you read the Guy Manusco thread on the Leica Digital Module R on FM-forums?
In his opinion the Leica sensor tested as good or better than the Canon 1DsII technically and was far superior in creating photographically pleasing shots, notably comparable to Kodachrome. Most reviews of the DMR agree. The digital M will use similar sensor-technology and will obviously use M lenses. It should be able to surpass all competitors by a fair margin and produce photo's that will be as good or better than film from an artistic point of view.
Click to expand...

Bold statement, asserting that leica vapor-ware will be superior to actual real-world cameras produced by one of the world's leading imaging companies.
 
dexdog said:
Bold statement, asserting that leica vapor-ware will be superior to actual real-world cameras produced by one of the world's leading imaging companies.
Click to expand...

Let's wait and see, the proof of the pudding is -as always- in the eating, but so far the DMR is a good omen :)
 
Last edited:
ywenz said:
And when is that DMR thing 'suppose' to come out? Meanwhile the other manufactures are steps ahead..

Looks like the DMR can't even stack up against the 20D in the area of dynamic range... hmmpff

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CQww

... I think I'll stick with my Canon DSLR and my analog-M and leave the digital to the "experts"
Click to expand...

Please only make this kind comment when you know what you are talking about.The thread you quote can hardly be regarded as the source of all wisdom.
It has been on the market for some time now and the professional users are very happy with it...
 
Last edited:
http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/leica_dmr/leica_dmr.html

Look at the ISO800 noise. I don't see how this can be comparable to the 1DsMKII, it doesn't even compare to the Rebel XT I'd say...

Why does Leica keep shooting themselves in the foot? They already know they're behind in marketshare in the digital world. Coming out with such a pricey digital product that doesn't stack up in comparision to its competitor, how do they think they'll come out on top? I don't think it's even enough to sustain what they have.
 
Last edited:
Sean Reid, exactly which "professional users" are buying 10MP Leicas? Other than paid shills for Leica? I suspect there are literally none. Let's see those links.

A real pro (ie pays all his bills with photos) would be nuts to invest in digital Leicas. It'd be VASTLY more cost effective to spend (and deduct from taxes) the necessary $20K and get something that actually makes photographic sense, such as Hassleblad H1 (or Pentax or Mamiya). Who wants a grotesque, bloated 35mm form factor when they can have something no larger physically with over twice the actual resolution (H1)?

And let's see links to those reviews that supposedly say Leica's borrowed Kodak chip is "better" than Sony. Since when is Leica (or Kodak) in the same league as Sony technologically ?

Digital Leicas: Edsels / Lava Lamps.
 
Last edited:
Ah well, for the moment production can't keep up with demand. I suppose those are all idiots that would be better off buying consumer-grade Canons.....
 
I entirely agree that real "pros" who are flexible enough to adapt to changing technology and pratical enough to recongnize brand dominance would have gone with Canon or Nikons years ago. It's the stubborn brand loyalists who have hung on to their R bodies who are now buying up these digital modules albeit probably reeling at the money they have to put out for them. If they're happy and you're happy then good! But don't be spreading rhetoric that the DMR is superior or equal to their Canon counterparts.

DMR production not able to keep up with demands doesn't mean anything about the products success. They can be producing a couple thousand units a year and I'm sure there would be a long line for them. Like I said, Leica would benefit itself by lowering the price of the DMR.
 
Last edited:
To you it may be rhetoric, to me it is the opinion of professionals I respect, like Guy Manusco, Ian Brittesen,Jorge Torralba etc. that have actually been using the DMR. See the interesting post of Han Borger on the Canon to Leica evolution....
Btw, the price is quite reasonable imo and comparable to the offerings on the professional front by Canon and Nikon.

I add a quote from Guy Manusco on FM forums, as he said it far better than I could
chuckpjones wrote:
Jack Flesher wrote:
<snip>
While it is clear the best files out of the DMR are a notch better than the best files out of the 1Ds2, I am of the opinion the average files out of the 1Ds2 are on par or better than the average file from the DMR -- re focus (detail), WB and exposure. And the worst files out of the 1Ds2 seem to my eye a bit better than the worst files from the DMR. Experienced users like Guy, Jan and Chuck (I don't know the rest of you very well) are going to land a significant percentage of "best" shots, and the majority of the rest of them will be at least average, so they will give up little to nothing most of the time and usually gain with the DMR. However a less experienced photographer, or one who is lazy or simply getting older -- and I place myself in these categories -- may end up with enough shots below average that they would be better off with the Canon. IOW, it is a camera that demands you pay attention to what you are doing to extract the maximum benefit from it. In the end, MY opinion is it is a camera for the more experienced user who is also willing to put up without some convenience features.

But I *REALLY* like the glass!

My .02 only,

Edited by Jack Flesher on Sep 14, 2005 at 06:40 AM GMT
Click to expand...

I would agree with everything Jack said here, with a couple of comments. The Leica DMR isn't a camera for everyone. Like Jack, I came from Leica M rangefinders, and still love using them. I also shoot a Contax 645, mostly in manual focus mode. I like the control of manual focus, even with my glasses and aging eyes. But clearly, this is not for everybody. I also don't think an objective view would demand that this camera be the only one in your bag. It is a great tool, but so are the Canon bodies. Both have advantages, and both have limitations. For my work, I use several tools. There simply isn't one perfect solution for every need. The "Holly Grail" camera hasn't been invented yet, and likely never will be. I make my living using these as tools, so can justify the expense of owning several. Those who don't are probably better off with a Canon body and lenses, as it is the more versatile solution. And the Canon combo is not only easier to use, it will make great images in trained hands.

Once you step out on the slippery slope of manual focus Zeiss or Leica lenses using an adaptor on your Canon body though, all bets are off. You have started down the path of where the DMR rules the roost. This is it's home. This is where it lives. This is what it was designed for. You don't get every image exposure perfect. Focus is tricky. I'm lucky to get 1 in 3. But oh that one.... When you nail it, it can take your breath away. If you are doing commercial work, where your images are CMYK conversions printed in newspapers or magazines, this difference you will never see. It is in fine art large format prints, or client presentations such as annual reports that will really show the difference.

My conclusions: This is not a camera for everyone. But for those it is intended for, there simply is nothing else out there like it.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Hihihi. Seems Leica is still able to stir up the emotions, whether it's over their uber lenses or their digital backs. Who could have though that from a company that's almost dead in the water? :p

But I'm with you on this, Jaap. The proof is in the eating. Use the DMR and than complain about its shortcomings (if any).
 
Guy (and he is one of the top free lance corporate photographers) just mailed me that he has sold off all his Canon gear (and knowing his gear that will have pressed second-hand prices down through flooding the market :D ) and bought his second DMR. Quite a nice pudding it appears, don't you think?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom