rvaubel
Well-known
Obsolete in a year? Why?
Obsolete in a year? Why?
Some members of this forum seem to assume, as a given, that the technology of the M8 will be outmoded in a year, making the camera vertually worthless and useless. While there might have been some merit to this "shelf life of less than a year" argument back in the early days of sensor development, such is not the case now. The Megapixel War has thankfully been drawing to a close for the last couple of years within the ranks of the consumer DSLR's
Witness the introduction of the 30D. What was widely expected to be a 10Meg version of the 20D's 8Meg, turned out to be a minor treaking of the existing features, not a sensor upgrade. The "obsoletist" complained bitterly that the 20D wasn't rendered passe' as there was really no reason to sell thier old body to get a new one. I,ve had my 20D for some time now, and the technology is over two years old and shows no sign of becoming "obsolete".
In an example of technology going backwards, the Nikon D80 @ 10Meg may produce an inferior file in some ways, to the camera it replaced, the D70. If noise levels, Low light performance, clean high dynamic range files are important to you, the argument can be made that the D70 is a better camera. The jury is out on this one but we shall see.
I believe digital cameras are emerging as a mature technology. Unlike computers there is a limit to how many pixels you want to cram on a given sensor's real estate. I believe this number has been reached for the most part, and exceeded in the case of pointn'shoots.
10 Megapixels on the M8 seems like the sweet spot on a 1.3 X sensor. In any case it will produce quality pictures for years to come. For that matter my RD1 @ 6 Megs, will do the same. I expect the M8 to keep providing quality pictures for the life of the camera.
Rex
Obsolete in a year? Why?
Some members of this forum seem to assume, as a given, that the technology of the M8 will be outmoded in a year, making the camera vertually worthless and useless. While there might have been some merit to this "shelf life of less than a year" argument back in the early days of sensor development, such is not the case now. The Megapixel War has thankfully been drawing to a close for the last couple of years within the ranks of the consumer DSLR's
Witness the introduction of the 30D. What was widely expected to be a 10Meg version of the 20D's 8Meg, turned out to be a minor treaking of the existing features, not a sensor upgrade. The "obsoletist" complained bitterly that the 20D wasn't rendered passe' as there was really no reason to sell thier old body to get a new one. I,ve had my 20D for some time now, and the technology is over two years old and shows no sign of becoming "obsolete".
In an example of technology going backwards, the Nikon D80 @ 10Meg may produce an inferior file in some ways, to the camera it replaced, the D70. If noise levels, Low light performance, clean high dynamic range files are important to you, the argument can be made that the D70 is a better camera. The jury is out on this one but we shall see.
I believe digital cameras are emerging as a mature technology. Unlike computers there is a limit to how many pixels you want to cram on a given sensor's real estate. I believe this number has been reached for the most part, and exceeded in the case of pointn'shoots.
10 Megapixels on the M8 seems like the sweet spot on a 1.3 X sensor. In any case it will produce quality pictures for years to come. For that matter my RD1 @ 6 Megs, will do the same. I expect the M8 to keep providing quality pictures for the life of the camera.
Rex
ghost
Well-known
three years sounds about right. that's about how long it takes for a digital camera to become hopelessly outdated. the olympus e-1 started out at $2200 in '04, to be replaced next year, and it's now going for $500.
Bob Ross
Well-known
But, my E-1 is still taking fine pictures and I've had it since Oct. 03, so that must be a sign of hopeless obsolecenceghost said:
The camera body is hardly outdated and may, in the long run, be considered one of the better ones made. The image quality and tonal & color gradients are still amongst the best, for what I use it for. It is hopelessly outdated only in the market place and it isn't even made any more to boot. I don't know when I will feel it is hopelessly outdated as a tool? Economically, I suppose I could amortize the body at $700/yr. or around 70¢/image. If you can find one at $500. buy it, because I wont sell you mine for that......I think we will feel the same about the M8.
Bob
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
That's what I'm hoping. I still think Leica should capitalize on that idea: a plan where you can "upgrade" the sensor if they happen to develop a new one. I think they'd have a pretty solid base, and gain those who are very weary of the "obsolescence" thingy dealie. It would also turn the upgrade model on its head.Bob Ross said:If you can find one at $500. buy it, because I wont sell you mine for that......
I think we will feel the same about the M8.
Bob
I don't think Leica is in the new-camera-model-a-year business. I hope.
Last edited:
rvaubel
Well-known
gabrielma said:
I don't think the are in the-new-camera-a year business either. For one the can't afford it. And secondly, it isnt necessary for Leica users. My disagreement with you is your believe that the sensor needs a yearly upgrade. We agree that the basic hardware can stay the same, but I claim that the sensor can stay the same too. I think you underestimate the cost involved in upgrading a sensor. Even when a manufacturer starts with a blank slate, its a bitch. Remember, its not just the sensor but also the support chips, firmware etc.
It's not that I don't like the concept of just upgrading the electronics on an M8 but I don't think it is practical.
Rex
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Huh? When did I say that? I didn't say that. I said "when they develop a new sensor". I don't know how that translated into "yearly".rvaubel said:
And you're right, I don't know what the cost of upgrading a sensor would be. I think the M8 would be an excellent chance (or maybe it's too late...maybe the M9??) to test this sort of concept. This way Leica has a body that lasts "despite the digital wars" and also is in line with what we come to expect from the film bodies: a tool that is with you for the long haul, an investment that can be inherited.
Last edited:
ghost
Well-known
obsolete and outdated are different. i said the e-1 is outdated, which it is, but it is not obsolete.
these fantasies about upgradable sensors are weird. if you want to keep up with the newest sensor technology, just buy the newest camera. it can't be that hard to upgrade from the m8 to the m9 if you could get the m8 to begin with.
these fantasies about upgradable sensors are weird. if you want to keep up with the newest sensor technology, just buy the newest camera. it can't be that hard to upgrade from the m8 to the m9 if you could get the m8 to begin with.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
So were pocket-sized phones, wireless mice and clickable icons, the Internet...and here we are.ghost said:
ghost
Well-known
you'd have to convince me that upgradable sensors are not within the reach of current technology to make that analogy relevant.
Flinor
Well-known
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nachkebia
rvaubel : what kind of magic you can do later with raw file we all know, but what you will see on location is different story, I want to see BW on the monitor with custom contrast and color settings, because if you see by mistake a flat digital grey bw image you will loose your inspiration.
That's where digital has changed expectations. For years we shot B&W film while looking through a viewfinder that showed the world in color. Now that we can choose to see in mono we complain about how it looks.
The more I use my R-D1, the more I come to terms with its capabilities and the more I like it. It's exactly like using my CLE from a user standpoint, so I just took the money that I'd putting away for the M8 and treated myself to a new Apple 23" cinema display. I've decided that, in combination with the R-D1 will do more for my photography than an M8.
Originally Posted by Nachkebia
rvaubel : what kind of magic you can do later with raw file we all know, but what you will see on location is different story, I want to see BW on the monitor with custom contrast and color settings, because if you see by mistake a flat digital grey bw image you will loose your inspiration.
That's where digital has changed expectations. For years we shot B&W film while looking through a viewfinder that showed the world in color. Now that we can choose to see in mono we complain about how it looks.
The more I use my R-D1, the more I come to terms with its capabilities and the more I like it. It's exactly like using my CLE from a user standpoint, so I just took the money that I'd putting away for the M8 and treated myself to a new Apple 23" cinema display. I've decided that, in combination with the R-D1 will do more for my photography than an M8.
rvaubel
Well-known
Flinor said:
Thats a very good point. The RD1 has so much potential that it would take a long time to learn to fully exploit it. The reason I'm getting the M8 isn't so much because it is a better camera, more it is a camera that I can get fixed. For the long haul I need a camera from a manufacture that will support its product. If Cosina was to partner with someone that had some legs and commitment, I would buy an Rd2 in a heartbeat.
Rex
etrigan63
Rangefinder Padawan
Leica has always been an "investment" camera: something bought for the long haul. Note that all M lenses fit on all M mount cameras. Sure, the M-series has not been upgradeable, but look at the DMR. Theoretically, when the DMR2 is ever released R-series owners need only remove the DMR and replace it with the DMR2. It may even be possible to upgrade a DMR to a DMR2 via component swapping. I am not a Leica owner (yet), but I have been following them for years and a recently departed family friend had a 1947 Leica that he used to teach me photography when I was a kid. I don't know what his family did with that Leica, but I got the manual.
Bob Ross
Well-known
Sensor upgrades are indeed weird, unless there is a problem of some kind with the original like Kodak had on the 14n. I think it would take a serious break through in sensors and processing to make upgrading desireable at a cost. If it is just pixel cramming for resolution gain at the expence of tonal/color gradient harshness it might not be worth it. A major shift from Bayer to Foveon, organic or Fuji architechture would be another matter.ghost said:
dogless
Member
An M3 with a col. summicron attached has been hopelessly out dated for decades as well, but apparently some still manage to use them to produce great images. Once the sensor quality, with regards to noise and file size are met and are acceptable for publication standards and required print sizes, and it exceeds the resolution and quality that can be obtained from film, what are the reasons for upgrading? I think you can fergetaboutit with regards to sensor upgrades. Its the amateur/hobbyist that's concerned with it's usability in 3-4 years. How old is the RD-1? Aren't they still being bought new @ >$2000.00USD? Are there any working pros that are buying RD-1's today?
There's liitle competition in the DRF market, however when Zeiss enters the market I'm sure their marketing will let us all know of their superior resolution/low noise @ 1600ISO ,yada, yada, yada and at half the price of the M8 ;-) Maybe it's time to start saving for an M9?
There's liitle competition in the DRF market, however when Zeiss enters the market I'm sure their marketing will let us all know of their superior resolution/low noise @ 1600ISO ,yada, yada, yada and at half the price of the M8 ;-) Maybe it's time to start saving for an M9?
swoop
Well-known
I really hate that it isn't 1:1 and that it doesn't have a winder lever. Even if it's merely for decorative purposes. I'm so used to the motion I know I'm going to be doing it in the air anyway.
chrisweeks
Member
all i want is the ability to use my beautiful m-glass on a digi!
800 iso with nice results would be nice as well.
wish it weren't 1.3x crop factor, but ... whatever. i can't have everything!
800 iso with nice results would be nice as well.
wish it weren't 1.3x crop factor, but ... whatever. i can't have everything!
Nachkebia
Well-known
Until fuji puts out new technology for sensors there will be no save for digital, I think leica is forced to bring out digital camera, I am sure they did not wanted to create digital camera, not only it will harm leica brand but it will also isolate alot of leicaphils...
Mark Norton
Well-known
Some weird thinking there.
Digital is the only thing which will keep Leica as an independent camera maker, so to those Leica-philes who feel put out by the introduction of the M8, I'd simply ask: why are you buying so little Leica equipment?
Leica needs more than a warm fuzzy heritage to survive. It needs sales and digital is the best way to get them.
Digital is the only thing which will keep Leica as an independent camera maker, so to those Leica-philes who feel put out by the introduction of the M8, I'd simply ask: why are you buying so little Leica equipment?
Leica needs more than a warm fuzzy heritage to survive. It needs sales and digital is the best way to get them.
Nachkebia
Well-known
Mark Norton : exactly, to survive it needs to bring out digital camera no meter how good the medium is, just because there is no other way to survive. it is just pity..
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I also find it interesting that an M8, a camera that still doesn't exist, brings out so many negative comments, than the RD-1, that exists, and is known for having a variety of issues, brings out a variety of positive comments.
You know what I don't like about the M8? It's not out yet.
You know what I don't like about the M8? It's not out yet.