How soon will you buy a M9 ?

[parsec1]

- to show-off - of course!....and you joined in - in great style!....well done!
Dave.

Cheers Dave,
Thought I might as well 'Join the Club". BTW the new RS is awesome and I love it but not enough to sleep with it...yet

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Peter,

Fair do's on most of what you say, especially the bit about '3 reliable digital Leicas': I think that you and Paul Stewart would be in an undignified melee for the first three to be issued to Fleet Street. I forget if it's three-quarters or four-fifth of Paul's awards (including second and third places) were won with Leicas.

But I don't agree that it's Leica telling us what to buy. Tragically, I think it's ourselves. Not you or me or indeed Paul but the market-place. Photography is 'equipment driven' as never before, and the catch is, there aren't enough Old Fogeys arguing (as they did in the 1930s) that quarter-plate Sandersons were all we needed. There's a lunatic pseudo-professionalism which assumes that expensive and above all NEW cameras are better.

There are also the undoubted advantages of digital: instant access, very low materials costs. You and I come at this from different directions -- Fleet Street and advertising -- but neither of us would dispute the enormous savings of time and money.

Leica had to make what they could, and although the M8 was a long way from perfect, it was almost certainly better than nothing. Also, it was almost certainly good enough for most applications. For the last decade or two I've referred to myself as a 'paid amateur' because that's what I am, most of the time: I don't HAVE to produce shots the way you do now, and I used to when I was shooting advertising. Or food, though that was a bit different), and the only way the M8/M8.2 have let me down seriously was a shoot 200 miles away when an SD card went bad; not Leica's fault, though a dual SD card (even in an accessory baseplate) would have been nice.

The M8/M8.2/M9 aren't 'designer' cameras. They are 'user' cameras. Not as perfect as you (or anyone) might wish, but merely the best you can get of a particular kind, much like a Breitling. Sure, they've a long way to go before they're a Breitling, or even an Omega Seamaster 30 (my watch for the last 40+ years). But then, the Leica III had a long way to go before it was an M3, and fitting a digital sensor into a body that's too small ain't easy.

I really believe that an M8/M9, with the compromises involved in a too-small body, were a vastly safer bet than a re-run of the M5, andI think Leica took the same gamble.

Finally, I believe that dear old V.B. (I never met him) wrote his column untl he died, and I hope I can do the same!

Cheers,

R.

 

[parsec1]

Dear Peter,

Fair do's on most of what you say, especially the bit about '3 reliable digital Leicas': I think that you and Paul Stewart would be in an undignified melee for the first three to be issued to Fleet Street. I forget if it's three-quarters or four-fifth of Paul's awards (including second and third places) were won with Leicas.

But I don't agree that it's Leica telling us what to buy. Tragically, I think it's ourselves. Not you or me or indeed Paul but the market-place. Photography is 'equipment driven' as never before, and the catch is, there aren't enough Old Fogeys arguing (as they did in the 1930s) that quarter-plate Sandersons were all we needed. There's a lunatic pseudo-professionalism which assumes that expensive and above all NEW cameras are better.


There are also the undoubted advantages of digital: instant access, very low materials costs. You and I come at this from different directions -- Fleet Street and advertising -- but neither of us would dispute the enormous savings of time and money.

Leica had to make what they could, and although the M8 was a long way from perfect, it was almost certainly better than nothing. Also, it was almost certainly good enough for most applications. For the last decade or two I've referred to myself as a 'paid amateur' because that's what I am, most of the time: I don't HAVE to produce shots the way you do now, and I used to when I was shooting advertising. Or food, though that was a bit different), and the only way the M8/M8.2 have let me down seriously was a shoot 200 miles away when an SD card went bad; not Leica's fault, though a dual SD card (even in an accessory baseplate) would have been nice.

The M8/M8.2/M9 aren't 'designer' cameras. They are 'user' cameras. Not as perfect as you (or anyone) might wish, but merely the best you can get of a particular kind, much like a Breitling. Sure, they've a long way to go before they're a Breitling, or even an Omega Seamaster 30 (my watch for the last 40+ years). But then, the Leica III had a long way to go before it was an M3, and fitting a digital sensor into a body that's too small ain't easy.

I really believe that an M8/M9, with the compromises involved in a too-small body, were a vastly safer bet than a re-run of the M5, andI think Leica took the same gamble.

Finally, I believe that dear old V.B. (I never met him) wrote his column untl he died, and I hope I can do the same!

Cheers,

Dear Roger,
Any melee Paul would certainy win as my 'deportment' is far less.
(About as politicaly correct as I can be !)

Peter

 

[jaapv]

I am also hoping that Leica has the sense not to increase the prices of their lenses with the introduction of the M9. I already feel insulted enough as it is and all they have done is ensure that I only buy used Leica, Zeiss, or CV of which they see no profit. The frustrating thing is, I (and many others like me) actually use the cameras & lenses for what Leica made them for, but have had enough of their outrageous price hikes (which have also driven the used market now to what new prices were 3 years ago).

C'mon Leica, rememeber the users. Remember compact lenses that may not be perfect optically, but are the best you can get for their size/performance.

I am always utterly amazed at feelings of being insulted whenever somebody feels that too high a price is asked. How on earth can that be an insult? It is simply a business proposition that one is free to take up or not. So don't buy - no harm done I would say.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I am always utterly amazed at feelings of being insulted whenever somebody feels that too high a price is asked. How on earth can that be an insult? It is simply a business proposition that one is free to take up or not. So don't buy - no harm done I would say.

Well, I suppose there's the implication that you're stupid enough to pay more than something is worth, but when it comes to that, I'd look at trainers and designer clothes before I'd look at Leicas. Also, unless you are stupid enough to pay more than something is worth, the insult pretty much rebounds on the person who offered it.

Besides which, where are you going to find better digital RF cameras or lenses? At that point, you pay the asking price if it's worth it to you (and it has no other value, unless you're selling), or not, if it's not.

As you say: no harm done.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Ben Z]

I don't fell insulted by Leica's prices of late...more like assaulted In particular, the cameras and lenses that have been around a number of years and are now double their former cost despite no improvements and despite a protracted period of very low inflation and a very bad economy that has brought many consumer-product manufacturers to their knees. The rationalization of world currency fluctuations hasn't made sense to me at all in face of the fact that major German automobile prices have not risen in the US. The MSRP of a comparably-equipped completely-redesigned 2010 Mercedes E-Class is almost to the penny what it was back at this time in 2002 when I bought one.

But if Leica can actually sell MP's, M7's and those legacy lenses for double what they went for 5 years ago, I have tremendous respect for them, not to mention a good measure of envy. Frankly the M8/8.2/9 (and the newest lenses) are the most reasonable IHMO to me of all Leica's products because they represent recent R&D costs, not products whose development has been fully amortized for a decade or so. If I feel stupid it's only because I sold my ASPH lenses 3-4 years ago. Had I held onto them I could have easily financed a couple of M9's on the profits alone.

The fact I will wait for a demo M9 is less a function of my feeling the new cost is unjust (well, given the fact I am travelling much less and shooting much less these days, perhaps unjustified) as it is a decision to sidestep some of the inevitable depreciation.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I don't fell insulted by Leica's prices of late...more like assaulted In particular, the cameras and lenses that have been around a number of years and are now double their former cost despite no improvements and despite a protracted period of very low inflation and a very bad economy that has brought many consumer-product manufacturers to their knees. The rationalization of world currency fluctuations hasn't made sense to me at all in face of the fact that major German automobile prices have not risen in the US. The MSRP of a comparably-equipped completely-redesigned 2010 Mercedes E-Class is almost to the penny what it was back at this time in 2002 when I bought one.

But if Leica can actually sell MP's, M7's and those legacy lenses for double what they went for 5 years ago, I have tremendous respect for them, not to mention a good measure of envy. Frankly the M8/8.2/9 (and the newest lenses) are the most reasonable IHMO to me of all Leica's products because they represent recent R&D costs, not products whose development has been fully amortized for a decade or so. If I feel stupid it's only because I sold my ASPH lenses 3-4 years ago. Had I held onto them I could have easily financed a couple of M9's on the profits alone.

Possibly because a mass-market manufacturer of taxis and commercial vehicles can swallow short-term currency fluctuations easier than a small specialist manufacturer of luxury cameras? Or possibly (I don't know) because profit margins on luxury Mercedes were a great deal higher than on Leicas?

I completely agree with your point about the newer cameras and lenses, but to discount a very significant decline in the value of the dollar strikes me as disingenuous.

Cheers,

R.

 

[leica007]

I don't fell insulted by Leica's prices of late...more like assaulted

that's great - i feel the same way.

 

[leicashot]

that's great - i feel the same way.

That's great, any deterent of the greater population buying Leica's is a good thing. I like the fact it's a niche product and would prefer it to stay that way.