larmarv916
Well-known
Iam very interested and impressed by the attached Nikon varible viewfinder that is both shown and discussed in the Nikon Link provided by Vlademar. This is really tangible technology that could be used for a digital rangfinder of the next generation. Also it would be a boon to the problems SLR cameras have had from day one....tunnel vision effect. So now you get a multi-frame style image and a locator frame and a focus confirmation signal for SLR...that is impressive.
Also I do not think the issue is Leica being dead....it just smacks,,,very loudly of that famous phrase....."Snatching defeat from the jaws of Victory" or in the modern world....lets try what didn't before. Lets look at some good ideas that revived a brand that stalled in the marketplace. When Porsche was going no where....the Boxster was a turnaround product. When VW had a similar probem....it was the reinvented "Bug" and did the same Trick. When Ducati was stuck and could not attract people..it was the Monster that got them into a whole new customer demographic. I fact it was the "naked Bike" concept that turned the entire motocycle market around.
The whole issue is that you must keep attracting new blood because your loyal old customers are always leaving the market. By death or lack of interest in photography....due to things like vision and focus problems. and other real life isssues. Even HCB late in life stated he had said everything he wanted to say with a camera and Stopped shooting and went back to drawing.
The Leica folks and it's internal culture are stuck in a time warp. This is never so clear as to read the POP interview
Best Regards....Laurance
Also I do not think the issue is Leica being dead....it just smacks,,,very loudly of that famous phrase....."Snatching defeat from the jaws of Victory" or in the modern world....lets try what didn't before. Lets look at some good ideas that revived a brand that stalled in the marketplace. When Porsche was going no where....the Boxster was a turnaround product. When VW had a similar probem....it was the reinvented "Bug" and did the same Trick. When Ducati was stuck and could not attract people..it was the Monster that got them into a whole new customer demographic. I fact it was the "naked Bike" concept that turned the entire motocycle market around.
The whole issue is that you must keep attracting new blood because your loyal old customers are always leaving the market. By death or lack of interest in photography....due to things like vision and focus problems. and other real life isssues. Even HCB late in life stated he had said everything he wanted to say with a camera and Stopped shooting and went back to drawing.
The Leica folks and it's internal culture are stuck in a time warp. This is never so clear as to read the POP interview
Best Regards....Laurance
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
Well actually... the sheep will snap 'em up at 10,000 Euros.
Timmy P
Established
Hmmmm, I remember from the DCS full frame camera's back in the day hearing a similar thing.
Didn't hear much about the colour though. I'd much rather superior ISO performance. Colour for me, in digital, is something thats easily manipulated and fixed anyways...
I'm pretty sure Kodak helped with the 4/3 sensors as well, and they're not exactly famed for their noise performance.
Oh well, I'll wait for Nikon's hopeful offering or just wait another 5 years until something becomes affordable for me :-/
Cheers,
-Tim
tomasis
Well-known
I really wish for digital "film" cartridge. it would be much simpler to put this into M3.
I believe a lot in nanotechonlogy and digital "cartridge" is not an impossibility
I really welcome Nikon digital RF and I believe that it is not good idea if Nikon tries to push out Leica from the market. Look why it is M mount on eventual nikon camera, not own its mount? Instead Nikon can create middle-level or comparable products with m8 and still offer good value against rd1.
I believe a lot in nanotechonlogy and digital "cartridge" is not an impossibility
I really welcome Nikon digital RF and I believe that it is not good idea if Nikon tries to push out Leica from the market. Look why it is M mount on eventual nikon camera, not own its mount? Instead Nikon can create middle-level or comparable products with m8 and still offer good value against rd1.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Easy. A digital M is pretty much the only product I'd buy new from them, because everything else is available just as good and cheaper on the used market, and I'm not a charitable institution. I'm interested in a digital M, but they're priced outside what I'm willing to spend on a hobby.
It might be infeasible to build a cheap digital M, but that's really Leica's problem. I'm probably not their target market either, but again, it's their job to figure out whether they even have a target market, just like it's their problem to figure out how to sell products that people will buy instead of talking about them.
Philipp
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
The donation nicely sums up Leica's dilemma as well as Leica's reason to exist. The irony about donating M4s to schools is that 35 years ago they were donating M4's, too.
Philipp
Philipp
jbf
||||||
Damn right they still use film.
More than half of the students in my school program as well as my school still use e5, 120, and large format films.veraikon
xpanner
To clarify the sackended discussion about the „donation M4-2/M4-P+ summarits” to Rochester Institute of Technologies (RIT) School of Photographic Arts and Sciences.
Kaufmann spoke in a former interview about. The idea was born when Kaufmann was at a meeting in Rochester (LHS??) and one of the RIT professors talked with him about the renaissance of film photography and the lack of equivalent cameras in the RIT equipment. As far as I know from the interview M4-P etc were chosen because they are full mechanical and without metering. Students should learn from the basic. For details why a M4-P and not a MP without battery was chosen we should ask the prof or Kaufmann. As far as I know they got what they wanted.
I hope this makes it clearer
V
varjag
Guest
Which of course been refuted later by the original poster as experiment in "internet rumor-making", but it was too late: Nikon droolers picked it up like forest fire and since the rumor moves in cycles over photography forums, reinforcing itself.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
More precisely, here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=25483282 and even that admission statement was weak-ish with lots to claims to the sociological value of what amounts to Internet trolling.
Goes to show that you should believe things you read on the Internet no more than things told to you by a random guy on a bus.
Philipp
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
That's a good point.
The chip, when it was announced, did make me cringe (and in a way, it still does) because I immediately thought of Kodak's Nikon/Canon based SLR systems.
In fact, you could, basically, take the following quote from Phil Askey's review (yes.. I don't mind DPReview for the REVIEWS but I tend to despise it for the forums... it's kind of like pizza with anchovies.. love the pizza.. hate the anchovies..
) and apply it to the M8 because it's the Kodak sensor in the M8:Phil Askey said:
The thing is.. as Leicasniper said.. that review is 4 years old but the sensor technology that Kodak has used in the M8 also seems to be 4 years old.
Dave
S
Socke
Guest
Dave, I don't think it's the chip from the DCS/n or DCS/c. A friend of mine has an upgraded DSC14n and it is very good at low ISOs, but low ISO means below ISO 200! At 400 it gets nasty and at 800 it is unusable.
The M8 pictures I have seen so far look much better than what you can get out of a DCS14.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Oh.. I know it's not the same chip
ISO 640 is perfectly fine on the M8.
ISO 1250.. with Noise Reduction added (or just converted to B&W) seems to be "ok".
But what I'm saying is, when it was announced that it was Kodak's chip (regardless of the generation) I got extremely nervous. Kodak, imho, has never been known for consistent high quality low noise sensors.... key word there is "consistent"
So far, I like what the camera can do - but it still doesn't help me have any more "confidence" in Kodak being able to produce a low noise sensor
Dave
M. Valdemar
Well-known
The Kodak Pro 14n used a chip from one manufacturer, and the "upgraded" 14nx and SLR/n, SLR/c used another chip from a different source.
The 14n had no AA filter and was sharper then the later Kodaks out of the camera, albeit it has a base ISO of 80 as opposed to the base ISO of 160 on the SLR/n, 14nx.
I have both cameras. The 14n is VERY usable at ISO 400 and even ISO 800.
MOST of the supposed problems with the camera were based on reports from photographers who didn't know how to use it.
1) They shot JPG instead of RAW. The JPGs are horrible.
2) The RAW converters 6 years ago were not good, and contributed to the bad impression of the camera.
3) The early firmware versions were awful, and not until the end of the camera's life did Kodak finally come up with decent firmware. 5.4.1 and 5.4.9 produce superb image quality when shot RAW and processed with modern RAW conversion software.
14n, ISO 320
14n, ISO 250
14n, ISO 200
14n, ISO 200
The 14n had no AA filter and was sharper then the later Kodaks out of the camera, albeit it has a base ISO of 80 as opposed to the base ISO of 160 on the SLR/n, 14nx.
I have both cameras. The 14n is VERY usable at ISO 400 and even ISO 800.
MOST of the supposed problems with the camera were based on reports from photographers who didn't know how to use it.
1) They shot JPG instead of RAW. The JPGs are horrible.
2) The RAW converters 6 years ago were not good, and contributed to the bad impression of the camera.
3) The early firmware versions were awful, and not until the end of the camera's life did Kodak finally come up with decent firmware. 5.4.1 and 5.4.9 produce superb image quality when shot RAW and processed with modern RAW conversion software.
14n, ISO 320
14n, ISO 250
14n, ISO 200
14n, ISO 200
Last edited:
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
M.Valdemar said:
Save for #2 there and playing with the numbers involved for the versions of the firmware that reads just like what people have said about the M8.. that's all I'm saying.
Dave
M. Valdemar
Well-known
Very possible. I have no problem with the quality of the files produced by the M8.
My aversion to the M8 is due to the inherent unreliability of the camera and the extortionate price that would be charged by Leica if the camera needed out-of-warranty service.
Epson will repair any R-D1 for a flat fee of $550.
Leica prices supposedly START at $2000 for any serious repair out of warranty.
My aversion to the M8 is due to the inherent unreliability of the camera and the extortionate price that would be charged by Leica if the camera needed out-of-warranty service.
Epson will repair any R-D1 for a flat fee of $550.
Leica prices supposedly START at $2000 for any serious repair out of warranty.
Tuolumne
Veteran
Those were very impressive photos from the 14n. How many years ago was that? I am not at all familiar with the camera.
/T
/T
M. Valdemar
Well-known
I took most of them in the last year or so. I get beautiful photos from the 14n with very little effort. I usually use a Tamron or Nikkor AF zoom, occasionally a Nikkor AF prime. I like the 14n better than the SLR/c in terms of color and file sharpness.
I usually shoot at around ISO 160 or ISO 320 and I use Adobe RAW with a minimum of post processing.
Vastly underrated camera. I only wish it would work with non-CPU lenses. It was based on the Nikon N80, a consumer camera. If it had been based on the Nikon F100 it would have been a masterpiece.
Remember, this was FULL FRAME around 2002.
.
I usually shoot at around ISO 160 or ISO 320 and I use Adobe RAW with a minimum of post processing.
Vastly underrated camera. I only wish it would work with non-CPU lenses. It was based on the Nikon N80, a consumer camera. If it had been based on the Nikon F100 it would have been a masterpiece.
Remember, this was FULL FRAME around 2002.
.
Last edited:
Harry Lime
Practitioner
The M4-2? That's great. These guys are geniuses. They are going to donate the one and only hit-or-miss M body Leica has ever made, to potential new customers.
How stupid can you get?
M. Valdemar
Well-known
If I was a student there, I'd be overjoyed to get one. That's starting to get a little silly. I don't really think they're "hit or miss".