Honestly, every time I start thinking about the future of the digital M, the price tag issue just makes me cringe. Even disregarding the prices we'd get from extrapolating from film vs digital markups and looking at just digital examples alone, for the price of Leica's Digital Module R back, you can either buy a full Nikon D2X pro-caliber body with more megapixels, high-speed crop, and state-of-the-art autofocus and ergonomics, or a full Canon 1DII pro-caliber body with a larger sensor size, blistering autofocus and shooting speed, and still have over $1000 to spend on glass. Or compare the huge price difference between the virtually identical Leica Digilux 2 and the Pasonic LC-1. Will Leica shooters really be able to stomach the inevitable digital markup on a digital M, which will be based on what is already the most expensive 35mm film body in the world?
Leica will not be trying to undercut the competition with price; however, with the likes of Nikon and Canon being so far ahead of them in the digital game, how will they be able to make the digital M anywhere near competitive if they can't do it through volume/price, specs/features, or raw build quality and longevity? The Epson is already priced at a barely-tolerable level of absurdity!
It would be hard enough for Leica to pull it off as it is, but with Zeiss and Epson in the tiny digital rangefinder market as well, Leica has a very long and hard uphill battle in front of them. And with the collector's market for Leicas offsetting the usual digital depreciation, I don't see how I'll ever be able to own a digital M. Ever. Without resorting to either theft or selling body parts, of course. 😀
