Leica Digital M is going forward

[CraigK]

Canon makes 130,000 Rebel XT's per month at the specs you listed to get the price down to $1000

Actually the camera I am thinking about would not have a fraction of the bells and whistles of the Rebel. , No autofocus, no autowind, no program modes (other than perhaps Aperature Priority) no interchangeable lenses, no pentaprism, no depth of field preview button, no internal flash, no autofocus assist beam, no multisegmented metering no multiple af focus spots, no autobracketing, no...well you get the idea.

Just weld a chip into an updated QL body, tack a screen on the back (that you can choose to show colour or black and white playback thank you very much) and leave all the do-dads and widgets to the dSLR guys and gals.

I'd call it the digital Kiss (keep it simply simple)

 

[Huck Finn]

Please tell me more about the Zeiss project. Where do I go to read?
Paul Treacy, D100 system for work. Hexar fixed for the street and for my sanity.
http://www.paultreacy.com

Paul, you can read about the Zeiss project here:

www.zeissikon.com

But for the time being, it is film only, not digital - at least as far as they're saying. In their promotional brochure, they give this hint of what may come:

"When digital technology takes another leap or two, you can count on us to come up with high performance digital systems . . . And your Carl Zeiss T* ZM-mount lenses will be ready."

 

[DaShiv]

Actually the camera I am thinking about would not have a fraction of the bells and whistles of the Rebel. , No autofocus, no autowind, no program modes (other than perhaps Aperature Priority) no interchangeable lenses, no pentaprism, no depth of field preview button, no internal flash, no autofocus assist beam, no multisegmented metering no multiple af focus spots, no autobracketing, no...well you get the idea.

Just weld a chip into an updated QL body, tack a screen on the back (that you can choose to show colour or black and white playback thank you very much) and leave all the do-dads and widgets to the dSLR guys and gals.

I'd call it the digital Kiss (keep it simply simple)

Well, the new Rebel XT is simply a digital version of the new Rebel T2, a $200-250 film camera. I don't know how much a new QL would cost in 2005 dollars (not really fair to look at used prices) and in the 2005 market since it's built to such a higher standard than "cheap" cameras like the Rebel are these days, but in any case for a digital QL, $700 today is definitely optimistic IMO, especially without the necessary type of sales volume to drive prices down.

Not that I wouldn't want it to be true, of course -- I just don't hope to see it happen for years. But I am hopeful that a fixed-lens digital rangefinder could be much more affordable than an interchangable one, since this would allow them to optimize the microlenses over the sensor toward fixing the incident angles in a specific pattern produced by a single lens (and possibly ramp up the individual pixel gains in a pattern to compensate for lens vignetting as well). With the right minds behind the project, a fixed-lens digital rangefinder could be an amazing performer without requiring a lot of expensive hardware. On the other hand, interchangable-lens digital rangefinders will most likely remain quite expensive for some time to come, I'm afraid.

By the way, you know that the Digital KISS is the product name for the Digital Rebel in Japan, right? 😀

 

[pukupi]

Leica's are expensive but if you buy a film M you're getting an exquisite piece of engineering - not technology - that should last years and possibly generations with a few CLA's along the way. This absence of technology is perhaps key to any M's longevity as there is nothing to go out of date but doesn't this all change with a digital M?

Unless Leica's digital M uses a modular design with a digital back that can be upgraded, it will be technologically surpassed after just few years which I feel means any digital M should be cheaper, not more expensive than the current film M's.

 

[Doug]

I think you bring up a very good point, pukupi. To maintain the Leica longevity, the digital bits should be modular and upgradable. This just adds to their engineering challenge, so it'll be interesting to see what emerges!

 

[aizan]

how long until digital matures? 8 mp is already good enough for many purposes.

 

[pukupi]

how long until digital matures? 8 mp is already good enough for many purposes.

I used this argument to justify the expense of my first four megapixel digital until the eight megapixel came along 😉

35mm film in ideal conditions is capable of taking a 8 to 18 megapixel image but just like the CPU clock speed myth people buy into, megapixels are not everything. When we reach 18 megapixels there will always be improvements in noise reduction, RAW write speed and any number of elements that make good digital camera sell.

 

[aizan]

yeah, there's always room for improvement, but how much do we practically need? increase the raw write speed a little on the 20d and i would call it a night!

 

[DaShiv]

What kind of card at you using on the 20D? With a fast card the 20D already has one of the fastest write times of any DSLR out there, only beaten by Canon's own 1-series (and only the MkII versions at that). For example, compare the 20D's write speeds with the Nikon D2H's:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-7303
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-6555

Now the RAW buffer size is a little skimpy for sports, I'll agree, but the 20D clears it out in a blazing hurry on my Sandisk Extreme.

 

[tamerlin]

And (unfortunately), much like MHz, megapixels are remarkably effective for marketing.

Although most of the photographers who would be interested in a digital Leica know
better, but the volumes come from selling to consumers who don't.

 

[aizan]

i don't have a 20d, i was just illustrating how the 20d, a high end prosumer camera, is really close to all anyone could ever need in a 35mm-esque camera, and that the technology is pretty far along...that it's not "too early" for leica to make a digital camera that doesn't require constant updates and "low build quality". noise reduction and mild vignetting can be dealt with in post-processing, afaic.

 

[Trius]

The market for a fixed-lens, digital rangefinder MIGHT be larger than I think, but if not, then the $699 price would likely be difficult to achieve, especially if you expect the quality of a GIII or RD. But while we're at it, let's throw in the Oly SP with its spot meter and f1.7 lens. If I could get an SP with a 28mm f1.7.... ooh.

 

[George S.]

Just another angle to consider....

I really doubt if a so-called "Digital M" camera would really be a success. It is my feeling that whenever you combine two disssimilar technologies into one package, that there will certainly be devotees of each technology that are disappointed in the results. And, given that how rabidly fanatical the Leica M devotee is, why, they even argue and shout and call each other names when they discuss the pros and cons of what rewind lever is best for the new MP and which way is the "real" way the shutter dial should turn.... and the like; I don't see a digital M body pleasing the film-M purists at all, nor will a digital-M please the techies that are into digital technology, since there's bound to be several (many?) compromises involved in the design.

I think it's kind of akin to taking a really classic car from the past, say a 1930s Packard, and building exactly the same car today but just adding an all-digital readout dashboard and radio, etc to try and please the old car and the new car buffs.

 

[pukupi]

yeah, there's always room for improvement, but how much do we practically need? increase the raw write speed a little on the 20d and i would call it a night!

I agree completely. Apart from not being full frame and the RAW write speed, I had little to complain about my 20D before I sold it to finance my RF GAS attack 😉. For most consumers though, 'want' not 'need' is in the drivers seat.