Leica's M9 and Mini M plan

Peter Walnes said:
This is pure fantasy. It is also the same mindset that brought Leica to near-bankruptcy 4 years ago.
Click to expand...

Hear hear.

Leica punches above it's weight only in the world of wishful thinking. Here in the real world it has to COMPETE like any other.

There is no such thing as a sentimental banker.

Regards,

Bill
 
jbf said:
BTW, it's an extremely good translation too...
Click to expand...

Yes, I thought this part was especially succinct for an automated translation:

""During the first Supervisory Board meeting," says Kaufmann, "I have said to me: We are in deep ****.""

(Hmmm, apparently it's too succinct for the RFF Naughty Words Manager!)


Anyway, so we learn from this that Leica is considering a possible, theoretical M9 plus compact M to be released maybe, someday, somehow...

What I would like to hope that means is that Leica is spreading this as FUD* because they have picked up credible suspicions of a competitor posed to enter the digital RF market! (Maybe a competitor whose name begins with "C" or "N"?!?)








*FUD: Back in the bad old days when Microsoft was an evil software empire, one strategy they used to crush more-innovative competitors was "Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt," commonly abbreviated as FUD. Basically, this meant saying to potential customers: "Don't buy our competitor's fully-functional, need-meeting product that's available now. Eventually we're going to release a product that's a lot better and will become the industry standard, and you'll kick yourself because you didn't wait." When enough customers believed this, they would hold off ordering the competitors' shipping product and put the competitor out of business. Then Microsoft was free to deliver as crappy a product as it wanted, as late as it wanted, if ever...
 
jlw said:
Yes, I thought this part was especially succinct for an automated translation:

""During the first Supervisory Board meeting," says Kaufmann, "I have said to me: We are in deep ****.""
Click to expand...
The last part is in English in the original, so the succinctness of the English version does not go to the credit of the automated translation 😉

Philipp
 
How about this, Philipp:

.) put the M8 electronics into the digi CL, sell for US 2500 or more
.) release full frame M9
.) discontinue M8

🙂
 
Peter Walnes said:
This is pure fantasy. It is also the same mindset that brought Leica to near-bankruptcy 4 years ago.
Click to expand...

Are you shooting an M8? have you see Jack Flecther comparison of the 1DsMkIII, 'sMKII, 5D and M8.

I'm currently shooting both a 5D with nothing but L glass and an M8 and the M8 without the AA filter process higher resolution images and images with more snap and requireing less Post sharpening.
 
sitemistic said:
John, do you think there will be a substantial market for a $12,000 Leica DSLR with 1Ds MkIII specs but without an AA filter? I don't know. I just don't think the resulting image quality difference (if any) would entice that many people.
Click to expand...

There is a market of a Mamiya ZF back and 645AFD which is at 12K and for the Canon 1DsMkIII at 8K.
 
rxmd said:
I was referring to the section on new products. Neither of the points you made are in there. I'm not denying that the article has some sources at Leica, only not for the section on new products that this thread is largely interested in, judging by the thread title.


For me both don't make sense. Or they make sense as products, but sound problematic as parts of a product lineup.

A digital mini-M will cut into M8 sales just like the CL cut into M5 sales. Leicas own sales are slim enough that they can't afford to undercut them. The existing M8 will have to present significant added value over a hypothetical mini-M, so the mini-M, if it comes, is likely to be crippled in significant aspects. I mean really significant as in "crop factor 2", or in "zoom viewfinder with only electronic rangefinder", not as in "slightly smaller rangefinder base" or "slightly different viewfinder" or "not in the original M form factor", because that didn't make a significant difference with the original CL either. If the mini-M lets you do the same that you could do with an M8, or almost the same, then the mini-M will be a danger for Leica, so it has to be substantially less capable.

A full-frame M9 will be hideously expensive given today's technology. Then again, maybe customers don't care and Leica doesn't mind producing a camera of which only a couple of thousand can be sold if at all. If people buy $6k lenses, maybe two or three of them will also buy $10k bodies. In this case the M9 is not a relevant product for any consideration of mine any more than a Seitz 6x17. But: Just because people say they would like to buy something, doesn't mean they will.

Regarding the oversized-sensor, autofocus R10: oversized sensors are a staple item in nerd speculations about digital developments in the 35mm world, people were speculating about that for the Canon 1Ds Mk III as well. It does not make sense technically because of the size and available clearance of the mirror, since it would make all the existing lenses incompatible mechanically. Let Leica build a full frame 35mm camera first, it's a capability they haven't demonstrated so far either. There is no market for what would effectively be another medium format system - in fact the existing systems are already done for; the Contax 645 is dead, and Pentax is having difficulties getting a workable digital 645 out, so I don't see why Leica with its overstrained development budget would want to dabble in this minefield. The "custom shutter" in the article is completely unnecessary because Leica has good electronic shutters already. Finally, autofocus has been speculated for the R series since the R8; Puts, in possibly unintended irony, wrote that Leica will have to develop autofocus sooner or later because Leica buyers are getting older and older and their eyes are getting weaker and weaker. I believe Leica producing an autofocus SLR when I see it, because many Leica-heads tend to see autofocus as the work of the devil and Leica as the epitome of manual-focus goodness, but still this seems to me the most likely addition of all the pieces of speculation from the article.

So until I hear someone from Leica making a definitive statement in the direction of one of these products (and I mean we-have-a-working-preseries-and-will-present-it-at-Photokina definitive, not some-of-us-have-been-speculating-over-a-beer-about-it definitive), I will remain quite skeptical about them.

Philipp
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I see that 'talk' of a full frame M9 and an oversized R10 etc. is just speculations on the part of the guy who wrote this article. Nowhere is it supported by statements from Leica. Further: A full frame rangefinder camera is far into the future. Could be 10 years or more.

To keep turnover up, leica must launch new products faster. I would guess that M8 sales now has bloomed off and is fractions of what it was a year ago. That means falling income and no or little profit. The dollar fall spells a different situation as well. The US market is of the greatest importance to Leica. If their American enthusiasts don't buy, Leica is in deep trouble. It could help a lot if Leica could come up with a cheaper alternative to M8.

So, I don't agree with you that a 'digital CL' would steal sales from M8. I could be a manually driven shutter, like on RD-1, and a 1,5 crop sensor, which is a hell lot cheaper and simpler to make. I think it is urgent that Leica comes up with a cheaper alternative to M8.
 
sitemistic said:
John, I have the R1800 also. No, I don't have an M8, which is why I asked.

I don't really know what to make of the M8, honestly. I'm seeing posts around now that claim it blows away the 1Ds Mk III. I don't know about that, but if it does, Kodak created a miracle sensor a few years ago and hopefully will build on it. If it truly delivers better resolution and image quality than a 21 megapixel full frame chip, why on earth would Leica change it in the M9?
Click to expand...

Well if you don't shoot one with Leica lenses you are rather like a virgin talking about sex. I guess we should take you posts in the same way.
 
sitemistic said:
John, I have the R1800 also. No, I don't have an M8, which is why I asked.

I don't really know what to make of the M8, honestly. I'm seeing posts around now that claim it blows away the 1Ds Mk III. I don't know about that, but if it does, Kodak created a miracle sensor a few years ago and hopefully will build on it. If it truly delivers better resolution and image quality than a 21 megapixel full frame chip, why on earth would Leica change it in the M9?
Click to expand...

I compare M8 files with those of my 1Ds II - I don't have the 1Ds III - yet. The M8 files look like 1,33 cropped files from a sensor with comparable resolution which favours from better optics and no AA filter. This is all in a more compact camera. - You should go for a M8. Highly recommended.
 
Olsen said:
I agree with this. I see that 'talk' of a full frame M9 and an oversized R10 etc. is just speculations on the part of the guy who wrote this article. Nowhere is it supported by statements from Leica. Further: A full frame rangefinder camera is far into the future. Could be 10 years or more.

To keep turnover up, leica must launch new products faster. I would guess that M8 sales now has bloomed off and is fractions of what it was a year ago.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. Leica told me that they would only start to supply M8 camera's "a la carte" when sales dropped to a manageable level. That hasn't happened yet.
Olsen said:
That means falling income and no or little profit. The dollar fall spells a different situation as well. The US market is of the greatest importance to Leica. If their American enthusiasts don't buy, Leica is in deep trouble.
Click to expand...
Doubtful. Of course the American market is important, but the German sales alone are larger than the ones in the USA. With the falling dollar I have a suspicion that profits on any sale over there are close to zero, if not negative. It may be more profitable to cut loose.
Olsen said:
It could help a lot if Leica could come up with a cheaper alternative to M8.
Click to expand...
Agree, especially for the USA.

Olsen said:
So, I don't agree with you that a 'digital CL' would steal sales from M8. I could be a manually driven shutter, like on RD-1, and a 1,5 crop sensor, which is a hell lot cheaper and simpler to make. I think it is urgent that Leica comes up with a cheaper alternative to M8.
Click to expand...
They might also consider going the CL way and limiting the viewfinder. Adding focus confirmation would be an option in that case.
 
sitemistic said:
John, I have the R1800 also. No, I don't have an M8, which is why I asked.

I don't really know what to make of the M8, honestly. I'm seeing posts around now that claim it blows away the 1Ds Mk III. I don't know about that, but if it does, Kodak created a miracle sensor a few years ago and hopefully will build on it. If it truly delivers better resolution and image quality than a 21 megapixel full frame chip, why on earth would Leica change it in the M9?
Click to expand...
Having done some comaprisons of 5D and 1Ds (1st version) files to the M8 files I find I prefer the M8. However if you are shooting test targets the 5D will resolve a bit more and the 1Ds MK III will resolve quite a bit more. However I don't shoot test targets and in print the M8 holds it's own against all the aforementioned cameras. The differences in image quality between top of the line digicams is small and to say that any one blows the other away would be hyperbole.

I find the biggest advantage of the M8 files is not that they are 'better' in the sense of resolving more detail but that they provide more flexibility in post then I have gotten with Canon and when processed correctly have a bit more life right out of the gate. But all the differences are small and I could get to the same place using a Nikon, Canon, Olympus, etc., if I had to.

The real attraction of the M8 is the RF finder, compact size and M like interface, it's a totally different way of seeing from an SLR. IQ wise digicams from $1000 to $8000 are not that far apart in a page sized print (if used with a good lens).
 
aizan said:
i'd prefer it if the "small digital m" was a DMD. fixed lens, image stabilization, etc. they'd sell like ipods (or hotcakes).
Click to expand...


I'd buy one of those. 10-12MP with a fixed lens, equivalent to a 2/35 or faster.
They could recycle the design from the last pre-ASPH Summicron (v4).
Sell it for around $1500 (knowing Leica it would be $2999).
 
Birthday Wishes

Birthday Wishes

I disagree with you on your view about the M9, and will add information from another interview... Dr. K. said (last July) in the Austrian magazine ECHO that they have not released any official M9 information, but he paints the following picture: "If you were Leica developer and you had found a way (he emphasizes subjunctive mood!) to integrate a full-frame sensor, you would do so, wouldn't you?" (source: http://www.echoonline.at/echo/salzbu...objectID=3330).
Asked about the R10, he stated that Leica has an obvious commitment to SLR. But in his (Dr. K's) opinion, one is better off with the M, though the market has decided otherwise. He added that Leica's SLR lenses belong to the best in the world.
So, it appears that it is not a matter of how but when the FF M9 will appear, and the same holds true for the R10. I for one am hoping (wishing, begging...) that they will release an official statement at Photokina this year, which happens to coincide with my birthday 🙂
MCSOL you will get your birthday wish the new products will be announced at Photokina. Disagree or not the statement by Mr K is ambiguous at best. Perhaps every engineer and CEO dreams of a full framed sensor camera but it is not always expedient monetarily to produce one and I doubt Leica wants to fall into the category of producing throw-away digital cameras so if we see a full frame M9 it won't be for a few years (look how long it took Nikon to produce one). Regardless of what all the nay sayers, Canon or Nikon owners have to say about the M8 it is a solid performer that has its own market share and is doing well in it. As far as the M8 being a rich man's toy I'm certainly not rich and neither are most of the people I sell M8's too. Credit cards afford a lot of us the luxuries the rich can afford it just takes us longer to pay them off.
 
This is a pipe dream

but I like the idea of the D-CL, however I would love to see it with a Fuji Super CCD (1.5x crop), love the DR of that sensor

perhaps with a fixed 35mm 1.8 lens ... would be a sweet shooter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom