ernesto
Well-known
well well well!
Soo many opinions...
What is not doubtfull is that Leica is still moving People´s feelings.
I needed a digital body for my wides, but I must pay it with my work. The problem is time. If I have a camera for 10 years it would be easier to pay, but if it becomes obsolete in 2 years, I will be in trouble!
What looks contradictory to me, is the idea of excelence in technology.
Leica prices are high because of it.
You can reach excelence trough experience and time, so the excelence is limited to really known technology.
When you have new technology, you cannot reach the same excelence because you have not enough time nor experience. Therefore the company should not charge extra for it. Anyway they do because they still have the "aura" of the previous excelence.
This is the point that made up my mind. I will stay with film some more time until a new digital body with M mount appears, and not necesarily a Leica brand.
I want to thank you all for all very clever and clear comments!
Having said this, let me tell you my new point of view, about leica´s future.
based on all your opinions:
Soon or later this diference between both technologies, will be more and more evident, and the contradiction will become wider. If so, Leica brand will be somehow devaluated. I assume they know this, and will have to keep the M "aura" intact if they want to survive, therefore a cheaper M mount line will be necesary until they have reached the new excelence level in the new tech era. If so, the M9 will not appear soon. Instead some other models will have to fill the niche. The M9 will have to be a full frame model, with a much modern development.
Ernesto
PD Great Picture johnastovall !
Soo many opinions...
What is not doubtfull is that Leica is still moving People´s feelings.
I needed a digital body for my wides, but I must pay it with my work. The problem is time. If I have a camera for 10 years it would be easier to pay, but if it becomes obsolete in 2 years, I will be in trouble!
What looks contradictory to me, is the idea of excelence in technology.
Leica prices are high because of it.
You can reach excelence trough experience and time, so the excelence is limited to really known technology.
When you have new technology, you cannot reach the same excelence because you have not enough time nor experience. Therefore the company should not charge extra for it. Anyway they do because they still have the "aura" of the previous excelence.
This is the point that made up my mind. I will stay with film some more time until a new digital body with M mount appears, and not necesarily a Leica brand.
I want to thank you all for all very clever and clear comments!
Having said this, let me tell you my new point of view, about leica´s future.
based on all your opinions:
Soon or later this diference between both technologies, will be more and more evident, and the contradiction will become wider. If so, Leica brand will be somehow devaluated. I assume they know this, and will have to keep the M "aura" intact if they want to survive, therefore a cheaper M mount line will be necesary until they have reached the new excelence level in the new tech era. If so, the M9 will not appear soon. Instead some other models will have to fill the niche. The M9 will have to be a full frame model, with a much modern development.
Ernesto
PD Great Picture johnastovall !
Last edited:
usayit
Well-known
Is it just me or these M8 threads have the same look and feel as the Noctilux threads?
RIVI1969
Established
This is an example from the Nikon website in which we can see the Nikon D3 capabilities at ISO 6400, which looks far cleaner than the M8 shots at ISO 2500 or 1250 for that matter presented here... so drooling about M8's high iso capabilities is a little nonsense. it is ok, but nothing even a D80 can surpass or at least match.
Leica strengths are not in its high-tech capabilities, in that arena is 2 steps behind and will always be.
(The original picture is 14x9.5 inches at 300 dpi and looks very impressive)
Leica strengths are not in its high-tech capabilities, in that arena is 2 steps behind and will always be.
(The original picture is 14x9.5 inches at 300 dpi and looks very impressive)
Attachments
Last edited:
kevin m
Veteran
No disrespect intended, but not with examples like these.
Much as I'm jonesing for a digital rangefinder, I'll wait for the M9, or its equivalent. At the very least, I'll be able to snatch up a used M8 for a reasonable price then.
infocusf8@earthlink.
Established
Perfectly Acceptable
Perfectly Acceptable
What I cannot accept is the solution to the magenta cast problem. When you are expected to pay £3000 for a camera and then told you need to put filters in front of your lenses to correct a flaw they can't fix is a joke.
What leaves me speechless is the fact that some posters here seem to think this is acceptable.
This is a misconception that it was a design flaw, it was not. Leica gave Kodak the criteria to design a sensor that would render the same image quality with their lenses as a Leica film camera. To design a sensor that gave that kind of reproduction a compromise had to be made. Either a standard AA filter and a IR filter had to be put on the sensor and the resulting image had to be cleaned up by a processor (this is what Canon, Nikon et al do) or a thin AA filter and no IR filter that maintained image sharpness without over processing. Leica decided to maintain image integrity and that is the choices you have with current technology unless you go with a Foveon sensor which is the only true color sensor available that doesn't need filtration of some kind. The magenta cast issue has been blown way out of proportion by non owners and people unfamiliar with the camera. If you think about the potential that exists with a camera that shoots color, B&W and B&W IR in 16 bit dng raw image quality you now have the perfect shooter for many of us who feel this is perfectly acceptable.
Perfectly Acceptable
What I cannot accept is the solution to the magenta cast problem. When you are expected to pay £3000 for a camera and then told you need to put filters in front of your lenses to correct a flaw they can't fix is a joke.
What leaves me speechless is the fact that some posters here seem to think this is acceptable.
This is a misconception that it was a design flaw, it was not. Leica gave Kodak the criteria to design a sensor that would render the same image quality with their lenses as a Leica film camera. To design a sensor that gave that kind of reproduction a compromise had to be made. Either a standard AA filter and a IR filter had to be put on the sensor and the resulting image had to be cleaned up by a processor (this is what Canon, Nikon et al do) or a thin AA filter and no IR filter that maintained image sharpness without over processing. Leica decided to maintain image integrity and that is the choices you have with current technology unless you go with a Foveon sensor which is the only true color sensor available that doesn't need filtration of some kind. The magenta cast issue has been blown way out of proportion by non owners and people unfamiliar with the camera. If you think about the potential that exists with a camera that shoots color, B&W and B&W IR in 16 bit dng raw image quality you now have the perfect shooter for many of us who feel this is perfectly acceptable.
pizzahut88
Well-known
How wide do you need?
How wide do you need?
Isn't the 12mm & 15mm wide enough?
The 12/5,6 Heliar = 15mm
The 15/4,5 = 20mm
I think that is good enough for most cases, if not, do pano, & stitch.
The effect is even more dramatic.
How wide do you need?
ernesto said:
Isn't the 12mm & 15mm wide enough?
The 12/5,6 Heliar = 15mm
The 15/4,5 = 20mm
I think that is good enough for most cases, if not, do pano, & stitch.
The effect is even more dramatic.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
RIVI1969 said:
Maybe it lookes impressive to you, I have seen it before and find it plastic fantastic.Smooooooooth is a marketing fetish.
Last edited:
johnastovall
Light Hunter - RIP 2010
infocusf8@earthlink. said:
You got it backward. The M8 has no AA filter and a very weak IR filter.
RIVI1969
Established
jaapv said:
That iso 6400 shot looks cleaner than the M8's iso 1250 picture in terms of noise and anyone can see it. Plastic fantastic? I don't know, but free of noise, yes. (In fact Sean Reid shows in his site how the RD1 outperforms the M8 in that area)
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
The noise reduction has destroyed skin texture and the microcontrast of the lens, losing all naturality. It looks like a staged studioshot instead of an action sports shot, the humans look computer-generated. But noiseless it is, I admit..
kevin m
Veteran
OK, all this was debatable until the computer generated part.
If you don't want to carry a camera the size of the D3, that's understandable, I don't either. But there's no need to make stuff up.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I'm happy to add imo. I didn't say it was not an excellent camera. If I were a pro I would buy it in a flash, I'm convinced there is a huge market out there for this kind of stuff. As somebody who is free to follow his own photographic path, I don't even come close to considering it. But look at the shot - the humans really look artificial.
rsl
Russell
jaapv said:
I'm a Nikon guy (in addition to my R-D1 and, eventually, a reliable digital M when Leica comes out with one), but I have to agree with Jaap. I don't understand why Nikon does this with their advertising. Most of the shots they use are of the same variety. Evidently they want to show pros that they can shoot at high ISO without any noise at all. But that's not the way the world really works, and since most of the noise generated by the D2, etc., series of cameras is luminance noise, leaving it in often adds to the effect of the picture.
Olsen
Well-known
Anyway, I should be possible for Leica (as well as Cosina/Epson) to make a cheaper 1,5 crop digital M. It should be possible to give it better high ISO noice properties than the M8. - If Leica does not move into this market segment, Cosina (w/Epson or Zeiss) just might.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
rsl said:
Well, Russ, Nikon is not the only one guilty of posting funny stuf on their website, Leica with their second-rate "testimonial" shots and amateurish "birthday party" series are not very impressive either.
gdi
Veteran
Olsen said:
Wow - good idea - think if Leica picked up the RD-1 where Epson left off. Maybe some tweaks, but mainly ongoing attention and support. They could round out the M line up nicely. Later they could upgrade the megapixels or some such and keep it alive after the next gen M8 arrives (if). Nice match for the new "bargain" summarits, no?
Problem is that if they priced it in the $2000 range it might cut into M8 sales.
gdi
Veteran
rsl said:
Somewhere around I have the poster Nikon stuffed in Rangefinder (Brainerd Raceway at dusk). It was sweet - yes low light and some noise, but plenty of detail. Of course not the shot you would try with an M8, but a nice exhibition of the D3 (that's the model, right?)
rsl
Russell
jaapv said:
By the way, I forgot to say, "wow" about your two pictures earlier on this thread. Not only are they perfectly exposed, they're perfectly beautiful. Since I had some of your raw files earlier to work with, I can imagine what these files must be like. This is the kind of thing Leica and Nikon ought to be using in their ads.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Thanks Russel, I feel flattered
infocusf8@earthlink.
Established
"Leica are doing this it's called a Panasonic. Leica optics are being introduced to a new generation of buyers through point and shoot and bridge cameras such as the FZ 50. Anyone wanting to continue with the Leica look and step up will already be primed for the primary aspect of owning a Leica, optics."
Sure, but not on a 'M-frame'.
Doesn't have to be, it's called getting the Leica name in the hearts and minds of future buyers. Later when they are more affluent you can move them into an M. Meanwhile Leica are making money off licensing their name on Panasonic lenses.
Sure, but not on a 'M-frame'.
Doesn't have to be, it's called getting the Leica name in the hearts and minds of future buyers. Later when they are more affluent you can move them into an M. Meanwhile Leica are making money off licensing their name on Panasonic lenses.