David_Manning
Well-known
At the expense of fanning any flames (especially as the new guy here), I spent $5K US on a new D2X body when they first came out. It really was leading-edge technology. That price hurt a lot, and it took a bunch of freelance work to justify/pay for it. I just sold it, three and a half years later, for about a thousand bucks in order to buy the M6 thats coming my way...one fifth the price.
Please remember that a digital camera body, as opposed to a film body, is like a computer...the sensor is the key element. With a poor sensor, none of the other ancillary systems can optimize their jobs. And size is not the only measurement of it's ability. I sincerely believe the king of full-frame, low-light professional cameras is the D700...it's pristine and amazing, for less than $3000. I don't think I'd buy a Leica-branded Panasonic digital camera for $8000 (I think that's Leica's digital partner). I think Nikon and Canon have demonstrated they have aced digital technology.
I like Leica for it's mechanical durability and all the strengths of the brand that have all of us shooting Leicas. I also like the intangible qualities of souped Tri-X and Ilford. The Leica advantage was always sharp glass on film with reliable bodies. Digital processing has equalized much of that advantage for digital shooters.
Use logic instead of emotion. If you want a great digital camera, get a Nikon. If you want a fabulous, discreet film camera, get a Leica. As a business decision, it's hard to justify an $8000 camera body just for two more stops of light. Especially in this economy, when freelancers are fighting over every scrap.
That said, if you could write that $8000 check and not bat an eyelash, enjoy your new M9!
Please remember that a digital camera body, as opposed to a film body, is like a computer...the sensor is the key element. With a poor sensor, none of the other ancillary systems can optimize their jobs. And size is not the only measurement of it's ability. I sincerely believe the king of full-frame, low-light professional cameras is the D700...it's pristine and amazing, for less than $3000. I don't think I'd buy a Leica-branded Panasonic digital camera for $8000 (I think that's Leica's digital partner). I think Nikon and Canon have demonstrated they have aced digital technology.
I like Leica for it's mechanical durability and all the strengths of the brand that have all of us shooting Leicas. I also like the intangible qualities of souped Tri-X and Ilford. The Leica advantage was always sharp glass on film with reliable bodies. Digital processing has equalized much of that advantage for digital shooters.
Use logic instead of emotion. If you want a great digital camera, get a Nikon. If you want a fabulous, discreet film camera, get a Leica. As a business decision, it's hard to justify an $8000 camera body just for two more stops of light. Especially in this economy, when freelancers are fighting over every scrap.
That said, if you could write that $8000 check and not bat an eyelash, enjoy your new M9!
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Panasonic has nothing whatever to do with either the M8 or M9. The "highest" Panaleica is the DLux4. Leica's digital partners are Kodak for the sensors , Jenoptic (partly) for the software and Fuyitsu for the Maestro chip which will power the M9. You focus too much on bodies. One buys into a system. There is no way Nikon can - or even wants to- compete with Leica M lenses in the shorter focal lengths.
Leica M8 cameras are still selling at something like half the original price, a lot better than one fifth I should think
So I think your logic is flawed. I would say if a Nikon suits you get a Nikon, and if a Leica suits you get a Leica. All the rest is just rationalizing.I like the work on your website btw, whichever camera it was taken with.
Last edited:
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
maybe they're using up surplus M5 bodies?
Only if increased size would take the shape of the M5 would I consider it. If it turns out a beefed-up M8, I'll pass.
Can't wait, all those poor sods that need to jump the bandwagon will sell great lenses to pay for the M9
Benjamin
Registered Snoozer
Better things will happen in September.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I must confess I'm on the list of pre-orders
horosu
Well-known
Put me on the pre-order list. I've been waiting enough for a FF rangefinder...
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I honestly believe if Leica priced the M9 at $100,000 there would be a market. There just doesn't seem to be an upper limit to what people will pay for these things. It's just amazing.
But...if it doesn't look and feel like an M7 or M8, nobody is going to buy it. So I can't imagine Leica making it bigger.
But...if it doesn't look and feel like an M7 or M8, nobody is going to buy it. So I can't imagine Leica making it bigger.
Spoks
Well-known
I might buy a used or refurbished one myself... only if it's really FF. Heck! I could buy a used one and have Leica refurbish it.
Sure, I could always write the great American novel and win the Nobel Prize in Economics for that matter.
But heck, dreaming is free (still)...
Solares,
.... you are dreaming....
I'll bet my shirt that it will not be a Nobel Price Winner in Economics from US of A this year, as things are...
Ben Z
Veteran
Speaking for myself I wouldn't buy one if it was bigger than the M8. Since I got my 5D a few months ago I confess it's the one I grab 90% of the time. I don't care if the M8 raw files need less sharpening, my final prints from the 5D look just as sharp as anything from the M8, and that's all that counts to me. I always preferred the viewing system of an SLR, it was their ever-increasing bulk throughout the years that put me off them. The only reason I gravitated to Leica in the first place was to have a top-quality outfit that fits in a small bag for traveling, and the M8 is already bigger than the M4. I'm getting more image quality than I need out of the M8 right now, so I don't consider replacing it a priority, and certainly if it grows in size I would have even less reason.
bean_counter
Well-known
I wouldn't be so sure... as long as it isn't W. doing it, spending trillions we don't have will be hailed as BRILLIANT
hey, maybe the reason the Feds are shutting down 'cash for clunkers' is so that they can afford a new rebate program for those trading film M's for the new M9....
Olsen
Well-known
It is not the FF Iam missing with my M8. But a lot of other things. I would like to get rid of all this UV/IR filter mess and be able to use, say, ZM lenses without having to code them and all that. I would like to see a sensor dust removal system and better high ISO performance. And so on. FF is no big deal. That can easily be compensated by buying/using wider angle lenses.
I am very curious about what Leica is coming up with now. What kind of sensor improvements can we expect after just two - three years? As one here comments; I hope that Leica isn't rushing another unfinished camera to market, once again.
For sure, I will not be a beta tester this time. I am going to Singapore in March/April next year, but if the M9 has just reached the shelves by then, I might just as well wait another year.
I am very curious about what Leica is coming up with now. What kind of sensor improvements can we expect after just two - three years? As one here comments; I hope that Leica isn't rushing another unfinished camera to market, once again.
For sure, I will not be a beta tester this time. I am going to Singapore in March/April next year, but if the M9 has just reached the shelves by then, I might just as well wait another year.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I agree, taking an unproved camera out on its own is not a good idea in general. But one could always drop an M8 in the bag, just for luck
JohnTF
Veteran
Spoks
Well-known
Swedish pension funds are among the losers on the Madoff Scandal. He just might get lynched - after having to explain 'where the money is' or 'who did he lose them to'. - If the answer is 'Goldman Sachs' then it's not worth a Nobel Price. Then we'll all be price winners....
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Umm, what about the pension fund managers that went into such a scheme? Dutch pension funds have lost quite a bit too, but just mundanely on the stock market, so it seems they will recover in the future.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Do I have to sell my M8 before that date, because after the announcement the prices for used M8 will drop even more? What do you think?
Olsen
Well-known
I am convinced that the value of M8s has fallen due to the uncertainty of any follow-up. When a M9 is announced and will be ready in the shops, I am convinced the the M8 price will go up, or at least stay stable. I bought my M8 2 years ago new, in Singapore, for NOK 20.000 - less than half of what it costs in Norway today. Still, a 2.hand M8 is traded easily for 18.000 NOK.
- I lost far more on buying/selling my Canon 1Ds/1DsII....
Spoks
Well-known
Good question.
Most of the pension fund managers I know of have come out of it as winners. Despite that they have lost billions on behalf of the pension funds. Best off is the Norwegian fund manager. He's the best paid CEO in Norway after having lost half the fund. He still holds that position...
climbing_vine
Well-known
Hey, it's a troll. Good times.
Back on topic, to the person who asked why the M9 would need to be bigger than the M8--physics suggests that when you increase the sensor size, you need to move the lens away from it at least a little in order to help compensate for the steep angle at which light is hitting the edges of the sensor.
Unlike film, a digital sensor has tiny lenses over its photosites, which pass less light as the angle of light hitting them increases. Leica developed some minor magic in the M8, apparently, to help with this issue, but unless they've made some sort of amazing breakthrough the M9 will certainly be at least slightly thicker than the M8... assuming it is indeed full frame.