rayfoxlee
Raymondo
Some interesting comments have been made in a recent edition of Amateur Photographer. Apparently, UK dealers have been reporting sales to newspaper photographers and others who have become disillusioned with the weight and bulk of DSLR kit. Apparently demand has far outweighed supply, notwithstanding the fact that Leitz had a substantial stock at launch. It would seem that the camera has hit a 'sweet spot' in the market for a smaller pro camera without the multiplicity of buttons and features. Does this herald Leica becoming a trend setter? It will be very interesting to see if Zeiss and CV - and perhaps Nikon with a digital SP - follow suit. I think many camera manufacturers might have missed a trick with their big bulky cameras. It would be great to see a resurgent Leica Camera Co. showing the way forward to likes of Nikon and Canon. The next few years should see some interesting developments.
It is also interesting to see how many M7's are coming to market. Is this a reflection of many who held off on the M8 now having confidence in the M9? It looks as if prices for M7's here in the UK might fall - hopefully! Are you guys in the US seeing a similar trend on M7 sales?
Ray
It is also interesting to see how many M7's are coming to market. Is this a reflection of many who held off on the M8 now having confidence in the M9? It looks as if prices for M7's here in the UK might fall - hopefully! Are you guys in the US seeing a similar trend on M7 sales?
Ray
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Ray, the idea that Leica had a "substantial stock" of M9's at launch is not accurate. I think the initial allocation to the UK was perhaps fewer than 20 cameras. Amateur Photographer seems to overhype the reality.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
There are those who want to believe this, and those who don't want to believe it. It will be hard to change the minds of the former, and even harder to change the minds of the latter. Probably best just to wait and see.
I do however know at least one working PJ in the UK who has ordered one -- and I don't know many working PJs in the UK any more.
Cheers,
Roger
I do however know at least one working PJ in the UK who has ordered one -- and I don't know many working PJs in the UK any more.
Cheers,
Roger
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Roger, many may have ordered them. But the AP story didn't supply some numbers it needed to and left the impression that M9's were flying off the shelves in the UK while PJ's were in mass abandoning their DSLRs.
The funny thing is the idea that DSLR users are going to abandon them for a DRF. Over the many years that film was king, PJ's always had to option of useing RF's (Leica still made cameras the whole time), but instead carried around heavy, bulky SLR's like Nikon F with motor drives, F3's with MD4's, F4s, F5's. Why folks think it is different in the digital age I can't understand.
The funny thing is the idea that DSLR users are going to abandon them for a DRF. Over the many years that film was king, PJ's always had to option of useing RF's (Leica still made cameras the whole time), but instead carried around heavy, bulky SLR's like Nikon F with motor drives, F3's with MD4's, F4s, F5's. Why folks think it is different in the digital age I can't understand.
Last edited:
fleetwoodjazz
Established
If many are ordering the M9 and Leica are flying, I'm afraid that it won't take very long for Zeiss or Nikon to understand the market and soon give their answer. Leica will just come back to where they are.
Bulk is only one side of the story. For PJ, iso is equally important. Where about the M9 can compete against Nikon D700 in this regard? Beside, reliability of the M9 remains to be seen...
Bulk is only one side of the story. For PJ, iso is equally important. Where about the M9 can compete against Nikon D700 in this regard? Beside, reliability of the M9 remains to be seen...
ZeissFan
Veteran
For some news photographers, a rangefinder would be a very good tool. For others, an SLR is really the best camera.
We have a couple of photographers who rarely need anything longer than a 135mm lens. And for those who shoot pro sports, they almost always shoot with at least a 300mm lens.
I would think for some news photographers (you get a lot of assignments that takes you up close to your subject), an M9 and perhaps three or four lenses would do the trick. But maybe you'd want to have a dSLR in the boot/trunk for those times when you need either the speed of the dSLR and autofocus or the reach of a longer lens or even the close-up capability than a rangefinder doesn't handle as well.
We have a couple of photographers who rarely need anything longer than a 135mm lens. And for those who shoot pro sports, they almost always shoot with at least a 300mm lens.
I would think for some news photographers (you get a lot of assignments that takes you up close to your subject), an M9 and perhaps three or four lenses would do the trick. But maybe you'd want to have a dSLR in the boot/trunk for those times when you need either the speed of the dSLR and autofocus or the reach of a longer lens or even the close-up capability than a rangefinder doesn't handle as well.
Paul T.
Veteran
It doesn't need to be a mass movement to help effect a modest turnaround in Leica's fortunes.
I know of one friend of a friend, who shoots for hip magazines, who's already ordered one, and yet another who is going into Robert White's in the next couple of weeks to investigate.
I actually know huge numbers of professionals in the magazine and newspaper field who would go out with a single SLR and just one lens; all these have reluctantly moved to much heavier Canon or Nikon kit. If the M9 is the one camera that boasts the portability of their old rig, stands to reason a few of them will consider switching. But the isssue isn't necessarily SLR vs RF; it's big camera vs small camera.
I know of one friend of a friend, who shoots for hip magazines, who's already ordered one, and yet another who is going into Robert White's in the next couple of weeks to investigate.
I actually know huge numbers of professionals in the magazine and newspaper field who would go out with a single SLR and just one lens; all these have reluctantly moved to much heavier Canon or Nikon kit. If the M9 is the one camera that boasts the portability of their old rig, stands to reason a few of them will consider switching. But the isssue isn't necessarily SLR vs RF; it's big camera vs small camera.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I guess I don't understand the difference with digital. Why didn't these same guys use film RF's in the film days instead of SLR's? The pro film SLR's I used through the years were all heavy and bulky.
ZeissFan
Veteran
At a certain point (the 1970s), the SLR took over both the pro and amateur market and the rangefinder appeared to be relegated to the corner of the room, so to speak.
The SLR had many advantages, which included a better representation of what was in focus and not in focus, more accurate framing and much easier ability to do close-up work. You could shoot with zoom lenses, get a FAST motor drive, different focusing screens and viewfinders and huge film backs (remember the 250-exposure backs), all at lower cost because it was Japanese. And ease of use, including loading film, was easier than a Leica. Sure, it was heavier and clunkier, but the versatility of the system made it a worthwhile tradeoff.
I don't know if pros carrying SLRs moved the amateur market or if it was the lower prices of the Japanese gear. Maybe a combination.
By the mid-1970s, Zeiss Ikon was gone, and Canon and Nikon had given up on the rangefinder market. There was just one pro-level rangefinder. While Leica supporters don't see the problem, it didn't leave much choice for photographers.
Sort of like the scene in "My Cousin Vinny" where Joe Pesci and Marisa Tomei go into the diner in the morning and ask for a menu, and the only thing offered is "Breakfast," "Lunch" and "Dinner." They pick "Breakfast."
The SLR had many advantages, which included a better representation of what was in focus and not in focus, more accurate framing and much easier ability to do close-up work. You could shoot with zoom lenses, get a FAST motor drive, different focusing screens and viewfinders and huge film backs (remember the 250-exposure backs), all at lower cost because it was Japanese. And ease of use, including loading film, was easier than a Leica. Sure, it was heavier and clunkier, but the versatility of the system made it a worthwhile tradeoff.
I don't know if pros carrying SLRs moved the amateur market or if it was the lower prices of the Japanese gear. Maybe a combination.
By the mid-1970s, Zeiss Ikon was gone, and Canon and Nikon had given up on the rangefinder market. There was just one pro-level rangefinder. While Leica supporters don't see the problem, it didn't leave much choice for photographers.
Sort of like the scene in "My Cousin Vinny" where Joe Pesci and Marisa Tomei go into the diner in the morning and ask for a menu, and the only thing offered is "Breakfast," "Lunch" and "Dinner." They pick "Breakfast."
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Yes, exactly. But lots of folks seem to think that PJ's who wouldn't use RF's when film was the medium are suddenly going to abandon their DSLR's to use DRF's. They had the same choice then as they do now and didn't take it.
gb hill
Veteran
With newspaper organizations filing bankruptcy & some going belly up (at least in the US) I don't see too many pj's or their organizations giving allowances to buy an M9. Besides if a lighter camera is in order, a good p&s is all that's needed.
tunebomb
Member
The only thing I really thought of while reading the first post wasn't a digital sp, but a DM3A. A DM3A would be the first digital camera I'd buy.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
We did, at least some of us. I used both Nikons and Leicas in the early 80s.
Paul T.
Veteran
This is true - Leica obviously have been a niche brand in the last three decades. But nonetheless it's undeniable that DSLRs are mostly bulkier than their predecessors. If a small percentage of pros are indeed switching to the M9, it will be for that reason.
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
I don't see any change of trend with the M9.
It is a "let's stuff new technology into a old design" typical of Leica and the "I have now a bigger sensor and more megapixels" typical of...everybody.
Sure lenses from Leitz are great and the camera will for sure be also great but I don't see anything special in it.
If really the demand for a small camera with a large sensor will grow I am sure Canikonmpus can easily put out a small camera with autofocus, great lenses and FF sensor for a fraction of the price and get most of the market.
The real change of trend I am waiting for is when finally there will be no run to more megapixels but low noise, quality of colours (why is the spelling program putting highlight to colour as if it was wrong?), proposing different IR filters and so on will be the priority... The D700 went a bit toward this as the latest Mamiya digital back ("only" 22 Mpx on a double FF and a decent price below that of, say a D3) but most other cameras are still at the "I have more megapixels" stage and the M9 is no exception.
GLF
It is a "let's stuff new technology into a old design" typical of Leica and the "I have now a bigger sensor and more megapixels" typical of...everybody.
Sure lenses from Leitz are great and the camera will for sure be also great but I don't see anything special in it.
If really the demand for a small camera with a large sensor will grow I am sure Canikonmpus can easily put out a small camera with autofocus, great lenses and FF sensor for a fraction of the price and get most of the market.
The real change of trend I am waiting for is when finally there will be no run to more megapixels but low noise, quality of colours (why is the spelling program putting highlight to colour as if it was wrong?), proposing different IR filters and so on will be the priority... The D700 went a bit toward this as the latest Mamiya digital back ("only" 22 Mpx on a double FF and a decent price below that of, say a D3) but most other cameras are still at the "I have more megapixels" stage and the M9 is no exception.
GLF
swoop
Well-known
That's exactly how I roll.
I use an M8 for the bulk of my assignments and spot news coverage.
I keep a 4/3rds Panasonic DMC-L1 around for sports assignments, social events and spot news coverage.
Next month I plan on upgrading to an M9 and Olympus E-620. It would be my personal small compact all around outfit.
mawz
Established
Pro DSLR's are not really much bulkier than their predecessors except in the mid-range consumer area. The pro bodies are similar in size if not marginally smaller than their immediate predecessors (F5, 1v with a PB-E2), and arguably any of the major system cameras with motor drives. You have to look back to the 1980's or look at Pentax kit to find many film bodies that are actually smaller than the equivalent DSLR and most of those are manual-wind bodies.
I suspect what's happening is many of the people who were forced into DSLR's by the switch to digital are now moving back, along with those who would have been using RF's if they'd started with film rather than digital.
jarski
Veteran
M7's
M7's
I've got the same impression about M7's recently, but it can still be just a coincidence. as I currently have "only" M5, would be interesting to have normal sized modern M-body with it. have to keep checking prices more closely.
regarding digital M's. been just as excited as many RFF readers about new M9, and used M8 prices going down. but after pondering a while: film is still cheap but perhaps not for long (?). Kodachrome swan song ends 2010, but managed to get affordable 10 rolls to experiement with it little as well. newish Nikon film scanner standing on my desk and Vuescan tuned to it. everything is set to be used, working and learning curve is mostly behind. changing the plan now, no thanks. digital wont disappear anywhere, its the future but it can wait
M7's
I've got the same impression about M7's recently, but it can still be just a coincidence. as I currently have "only" M5, would be interesting to have normal sized modern M-body with it. have to keep checking prices more closely.
regarding digital M's. been just as excited as many RFF readers about new M9, and used M8 prices going down. but after pondering a while: film is still cheap but perhaps not for long (?). Kodachrome swan song ends 2010, but managed to get affordable 10 rolls to experiement with it little as well. newish Nikon film scanner standing on my desk and Vuescan tuned to it. everything is set to be used, working and learning curve is mostly behind. changing the plan now, no thanks. digital wont disappear anywhere, its the future but it can wait