No New M9 but M8-2 - Leica Announcement

[Ascender]

Can I start the thread titled "Post Your Pictures of You Shagging the Mrs and/or Cat"?

😉

hahahaha.... humor is back again. Great!!

-charlie

 

[aizan]

my feeling is that all new m8s will have the upgrade.

we already know you've got every camera and lens worth having, charlie. go start a charity and put an m8 in every starving celebrities' hands. 🙄

 

[photogdave]

I don't see the logic in making a comparison between a $4 roll of film and a $2000 "upgrade" on a digital camera.

Hmmm...let's see. Some people can spend $2000 in a year just to shoot and process film. I don't, but it's not unheard of.
It's not likely that there will be $2000 upgrade very year, or even if there is, that it will be necessary to do every upgrade.
All I'm saying is that IF THIS CONCEPT BECOMES A REALITY then people who WANT to upgrade their camera without replacing it can, and they get a new warranty to boot.
Those who want to spend more money on a whole new camera can do so if they wish. What's the harm in that?

 

[thomasw_]

Still waiting for a full-frame black and white 8 mp sensor that's not too grainy at 800 ISO............Oh yeah, and a "your cap is on numb-nuts" flashy LED.

Now this remark had me laughing....thanks for that, MikeL.

 

[Bryan Lee]

Folks,

I am not sure the guy in the UK got all the details right
-- but maybe he did.

But I do have it from a reliable source this info is substantially fact,
not rumor.

Hello M8 Upgrade Dept.

Stephen

Stephen, Myself and others have been watching PMA like hawks for anything M-Mount as I'm sure you have been also. To date I have seen nothing newsworthy only some speculation. In some circles I'm known for my abilities to fact check writing and stories. Doing the most basic of research the first posting here has appeared on many forums and websites but not one single reliable and known source has picked up the story or even bothered to mention it, only forum users.

I'm afraid at this point anything that gets posted anywhere about Digital Rangefinders will spread like wildfire through the forums but until its information delivered by Leica themselves it is just speculation. I'm surprised that there has not been more stories posted that are supposed quotes from Leica and Zeiss on this matter, until the last day of the PMA I will not believe anything till I see it on Youtube 🙂

The first most may or may not have some truth in it but it certainly didnt come from Leica as any kind of press release.

 

[rxmd]

Either somebody in a basement somewhere is laughing his a$$ off at the gullibility of Leica users, or, well, nobody is forced at gunpoint to have his camera upgraded and so you can all be a bit more laid-back about it.

A "reliable source" without a name is still just a rumour on the Internet.

Everybody who wanted a full-frame M9 has just subscribed to the digital camera upgrading hype where your old cameras somehow go bad if the manufacturer doesn't push out upgrades every two years. And if he does, the old ones go bad even faster. It's a cruel world we're living in, it really is.

 

[MichaelHarris]

Someone got their Wheaties pissed in. I have the money, I have held it, I have the lenses for it but I'm not going to buy a flawed camera. Where do I fit in Ascender?

 

[Roger Hicks]

None of this ties in very closely with what I have heard from Leica themselves. I do not pretend for an instant that Leica tlls me everything, but at least I do talk to both Solms and Leica UK from time to time, and I get a slight feeling for what might happen.

There will be new M digital models: they have said as much.

There is a new and expanded R&D department at Solms, specializing in electronics: I have seen it. They want to minimize what they have to buy in.

Upgradable cameras are something of a pipe-dream, except for fairly minor upgrades (especially software, obviously). A production line, working with new components, is a lot cheaper and quicker than receiving, disassembling, reassembling and sending out existing cameras. Again, they told me this.

They may of course change their minds. Ilford once told me that they didn't think the market was big enough for a competitor to TMZ P3200 -- then, a few months later, asked me if I'd like to try out their forthcoming Delta 3200.

And of course, manufacturers don't tell journalists everything, for obvious reasons.

But this 'announcement' does not, as I say, square with the little I know.

Cheers,

R.

 

[varjag]

I'm still curious what the new M8-2 will sell for new. If it sells for the price of a current M8, then the owners of the current model who just ponied up a couple of grand to upgrade their $5,000 camera aren't going to be happy. I mean, I would be unhappy owning last years upgraded model that I'd pay $7,000 total for when the new model with the same specs only cost $5,000.

That's some creative use of numbers 🙂 When you upgrade your Canon-something body to newer Canon-something body, do you add up figures same way? While it's really the same, just that you pay more for Canon upgrade.

If the rumor is true, we see for at least very different way of marketing digital cameras than large-volume manufacturers do. This for once can create a market of used digital cameras that actually worth something. Let's say a used M8-2 when in production will go for $4500, then a used, non-upgraded M8 will cost 4500-1800~=$2700, without further devaluation in sight.

It is easy to be negative about Leica just because they do it not in the way Canon and Nikon do, but there are at least some clear advantages:

- it makes the initial price tag more justified, and customer's investment more valuable
- it allows to finally have a digital camera with personal history or attachment (I think this market is huge and untapped)
- potentially, the number of people buying upgrade + people buying M8-2 is bigger than people just buying M8-2 new

 

[Bryan Lee]

I'm chomping at the bit to get a digital m-mount body but I cannot afford to screw around with the M8 the way it is. I would rather have any of the Nikon DSLR Bodies than the M8 the way it is. As a matter of fact, if half of this rumor is true about the upgrade deal for 1200 Euros I would never buy anything from them. Not just to complain about Leica but they have lost the plot it seems and gone from a valuable camera that was collected for its utility to a fancy camera collected for nostalgia.

Somewhere in the archives I remember stating something along the lines of what is going to happen to all these cameras and lenses when the collectors with hundreds of Leica Bodies thousands of Leica Lenses start to die off? It is starting to happen slowly put will peek in 20 years, nobody will want the things, they will be laying around like the old useless Yashicas that I once had and my old Russian Rangefinder that I use as a paper weight.


One thing is for sure, some of the posts I have seen here today are just downright nasty, the kinds of things that I expect to see on "Women and Whiskey Forums" written by tough guys, not my old playground for well heeled photographers. I also see that Bill has came out of hibernation, to bad about that but fair is fair, I just hope he does not try to invoke the patriot act on me for posting a picture he feels is propaganda as I feel all photography is propaganda, but what the hell, PMA week goes on and without anything from Leica, Zeiss, or even Cosina worth mentioning so far, just more point and shoot for kid Kameras and Kommie Film 🙂

 

[rxmd]

That's some creative use of numbers 🙂 When you upgrade your Canon-something body to newer Canon-something body, do you add up figures same way? While it's really the same, just that you pay more for Canon upgrade.

Not exactly, you get to keep the old Canon-something body, which you can then sell, continue using, or give to your son/sister/grandfather who always wanted a digital camera. Here you get to keep nothing except your original M8 invoice.

The upgrade process assumes that you have a digital camera for which you've spent about $5000. A new Nikon D300 costs about $1750 (Amazon again), the Leica upgrade rumour mentions a price of 1200 EUR which is about $1760. Since you get to keep this digital camera you had beforehand, you definitely get more when carrying your $1750 to Nikon than to Leica.

That said, here's a couple of comments on your ideas. Let's assume for the moment that this is an actual update, instead of a great practical joke on the online Leica community:

If the rumor is true, we see for at least very different way of marketing digital cameras than large-volume manufacturers do. This for once can create a market of used digital cameras that actually worth something. Let's say a used M8-2 when in production will go for $4500, then a used, non-upgraded M8 will cost 4500-1800~=$2700, without further devaluation in sight.

This argument works only if you assume this upgrade, if it happens at all, to be the last. Imagine two more $1800 upgrades and continue your calculation. If the market worked like that, which it likely doesn't, used digital cameras would be worth literally zero after two or three generations, but even with the present replacement cycle I don't find the streets of Berlin littered with discarded Pentax *istDSes and Canon 10Ds and Nikon D1s.

On the contrary, you've just spent $5000 on an M8. Let's assume you are the type of user who upgrades his cameras, so you spend another $1750. You have a digital camera that you've spent $6750 on, at least. If a factory-pre-upgraded M8-2 costs substantially less than these $6750, it makes sense to skip two or three upgrades, such as this rather unattractive one, and buy an M8-4 straigt from the factory, while keeping your old unmodified M8 as a second body.

As soon as you assume that there might be more updates coming, it makes no sense financially to buy an M8 and upgrade it continually, no more than it did to buy an MD and have it later fitted with a viewfinder, or than it did to buy a Macintosh SE and have it fitted with an SE/30 mainboard, which is why none of these business models have taken off on a large scale. It only makes sense usability-wise, and there, frankly, I would be underwhelmed if all I got for $1750 was a scratch-resistant screen which you get for putting a piece of $1 sticky tape on the back of your existing screen, a slower maximum shutter speed, and a marginally quieter shutter which in practice won't make a difference at all, let alone $1750 worth of difference. If all upgrades were like this, I'd skip them and buy a new camera every now and then if it interests me all by itself.

- it makes the initial price tag more justified, and customer's investment more valuable

This largely depends on how substantial and useful the upgrade is.

Philipp

 

[varjag]

Not exactly, you get to keep the old Canon-something body, which you can then sell, continue using, or give to your son/sister/grandfather who always wanted a digital camera. Here you get to keep nothing except your original M8 invoice.

Paying $5000 plus $1800 still makes more sense than paying $5000 twice, if your objective is to have an up-to-date digital camera. In the latter case I agree it is common to trade in older body, but I don't see how it is more economical.

The upgrade process assumes that you have a digital camera for which you've spent about $5000. A new Nikon D300 costs about $1750 (Amazon again), the Leica upgrade rumour mentions a price of 1200 EUR which is about $1760. Since you get to keep this digital camera you had beforehand, you definitely get more when carrying your $1750 to Nikon than to Leica.

And if I stick to $200 Canon Powershot line, I can upgrade 8 times for cost of one D300. So yes, it definitely makes more sense for expensive camera, and M8 is an expensive camera.

This argument works only if you assume this upgrade, if it happens at all, to be the last. Imagine two more $1800 upgrades and continue your calculation. If the market worked like that, which it likely doesn't, used digital cameras would be worth literally zero after two or three generations, but even with the present replacement cycle I don't find the streets of Berlin littered with discarded Pentax *istDSes and Canon 10Ds and Nikon D1s.

[...]

This largely depends on how substantial and useful the upgrade is.

A lot of valid points here yes; upgrade costs, scope and market elasticity can affect the economics of it a lot. But there still is large possible set of circumstances when such a scheme would work. It's up to Leica marketing dept. to how they can configure it. If the whole rumor is not a soap bubble that is.

However, my point about having an up-to-date digital camera with personal attachment still valid.

 

[varjag]

Well, in the case of the M8, it's not going to be up to date very long, even with $1800 "updates." Should the mythical FF sensor for the Leica ever come along, it won't be a simple update to an M8 body. Leica would be nuts from a marketing standpoint, not even looking at the technical issues, to offer such an update. So forming much of a personal attachment to the M8 is going to mean you stay with the APS size sensor with it's first generation limitations.

There is a huge chance that a FF Leica will be built over same chassis as M8, given the tooling costs. I would think its geometrical configuration allows FF sensor already.

Such a replacement would assume full change of electronics package however, leaving you with old body shell, shutter, controls, LCD and RF/VF assembly (sans frameline mask). It is hard to tell if it would be economical at all, but it is not impossible to do in factory setting.

 

[rxmd]

Paying $5000 plus $1800 still makes more sense than paying $5000 twice, if your objective is to have an up-to-date digital camera. In the latter case I agree it is common to trade in older body, but I don't see how it is more economical.

This whole argument of corse rests on the basis of the assumption that the upgrades actually do something significant to bring your digital camera up to date, which this one doesn't. (If it happens at all etc.pp.)

Otherwise I could make a fortune painting people's 5Ds and putting sticky tape on the display for $1000 and tell them that it's more economical than buying a new digital camera every year.

And if I stick to $200 Canon Powershot line, I can upgrade 8 times for cost of one D300. So yes, it definitely makes more sense for expensive camera, and M8 is an expensive camera.

Well, the difference here is that the D300 at least comes close to equalling the upgraded M8 in capabilities (including lens compatibility, with the major differences resulting mainly from the fact that one is a rangefinder and the other an SLR). So basically for an extra $1750 you have the option of having one digital camera or two of them. You have to be pretty emotionally attached to your Leica, and willing to live on the bleeding edge technologically to the extent that a sapphire screen means a four-digit number to you.

This kind of comparison only makes sense between roughly comparable cameras, otherwise I don't think I'd have brought it up. Regarding your $200 PowerShot comparison, well, if we stick to $2 rolls of film, we can do a lot of things as well for the price of regular M8 upgrades 🙂

However, my point about having an up-to-date digital camera with personal attachment still valid.

And that is about the only reason why I think an update scheme might work, because it ties into the highly emotional character of Leica ownership. Since people were apparently ready to pay $5000 for it in the first place, they might actually be ready to buy into that scheme. It would certainly be interesting to see if alternate marketing schemes would work. This would require, on the other hand, future upgrades to be more substantial than this hypothetical one.

Philipp

 

[varjag]

I'm not sure the M body will ever allow a FF sensor.

I'm not sure either, but it is likely. M8 uses standard Copal type shutter for 35mm film cameras.

 

[varjag]

varjag, the problem isn't the shutter. The problem is the short lens to focal plane distance. Leica's problem is phystics.

Ehm.. the working distance will have to stay the same on FF, sure you know that? If you make it longer old lenses lose infinity focusing.

If FF Leica possible at all is entirely different question. But once(if) it possible, I see no principal obstacle to fitting larger sensor into same body.

 

[rxmd]

Erik, why from a marketing standpoint would Leica retrofit M8's with full frame sensors, even if they could (which I doubt)? Leica would need to sell lots of FF M9's should they become available. Retrofitting M8's would kill those sales.

I don't know. If the camera's design is modular enough that the development work for the new line would be confined to the sensor and part of the electronics package, then you only have to recuperate the cost on these parts of development. They would probably sell more of these new sensor and electronics packages (either as upgrades or as M9 bodies) than if they only sold M9 bodies, with the difference consisting of undecided existing M8 customers who wouldn't spend $REALLY_HUGE_SUM on a new M9, but who would spend $MODERATELY_HUGE_SUM on an upgrade.

I guess they sold more M2/M4 rangefinder units by offering the M2 and M4 as well as the upgrade for the M1 separately. However Leica is a camera & optics company, not a rangefinder unit company. And the upgrade in this case would probably be more fundamental; if you look at Canon or Nikon, they effectively change all the signal processor package with every new generation, and I would expect Leica to have to do the same, so it would be such a substantial change in innards that the extra R&D effort to develop a new body around it would probably be lower than the R&D to develop an upgrade-capable camera and to keep the new innards compatible with the old body. Let's see what happens, it can only be interesting.

Philipp

 

[rxmd]

I'm not sure either, but it is likely. M8 uses standard Copal type shutter for 35mm film cameras.

Well firstly the shutter is off-the-shelf, secondly it's what Leica was using anyway for the R series, so while interesting, you can't read too much into that.

Philipp

 

[infrequent]

razor vs blades

razor vs blades

nothing new here....leica has caught onto the whole gillette "sell razors on the cheap and suck them dry with the blades" philosophy. i look forward to the days when you buy a camera chassis and then choose a particular combination of shutter, sensor, electronics packaging. there is more money to be made by selling "upgrades" every couple of years rather than selling a brand new camera. even leica realises that there die hard fans won't shell over five grand often and easily...couple of grand every few years disguised as a warranty update / upgrade might be more palatable.

 

[varjag]

This whole argument of corse rests on the basis of the assumption that the upgrades actually do something significant to bring your digital camera up to date, which this one doesn't. (If it happens at all etc.pp.)

We do not know the scope of this upgrade yet. Hell, we don't know if it is real at all.

Well, the difference here is that the D300 at least comes close to equalling the upgraded M8 in capabilities (including lens compatibility, with the major differences resulting mainly from the fact that one is a rangefinder and the other an SLR). So basically for an extra $1750 you have the option of having one digital camera or two of them.

I would say that D300 actually surpasses M8 in what is commonly thought as "capabilities". However both it and PowerShot aren't really competitors to M8, not any more than F5 was competitor to M7. You don't take Vespa over Humvee based on horsepower and wheel count comparison.

It still shows however that the more expensive camera is, the more sense factory upgrade can make.

As side note, what makes me think this might be for real is the detail about bringing down max shutter speed from 1/8000 to 1/4000. It's not something that usual Web forum wet dreams are made of 🙂