ywenz
Veteran
zeos 386sx said:
You want to know why this will be a first in its history? Digital technology evolves extremely fast and the price drops accordingly. If Leica decides to join the game it will be forced to evolve with the industry. When they come out with their 2nd and 3rd gen Digital M with improved circuitry and sensor, how could this $5000 1st gen's price not fall? I think you're still stuck on the old Leica mindset, do I need to point out that Leica has been in the business of film? "Good" film equipment do not go obsolete, unlike good digital equipment.
aizan
Veteran
you don't have to imagine, just hope. the angle of incidence problem with sensors hasn't been resolved to a satisfactory degree (lol), and i don't see epson increasing the size of the sensor. since slrs have a head start in actually using ff sensors, if you really need it, i hear the canon 5d has a quieter shutter than the 1d bodies.
aizan
Veteran
good film equipment does go obsolete. all leicas are obsolete, for example. 
but a good camera is a good camera, film or digital. how much processing power do certain photogs, say those who use rangefinders, really need? how many pixels? how large a raw buffer? fps? metering patterns? the digital m can be obsolete and still be a great camera that sells well.
but a good camera is a good camera, film or digital. how much processing power do certain photogs, say those who use rangefinders, really need? how many pixels? how large a raw buffer? fps? metering patterns? the digital m can be obsolete and still be a great camera that sells well.saxshooter
Well-known
Aizan said:
"you don't have to imagine, just hope. the angle of incidence problem with sensors hasn't been resolved to a satisfactory degree ."
Agreed.
If the price will indeed be $4000-5000, I imagine that a new chip has NOT been designed, and let's say it is an off the shelf 1.3x chip (Canon's?), I am hoping that Leica will follow Epson's lead and solve the vignetting problem via a RAW plug-in with correction profiles for individual lenses.
If Leica puts a big RAW buffer and fast processor into the camera, AND packages it with a good RAW batching software... could be a great camera. Let's just keep our fingers crossed.
"you don't have to imagine, just hope. the angle of incidence problem with sensors hasn't been resolved to a satisfactory degree ."
Agreed.
If the price will indeed be $4000-5000, I imagine that a new chip has NOT been designed, and let's say it is an off the shelf 1.3x chip (Canon's?), I am hoping that Leica will follow Epson's lead and solve the vignetting problem via a RAW plug-in with correction profiles for individual lenses.
If Leica puts a big RAW buffer and fast processor into the camera, AND packages it with a good RAW batching software... could be a great camera. Let's just keep our fingers crossed.
Last edited:
ywenz
Veteran
aizan said:
It doesn't matter. The Canon D30(circa 2001) is still a good camera and can take wonderful pics but they're all over ebay selling for ~$300 or so. My argument was that the digital M will be worth nothing given a few years after it comes out.. It WILL depreciate much much faster than its film counter parts. $5000 for a 1.3x body that has nothing going for it other than the Leica mystique and a "rangefinder" mechanism? Greeeaaaattt buy I say! (sarcasm)
aizan
Veteran
think leica will constantly upgrade the digital m? and it only has mystique and a "rangefinder" mechanism going for it? wow, i never knew that's all it took.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
saxshooter said:
Which is exactly what Leica claims, through new sensor design.
Interesting. Leica stated aboout a year ago that the sensor would be developed by the same partners they have with the DMR, i.e. Kodak/Imacon.
That is great news, Traut. It tallies with everything Leica said before. Except for the price, that is new, and about 1000 $ to 2000$ less than everybody was expecting
If they manage to keep it in that range, 1000 units per month does seem realistic, even on the pessimistic side.
Last edited:
aizan
Veteran
They've only applied offset microlenses to the DMR. They didn't do anything with the actual sensor supplied by Kodak. What they've done with the digital M, I haven't read anywhere.
S
StuartR
Guest
I don't really understand why depreciation should be such a huge concern...this is a camera that is purchased to be used, not resold. Sure, it is great to be able to resell something for close to what you bought it for, but that is not the only reason to buy something. We are rapidly reaching (or have reached) the point where digital cameras can offer equal or better results in many situations to 35mm film. If the MD is going to be based on the DMR sensor, only a little beefier (let's just guess 14 megapixels based on the fact that it is 1.3 instead of 1.37 and is a generation later), then you are going to get pretty spectacular results with it. So are the results going to be dramatically better in normal print sizes if the next iteration jumps to 18 or 20 megapixels? Probably not. We are just barely starting to hit the law of diminishing returns in digital. In any case, all I really mean to say is that the MD probably will not be obsolete or worthless immediately on arrival, or even soon after. I am sure things with better specs will come along, but I doubt anything will arrive very soon that just utterly blows it out of the water.
Anyway, as for the price, I too was surprised to hear 4-5000 instead of 6 or 8, but perhaps it is easier to design an integral camera then a digital back that needs to be completely self-contained and work within existing technology. With the MD you can design it with a lot more freedom. And surely many of the major aspects will be the same or similar to other cameras that leica has made (i.e. identical viewfinder, mount, similar body casing and styling, probably a shutter similar to the one in the R8/9). Since much of the R&D was done during the DMR production, I am guessing they are going to be able to cut costs there. They are probably also counting on selling a lot more of them than they did with the DMR -- the M system user base is significantly larger and more loyal, and they are probably hoping to recover old customers and make a lot of new ones. A digital rangefinder that can keep up with good DSLR's is a new market (sorry RD-1), and I imagine that there are a decent number of working pros who would consider using one if Leica does a good job on it and markets it well.
Well, such are my completely speculative ramblings.
Anyway, as for the price, I too was surprised to hear 4-5000 instead of 6 or 8, but perhaps it is easier to design an integral camera then a digital back that needs to be completely self-contained and work within existing technology. With the MD you can design it with a lot more freedom. And surely many of the major aspects will be the same or similar to other cameras that leica has made (i.e. identical viewfinder, mount, similar body casing and styling, probably a shutter similar to the one in the R8/9). Since much of the R&D was done during the DMR production, I am guessing they are going to be able to cut costs there. They are probably also counting on selling a lot more of them than they did with the DMR -- the M system user base is significantly larger and more loyal, and they are probably hoping to recover old customers and make a lot of new ones. A digital rangefinder that can keep up with good DSLR's is a new market (sorry RD-1), and I imagine that there are a decent number of working pros who would consider using one if Leica does a good job on it and markets it well.
Well, such are my completely speculative ramblings.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
aizan said:
I'm sure you are at least partly right,I was only quoting Leica, who said that "developments in sensor technology made the digital M possible", anyway I am not really as interested in the way they do it as much as in the results -which are amazingly good by the DMR by all accounts. If the manage to link that kind of performance to the Leica M concept we may well have the ultimate digital camera. As for technical evolution, well what is the point of getting something "better"if what one has far surpasses ones capabilities as photographer? If the digital M is what I imagine it will be, I don't see myself selling it any more than my 1954 M3. So resale value is the least of my concerns.....
S
Stephan
Guest
flamingo said:They probably got a deal on a warehouse full of 1.3 crop sensors from Canon, whose 1D Mark II will very shortly be an antique once they release their 5D model next month (full frame 13 MP, $3299 LIST price)
The 1ds mk2 wont get shoved off the shelf by the 5D, for those who need the functionalities of the mk2 its the only choice, and worth the money.
Although I'd be happy with 2 5D's instead please
ywenz
Veteran
I'm speaking of resale value from the perspective of the prospective buyer. If I can get the digital M 2-3 years after it comes out for 1/4 of the original price, then why the hell not? If yal have waited 5-7 years for the digital M, whats a few more will hurt?
You can say now, that the first gen will be good enough for you and you won't be tempted by newer generations, but once you get suckered into the digital evolution, you wont be able to sit so still while newer digital Ms are put out to market... just take a look at the canon forums and check out the equipment frenzy there!
You can say now, that the first gen will be good enough for you and you won't be tempted by newer generations, but once you get suckered into the digital evolution, you wont be able to sit so still while newer digital Ms are put out to market... just take a look at the canon forums and check out the equipment frenzy there!
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
PaulN said:However, by this time next year, I wouldn't doubt that the Epson R-D2 is announced. I currently love my R-D1 and have taken thousands of images with it. I have to imagine that the R-D2 will be even more refined, with a bigger/better sensor, better quality control etc.
If you want a Digital M, buy and R-D1 and save yourself $2k and spend it on a nice lense
Hmmm, interesting. I hope Traut is right, although I still suspect his rep -- and his third-party corroborator -- may have been indulging in a bit of wishful thinking. (It'll be interesting to see if "released" means "available for sale," "shown in prototype form," "shown under the table," or what...)
If they can bring in a good product at this price point, I think they'll be on to something. Here's how I look at it: I like everything about my R-D 1 except that I sometimes wish it had a longer rangefinder base. The RF is accurate enough for all lenses for which the R-D 1 provides finder frames -- but a longer base would provide more confident, positive focusing, and give some safety margin when I want to get crazy and use a longer lens with accessory finder.
I'd say that a longer RF base plus a few more finder frames definitely would add enough value to be worth $1000 more. $2000 more would be a stretch, but not that big a stretch (particularly if that price included a few other features such as motor capability.)
The really interesting question, as someone else has pointed out, is what Epson or Zeiss might do. The Zeiss Ikon already has a longer-base RF, and Cosina already knows how to engineer a digital imager into this camera chassis. Suppose they all got together and rolled out a new camera that basically offered feature parity with the putative digital M, but at a price closer to the current R-D 1?
Now that would be an interesting situation. It'd be nice to have a choice of usable digital RF cameras!
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
ywenz said:
I bought a 10D once and never felt any inclination to buy an " upgrade" because I didn't feel the need.I'm pretty immune, I guess. And I think that goes for a considerable number of Leica users. Look at the (for digital) long production run of the Digiluxes for instance, and the small number of used ones on the market.
Last edited:
ywenz
Veteran
jaapv said:
It's still a very capable camera like you said, but it has depreciated tremendously like all digital equipment. The Digital M will be no different. From the perspective of a prospective buyer, this is grreeaaattt
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
You have to look at professional equipement. The 1Ds is still selling at 5000$ used, despite the mkII
zeos 386sx
Well-known
High megapixel sensors are only necessary if high enlargement is required (This is the arena where film still reigns). If a sensor provides the picture quality and degree of enlargement required then there is no reason for the camera to become obsolete - or lose resale value.
It has been said that Leica's biggest competitor is its own used cameras. If the digital M is built to the same high quality standards as its predecessors and provides the degree of enlargement required by its users then there is no reason for it to become obsolete. Like StuartR, "I doubt anything will arrive very soon that just utterly blows it (the digital M) out of the water".
The R-D1 is a perfect example of this principle. Since it was introduced there has not been a drop in its selling price. It is not becoming obsolete because it is a - high quality tool - for taking pictures.
It has been said that Leica's biggest competitor is its own used cameras. If the digital M is built to the same high quality standards as its predecessors and provides the degree of enlargement required by its users then there is no reason for it to become obsolete. Like StuartR, "I doubt anything will arrive very soon that just utterly blows it (the digital M) out of the water".
The R-D1 is a perfect example of this principle. Since it was introduced there has not been a drop in its selling price. It is not becoming obsolete because it is a - high quality tool - for taking pictures.
Last edited:
Phil_Hawkes
Established
Disclaimer: this is from the perspective of a loyal R-D1 owner with a couple of leica lenses. :angel: While I'm here, I gotta say that I've tasted Leica.. and I want more!!!! The Leica lenses are fantastic on the R-D1. Anyway, back to the topic at hand...
---------
I seem to remember someone somewhere on the 'net discussing the idea of having a permanent body + rangefinder mechanism, but with upgrade-able digital innards... so in a few years we can upgrade the sensor or the processor (or both) without paying for new rangefinder and new body. I think it is a cool idea. We might have to send the camera to Leica for the innard replacement, but I would be happy to do that. I have no idea if this is actually what Leica has come up with... if it is, then that's fantastic!!! but if the digital M has a permanent sensor and processor then I'd be happy enough with that for $4000-$5000.
My thought was that the replaceable innards idea would almost certainly result in a non-depreciating product. That would be the ultimate in solutions (IMHO). I guess I'll want a few more pixels and better crop factor when/if I upgrade, but I'll be more interested in higher ISO, bigger buffers, faster transfer to smart cards and maybe better onboard processing. IMHO it would be great if a few companies got together to develop a standard for interworking sensors and processors for rangefinder cameras (like the 35mm film cartridge became a standard). But... I don't like our chances on that one
Just thought I'd share whosever idea it was....
Cheers,
Phil
---------
I seem to remember someone somewhere on the 'net discussing the idea of having a permanent body + rangefinder mechanism, but with upgrade-able digital innards... so in a few years we can upgrade the sensor or the processor (or both) without paying for new rangefinder and new body. I think it is a cool idea. We might have to send the camera to Leica for the innard replacement, but I would be happy to do that. I have no idea if this is actually what Leica has come up with... if it is, then that's fantastic!!! but if the digital M has a permanent sensor and processor then I'd be happy enough with that for $4000-$5000.
My thought was that the replaceable innards idea would almost certainly result in a non-depreciating product. That would be the ultimate in solutions (IMHO). I guess I'll want a few more pixels and better crop factor when/if I upgrade, but I'll be more interested in higher ISO, bigger buffers, faster transfer to smart cards and maybe better onboard processing. IMHO it would be great if a few companies got together to develop a standard for interworking sensors and processors for rangefinder cameras (like the 35mm film cartridge became a standard). But... I don't like our chances on that one
Just thought I'd share whosever idea it was....
Cheers,
Phil
J. Borger
Well-known
jaapv said:
You are sure? I'm afraid i will have difficulties selling my mint 1Ds I for $3000 with the announcement of the 5D. So i will probably keep it on the shelf.
Han
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
J. Borger said:
There was a price-complaint thread on FM a week or two ago, and it IS a 1-series camera, something quite different from the 5D. It should be worth a lot more than 3000$