zeos 386sx
Well-known
Sean, I have an idea that you have info on the digital M. From what you have posted elsewhere (Leica forum) I understand that you have NDA info (which keeps you from talking about it).
HOWEVER, would you please ask Leica if you can relay to us whether or not the digital M will mount a Viso III. If it will then I have purchases to make!
Thanks.
P.S. Congrats on having Epson display your portfolio.
http://www.epsonrd1.co.uk/portfolio/reid.html
HOWEVER, would you please ask Leica if you can relay to us whether or not the digital M will mount a Viso III. If it will then I have purchases to make!
Thanks.
P.S. Congrats on having Epson display your portfolio.
http://www.epsonrd1.co.uk/portfolio/reid.html
R
RML
Guest
As much as I'd like to see the digital M, I'm sure I won't be able to afford one. 
zeos 386sx
Well-known
Someone on the Photonet forum, who acts like he might have seen or heard about the digital M says to start saving between $4000 and $5000. I figure I can do it in a year if I just give up on eating.RML said:As much as I'd like to see the digital M, I'm sure I won't be able to afford one.
Sounds like "starving" could be shorthand for "start saving"...zeos 386sx said:
zeos 386sx
Well-known
Doug, that's good!Doug said:Sounds like "starving" could be shorthand for "start saving"...
Yup, that's what it means in my case. By this time next year I expect to be alot thinner in waist but fatter in pocketbook - unless, I've already purchased a digital M in which case I'll just be thinner but HAPPY!
.jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
"Someone on Photo.net who acts like he might have seen or heard" could just be someone on Photo.net who's a good actor. There are LOTS of people there talented in the field of sounding more knowledgeable than they really are!
My GUESS, based on the prices of current M bodies and of the Digital Module R (which doesn't include a camera, of course) is that $4000-$5000 would just be a down payment...
My GUESS, based on the prices of current M bodies and of the Digital Module R (which doesn't include a camera, of course) is that $4000-$5000 would just be a down payment...
zeos 386sx
Well-known
I sure hope not. I believe that Leica could sell the digital M in the $4000 to $5000 range. Part of the initial cost of the DMR involved R&D. If Leica uses the same sensor as the DMR then the R&D costs should be halved (my guess).jlw said:
Leica can't afford to turn the digital M into a collectors item by making its price too high (The recent MP3 LHSA special edition body sells for 2636GBP/4680USD at Robert White and it is a collectors camera of only 1000 units). Leica has to make the digital M a "user" camera that some of us can afford. I think Leica will do what it can to stay in the ballpark with Canon, Nikon and especially Epson (who sounds like it plans to make more digital RF's).
BTW, the young Danielle Hincks in your gallery is now back in Australia teaching. That is a beautiful picture you took of her in ballet class. It is so dramatic It's hard to believe it was available light - it looks like a studio setup.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
I hope you're right, but based on the fact that retail list for a current M7 is $3000+, I am skeptical that they can re-engineer it for digital capability while adding only $1000 to the price. $2000, maybe... but that still seems like a stretch.
Another way to look at it is that the Epson R-D 1, which is based on the Bessa R3a chassis, lists for about five times the price of its "mother" camera... so Leica might feel it's reasonable to price THEIR digital M at five times the price of the "mother" camera (presumably the M7) -- which would put it at nearly $15,000 (!) I hope they have more sense than that...
I agree that Leica would benefit by pricing their digital M at a level at which they could sell it at higher volume. But I think that they are constrained by how many units they can make of the M rangefinder module, which is very complex but which is the main benefit of this camera over its potential competitors. (I feel that if Leica brought out a digital M camera using a cheaper rangefinder module, many Leica fans would feel betrayed and would not buy it at any price.) So, there's a natural limit to how much volume they could sell in a digital M, no matter how they priced it, and that in turn means that the unit price would need to be higher to cover the fixed costs of manufacture and distribution.
In short, I really, really hope you're right about this price guess -- but it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out to be twice that high.
I've gotten so much use out of my R-D 1 that I might (barely) be able to rationalize buying a digital M at $4000 - $5000, even though it would take a lot of saving. But at $8,000-10,000, it simply would be out of my reach.
PS -- Glad to hear news of Danielle. She was a very pleasant girl and is fondly remembered here in Nebraska. That magic light was the product of late-afternoon sun bouncing off the walls, the mirrors, the floors, etc. -- I never would have been able to think up such a lighting scheme by myself and make it happen in a studio! That's one reason I like shooting with an RF camera: Luck counts in photography, and I feel an RF puts me in a better position to take advantage of lucky accidents of light.
Another way to look at it is that the Epson R-D 1, which is based on the Bessa R3a chassis, lists for about five times the price of its "mother" camera... so Leica might feel it's reasonable to price THEIR digital M at five times the price of the "mother" camera (presumably the M7) -- which would put it at nearly $15,000 (!) I hope they have more sense than that...
I agree that Leica would benefit by pricing their digital M at a level at which they could sell it at higher volume. But I think that they are constrained by how many units they can make of the M rangefinder module, which is very complex but which is the main benefit of this camera over its potential competitors. (I feel that if Leica brought out a digital M camera using a cheaper rangefinder module, many Leica fans would feel betrayed and would not buy it at any price.) So, there's a natural limit to how much volume they could sell in a digital M, no matter how they priced it, and that in turn means that the unit price would need to be higher to cover the fixed costs of manufacture and distribution.
In short, I really, really hope you're right about this price guess -- but it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out to be twice that high.
I've gotten so much use out of my R-D 1 that I might (barely) be able to rationalize buying a digital M at $4000 - $5000, even though it would take a lot of saving. But at $8,000-10,000, it simply would be out of my reach.
PS -- Glad to hear news of Danielle. She was a very pleasant girl and is fondly remembered here in Nebraska. That magic light was the product of late-afternoon sun bouncing off the walls, the mirrors, the floors, etc. -- I never would have been able to think up such a lighting scheme by myself and make it happen in a studio! That's one reason I like shooting with an RF camera: Luck counts in photography, and I feel an RF puts me in a better position to take advantage of lucky accidents of light.
Traut
Well-known
Leica M Digital will be released at Photokina. $4000-$5000. 1.3 crop. 2mm thicker. all glass will work. Digital only. I went to Leica Day yesterday and spoke with the Leica rep. My findings are on photo.net and substantiated by thord party. Production is estimated at 1,000/month.
Start saving. Stop dreaming.
Start saving. Stop dreaming.
ywenz
Veteran
$3000 for a MP is a much better deal than a digital M for $5000. Given that digital technology will depreciate much much faster. There is no doubt that the digital M can be had for $1000 given a few years.
I'd much rather spend the $3000 on an MP and use the $2000 on film and processing cost.
I'd much rather spend the $3000 on an MP and use the $2000 on film and processing cost.
zeos 386sx
Well-known
Traut,
If correct that the digital M will mount all Leica glass then I have to assume it will mount the goggled lenses and viso's. That answers my initial question. Thanks for the info.
If correct that the digital M will mount all Leica glass then I have to assume it will mount the goggled lenses and viso's. That answers my initial question. Thanks for the info.
zeos 386sx
Well-known
I have yet to see anything made by Leica depreciate. If their digital M depreciates it will be a first in the history of Leica.ywenz said:
flamingo
flamingo
Leica may as well flush themselves down the toilet now.
For that kind of geesh, it really should have been a full frame sensor Hopefully iit will be CMOS sensor as opposed to CCD, can anyone confirm?
Those morons. Why do they always have to be 1 step behind and still rape the customer ?
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)
For that kind of geesh, it really should have been a full frame sensor Hopefully iit will be CMOS sensor as opposed to CCD, can anyone confirm?
Those morons. Why do they always have to be 1 step behind and still rape the customer ?
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)
Mazurka
Well-known
flamingo said:
Look at the current M7 - it's not 1 step behind, more like 30 years behind. Additionally for the MP, the rewind mechanism is at least 50 years behind.
I paid something like US$15 for an E39 lens cap from Leica when I bought a new M6TTL. It's the only lens cap I own (among a dozen or so) that keeps falling off! Customer rape is Leica's trademark way of maintaining the mystique.
Mazurka
Well-known
...not to mention the extremely flare-prone rangefinder of my 0.85 TTL, or the dust-magnet eyepiece of the MP. Not even years back but more like free-fall.
Traut
Well-known
Its reminds me of a wealthy friend that bought a Rolex all gold quartz watch back in 1979. The mechanical one I bought is 10X what I paid for mine - his 1/10th what he paid. It and the digital M are concessions to technology.
aizan
Veteran
why will the digital m depreciate a lot in a few years?
in any case, 4 to 5 grand is a steal. current sensors won't allow ff. you want good image quality to the corners, right?
in any case, 4 to 5 grand is a steal. current sensors won't allow ff. you want good image quality to the corners, right?
zeos 386sx
Well-known
The digital M is a concession to reality. Without digital products Leica will not survive.Traut said:
aizan
Veteran
the canon 1d2n is 4 grand. the digital m will sell briskly, thank goodness.
PaulN
Monkey
aizan said:
Is it though? For $3k you can get a full frame 12mp camera from Canon. Chromatic aberation? Just use good glass. In the case of the Canon cameras, people have been recommending their L series lenses to reduce the chromatic fringing in the corners.
But yeah, I understand that RF sensors have different issues, and making a full frame RF has different challenges.
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.
Digital is a different beast. It will be interesting to see if Leica can carry over the elegant design & minimalist nature of the MP to the new digital M. It will need to have good battery life, low noise sensor, intuitive interface, etc.
Will I buy one? Doubtful at this point. I have an R-D1 and an MP. Both have their strong points and I love both cameras.
If you want a Digital M, buy and R-D1 and save yourself $2k and spend it on a nice lense