ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
Thor's nuts. The M10 will be a film camera.
Chris
Chris
AusDLK
Famous Photographer
hopefully the M10 will be a mirrorless, shutterless camera in an M7/MP sized/shaped configuration ala the Fuji XP1. it can be made thinner (therefore back to the M7/MP form factor) and they can make the otherwise quiet "shutter" release sound just like the old cloth shutter cameras (no more M8/M9 grinding).
if this is the M10, then wow. otherwise, it VERY hard for me to see why a would replace my M9
if this is the M10, then wow. otherwise, it VERY hard for me to see why a would replace my M9
Frontman
Well-known
What "R&D" department? If R&D means choosing body colors and limited-edition themes, then Leica's R&D department have been working overtime. If we are talking about technical innovation, Leica have not been up to much. The M9 had no "groundbreaking" features to mention, other than its record price tag. I love Leica cameras, but they are becoming less and less relevant to real-world photographers, mainly do to ever-increasing prices, or "exclusivity", as Leica might term it.
MCTuomey
Veteran
benlees
Well-known
f16sunshine
Moderator
I could not finish reading the article.
It felt like I was read a section from "The Leica faithful fluff girls handbook".
Getting the faithful good and woody for the May 10 event.
It's just a damn camera company !
It felt like I was read a section from "The Leica faithful fluff girls handbook".
Getting the faithful good and woody for the May 10 event.
It's just a damn camera company !
Araakii
Well-known
This is funny because the M9 is still the smallest full-frame camera in the market. Maybe it's not "groundbreaking" but there's nothing better in this regard. And if I understand correctly, some of the profit from M9 actually is used to subsidize the development cost for the lenses. Someone can correct me if that's not true.
As for being irrelevant to "real-world photographers". Why does that matter? Why should I care what "real-world photographers" use?
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
It's not either/or. It's both. And that's the brilliance of their marketing.
The assertion, straight from the top, is that Leica won't make superb products at reasonable cost even in cases where it's technically feasible to do so.
maddoc
... likes film again.
"Leica Camera AG" is not only producing M-mount cameras / lenses ... There is some other stuff, Leica S2 and lenses for example, which are quite innovative. Also, the M9 is the only FF-sensor equipped camera that can be used with true wide-angle lenses (except for the Hasselblad SWC with digital back), quite some novelty.
Araakii
Well-known
It's a free market economy. If someone else can make a superb product at reasonable cost where it's technically feasible, it would be done. The fact that there's no directly comparable product in the market implies that it's not something that can easily be done at reasonable cost. If Fuji could make an identical M9 for $1500, they wouldn't have made the X-pro.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
victoriapio
Well-known
Harry, i hope for your sake you are right, but I have my doubts about this. I just can't imagine a business model that would make this work financially for Leica. That being said, it is Leica making the decision on the supposed M10 and while in the past business often seems to take a back seat to Leica's decisions, I don't think that will be the case this time..
Araakii
Well-known
Germany has one of the highest wages in the world. Sure, Leica can move the production to China or Vietnam and cut the prices by 50%, but why should they do that? I would not want Leica to become another piece of crap like Wal-mart.
As to whether the Zeiss lenses you listed are really the same "quality", I've only used the 25mm 2.8 myself and didn't like it. But assuming that they are absolutely as good as the Leica equivalent, why would the Leica pricing strategy bother you at all? You would just be a happy Zeiss shooter. The fact that people are mad at Leica for the high prices indicate that they themselves would want to be Leica owners and they believe that Leica products are superior.
Araakii
Well-known
And the two ZM lenses that are made in Germany, 85mm sonnar and 15mm distagon, are priced way above $3K at the same price range as the Leica equivalents. I haven't heard anyone accusing Zeiss of making an outrageous profit there.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
That's adorable.
You do realize that Leica does as much work in Portugal as possible, and then does enough final assembly work in Germany to stamp that country as the country of origin, don't you?
And it's not as though Japan has low wages.
Ryan1938
Established
At the end of the day what it comes down to FOR ME is that for the first time since I've been into photography, I'm actually distracted from my typical "I want a digital Leica M at any cost" drive. I think that distraction comes from not only the cost to entry continually and ruthlessly rising, but the company's admitted and announced goal of edging the fashion world.
willie_901
Veteran
I think the M9 does have ground breaking technology.
Somehow Leica shoe-horned a modestly competent 24x36 mm sensor into a camera that is faithful to the M body aesthetic. I personally don't find this to be important for my photography, but I do resect Leica for their determination and engineering prowess to succeed at such a difficult task.
Why is important or even desirable for the body had to be indistinguishable in size to a film M camera is a completely different matter. I mean would it really matter if the camera was a bit thicker than the thickest M film camera? Would the Leica faithful rather have a state-of-the art sensor or a camera body that is slightly thicker than the M7? How many M8 owners would have tolerated a marginally thicker camera in order to avoid the necessity for IR filters for color work?
No matter. Leica made it happen and that is ground breaking in my opinion.
Somehow Leica shoe-horned a modestly competent 24x36 mm sensor into a camera that is faithful to the M body aesthetic. I personally don't find this to be important for my photography, but I do resect Leica for their determination and engineering prowess to succeed at such a difficult task.
Why is important or even desirable for the body had to be indistinguishable in size to a film M camera is a completely different matter. I mean would it really matter if the camera was a bit thicker than the thickest M film camera? Would the Leica faithful rather have a state-of-the art sensor or a camera body that is slightly thicker than the M7? How many M8 owners would have tolerated a marginally thicker camera in order to avoid the necessity for IR filters for color work?
No matter. Leica made it happen and that is ground breaking in my opinion.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
As much as I love film I've basically talked myself in to the inevitable transition to digital. I'm not worried about getting my Leicas serviced 5-10 years from now, but the Nikons and Rolleiflex bodies are going to be a problem. Scanners are a whole other story.
The money is going to be the hard part. There is little doubt that Leica will bend us over and have it's way with us, no matter how much we squirm. $7000-9000 is a lot of cash for just a body. Two bodies, which really is what anyone doing serious work is going to need is pretty insane, unless you are rolling in cash or can recoup that outlay through work.
Who, knows. Maybe I'll just have to keep shooting Tri-X until Kodak goes to the big darkroom in the sky or I hit it big. That or I'll just buy a Nikon.
PS: Anyone want to take bets on the status of weather sealing for the M10? After all it's supposedly a professional camera. I hope that Leica realizes that their new BFF at Magnum can't just retreat to the golf course clubhouse if a shower should appear. In the case of the Magnum shooters that clubhouse could be on fire.
Nigel Meaby
Well-known
The M8 and M9 are thicker than the film bodies. It's not really a problem but it does alter the experience of holding the camera. For my hands, film bodies just seem to "fit" really well.