Why the next digital M will not cost $10,000 USD

eleskin said:
I

I must say the new Fuji will change alot. For $800-$1000 USD, the rangefinder experience will be accessable to many who cannot afford an M9 or a used M8. This is great for those who really love rangefinder photography and want people of all economic levels to have the choice to experience using a high quality direct viewfinder camera.
Click to expand...

From what we have seen so far, the X100 is not a real rangefinder.
 
Benjamin Marks said:
Let me add: EVF and TTL focusing. I know we love the RF, but there are so many little issues solved by this approach. I often think that my little EP-2 is an M 9/2 (nine divided by two) -- it's just such a slick little lozenge of a camera. Flame away if you must, but I think EVF would significantly improve the M's handling. No more RF adjustments, no more back- focusing lenses, the ability to use extension tubes and lenses as long as you'd like. Hell, you could even get image stabilization in there . . . Olympus did.

OK. Done hallucinating.

Ben
Click to expand...

Been there, done that :( All the EVF that are around right now suck. They don't come near a FF DSLR finder or a real rangefinder.
 
tom.w.bn said:
Been there, done that :( All the EVF that are around right now suck. They don't come near a FF DSLR finder or a real rangefinder.
Click to expand...
Yeah. You have a point, but my pictures are in focus. This may sound trivial, but for me it's the whole ball-game. So while it is apparently a near certainty that I will grow hair on my palms and rapidly lose IQ points from looking through a sucky EVF, I am limping along OK. Wait! I think I just lost a hat-size. Damn, I may have spoken too soon.

BTW, my pictures were not always in focus when using the truly sucky digi-Rebel optical postage-stamp-at-the-bottom-of-a-drain-pipe view finder. So I guess the amount of suction is relative, so to speak.
 
Benjamin Marks said:
BTW, my pictures were not always in focus when using the truly sucky digi-Rebel optical postage-stamp-at-the-bottom-of-a-drain-pipe view finder. So I guess the amount of suction is relative, so to speak.
Click to expand...

If you compare an EVF with the lower quality half then the EVF might look surprisingly good. It's all relative.
I like rangefinders because they have a rangefinder. I didn't like manual focussing with an SLR but I enjoy using the focussing mechanism of a rangefinder. An M10 with an EVF wouldn't be tempting for me.
 
jsrockit said:
Why? Please explain.
Click to expand...

- Too expensive to make, more so with the features people seem to expect (see the common "Full frame M-mount Bessa 5D for < $2K" discussions)

- Discussion dominated by wishful thinking

- Too few buyers overall, economics of scale don't work out

- Market highly fragmented with contradictory requirements on basic questions (display or no display, advance lever or no advance lever etc.)

Philipp
 
Is it possible that Leica might change their philosophy and use a CMOS sensor in the M10.
It seems to be working well for them (cleaner high ISO) in the X1.
Maybe cutting ties with Kodak.. It could be a cheaper option.
 
is this really a question of "Should I buy the M9 now for M9 prices or do I risk waiting for the 9.2/M10 which might cost a lot more?".
Methinks no one here knows. There is no telling what Leica might do to stay in business but I'd guess they will count on their clients(the faithful) being loaded and willing to pay whatever is asked.
 
I think eleskin is right (i.e., there will be a market alternative RF body), although I have no greater cause for substantiation than intuition. Just wanted to voice my whisper-thin vote. :p

Some people in this thread seem to confuse fantasy as a mode of prediction and fantasy as an irreplaceable marketing tool.
 
Maybe there should be - but I wonder who is to take the risk of near-certain heavy losses..:rolleyes:
 
Leica will never really expand their market IMO so subsequent models are always going to have a substantial price jump (someone has to pay) ... and let's face it, they don't really make that many cameras compared to the big guns.

Canon and Nikon keep giving us better cameras (in their minds at least) with ever improving features for not much more money. I didn't pay a hell of a lot less for my D70 five or so years ago than than I paid for my D700 recently which when you compare the two cameras is remarkable. Leica will certainly never be in a position to do this!

I guess all those ugly little point and shoots that the big two make generate a lot of profit that goes into making the real cameras and helps to keep the prices on those down to acceptable levels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom