Why the overbuilt digital M is flawed and why we need less expensive alternatives.

[back alley]

panasonic g1 with adapter...works a treat!!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I let Nikki use my M3 when she was 4.

So easy, a small child can use one. She framed with the 9cm F4 Elmar quite nicely. She likes the M8.

 

[dof]

Respectfully, so what? Who cares about Leica's "reputation?" Why should photographers give a tinker's damn about that?

Photographers give a tinkers damn insofar as it reflects on their reputation!

Joking aside, I think most can agree that we'd love to see Leica to offer a less expensive option for a digital M camera.

Beyond that, my opinion is that the mostly repetitious points, counterpoints, and barbs made in these threads have been done to the point of being tired.

 

[back alley]

...very tired...

 

[NickTrop]

The price/performance ratio of the M9 is absurdly bad relative to much cheaper alternatives. This was always the case going back to film, the M9 takes this to extremes. And, no, I don't own a Leica - and, there, I said it. But to each his own.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

If you think the M9 is overpriced, don't buy it. A used M8 goes for under $2000, and an RD-1 goes for less.

An my EP-2 is a fun little camera, especially with visible+infrared for under $1400.

There, two RF alternatives and one extra just for fun.

 

[jrv]

Why not just go to an EVF with great focus capabilities?

The Viewfinder is about more than just focusing. And some people don't feel like they "see" the image they are about to capture with an EVF.

Right now, If Zeiss and Voigtlander got off their asses and smelled the 21st century digital coffee, they could cash in big with a body in the $3,000 or so.

Epson tried this a few years ago...

Back-illuminated CMOS full-frame sensors are right around the corner - 2011, maybe announcements at Photokina - and that will allow Leica to switch from CCD and save money, and maybe even cut the price.

Cosina is in the best position to launch a budget RF as they already make low-cost RF lenses and they made the R-D1. They may have no-compete agreements so long as Epson sells the R-D1x in Japan, and now may not seem like the best time for them to invest in a new lines of "niche" cameras (manual focus is a niche market, period). But Cosina is an RF fan, so maybe it happens...

 

[Keith]

Over built is a term that puzzles me ... it has a lot of manufacturing complexity associated with jamming that sort of technology into a body that was never intended to house a digital camera and I think that makes it fragile and vulnerable.

If you drop a current DSLR along with an M9 from a few feet onto a hard surface you'll be able to pick the DSLR up and keep shooting nine times out of ten ... not so sure about the Leica though! Run them both under a tap for a while and the result will probably be the same.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The M8 is not fragile. I've seen a 1-week old D2x that the wedding photographer had take a spill- knocked over on a tripod, by a guest bumping into it. $1500 repair. I've handled an M8 and M9 that had been very roughly treated, worked perfectly.

 

[ederek]

The price/performance ratio of the M9 is absurdly bad relative to much cheaper alternatives. This was always the case going back to film, the M9 takes this to extremes. And, no, I don't own a Leica - and, there, I said it. But to each his own.

I do not believe there are any digital alternatives at the M9 performance level (or are you suggesting size doesn't matter? )

Suggesting an "absurd" $/perf ratio seems to imply a linear extrapolation of $/perf relative to alternatives. Given a typical s-curve, it would be absurd NOT to expect a higher ratio at the M9 point vs alternatives.

To not have a personal demand for the performance level of the M9 is perfectly fine.

 

[ederek]

Nikon D3x Canon 1ds

true, but not in the same form factor (part of my 'performance' criteria).

any film camera with a scanned neg.

true, but note I specified 'digital alternatives'. didn't want to get into f/d debate where 'performance' is the final output. there's convenience, etc.

But for low-light, sorry. D3/D700. Nothing yet comes close. It will eventually, but it's not the M9.

indeed.

btw - a polymeric structural body would need fresh accelerated life testing versus an established platform, increase warranty risk (buried element of final cost), require new production equipment and manufacturing techniques, retraining workforce, etc. etc. - might end up being higher current cost than current offering...

Ok, enough of this sillyness for me...

 

[ederek]

That's awesome Shane!!! Thanks.

 

[doolittle]

There is a certain irony in the fact that a lot of people want a camera that doesn't exist yet so they can make pictures similar to those which were made before they were born, using cameras and lenses they would likely turn their noses up at.

Succinct Guilty as charged.

 

[Olsen]

I really can't understand, to the best of my ability, why this discussion has been moved to 'Off Topic'. Is RFF a film forum only?