M8 in the flesh at last!

And it only costs $895 (non-Passport price).

I really want one of these. For some reason, I'm not so bent on getting "full frame" anymore. I'd still like it, but from the looks of this unit, I think I'd enjoy it for a long time. I wonder, though, after spending $4.7K or so, how long it would be before I'd want to get my hands on the "new" model. Three years? *whew* My wife isn't going to like this at all.

I still want one, I don't care what Brad says. ;)

<< ... 18% gray beanie-cap with a wind-driven propeller ... >>

 

Wind-driven is keenly appropriate :)

 

Tony, as Ricky R used to say, you will have some 'splainin to do.

"Gary my original logic compared the $1650 Eos 1V to the $6870 1DS-II wherein the price

premium is still more than in your example of a 'reasonably' priced M7 vs the M8."

 

You're forgetting that the 1Ds II has a full frame 17MP sensor, which is probably why it cost

more than the M8 with its 'miniature' sensor with 10MP.

 

You should more properly compare the M8 to the 1D IIn which is has the same sensor size

and comes in cheaper. It's also weather sealed, which the M8 is not.

I wonder if the used market value of the M8 will follow the trends of the film leica bodies, or more closely resemble the used values of digital cameras.

<I>"You're forgetting that the 1Ds II has a full frame 17MP sensor..."</I>

<P>

Have either of you guys ever done cost-estimation for a product slated for manufacture? If so do you both think Canon and Leica projected the same sales volume?

<i><blockquote> do you both think Canon and Leica projected the same sales volume?

</blockquote> </i><p>

 

Differentmarkets. Leicas are primarily sold to a small base of amateurs with disposable incomes, while Canon's top-line digital appears to be sold mostly to pros.

Exactly my point Z, which is why they can't be compared through price and feature set.

, while Canon's top-line digital appears to be sold mostly to pros.

 

Wow, they must be good,Z. Personally, i could never figure out why someone would want a big long white lense. Are they cheaper in white or something? Is there a big discount because they are extra special boring?

 

Pro's understand, i suppose, because they are extra special clever.

"Have either of you guys ever done cost-estimation for a product slated for manufacture?

If so do you both think Canon and Leica projected the same sales volume?"

 

If the Leica execs are delusional they probably projected similar sales volume, but I

seriously doubt that they did. The Leica is obviously a more niche product. Luckily for

Leica the issues of tolerance, complexity, and reliability are all helped by virtue of the fact

that a digital camera is less mechanically complicated than a film camera. The only

moving parts are the shutter and buttons / dials. I would not be surprised if the M8 cost

less to manufacture and is more reliable than a Leica film camera.

Different customers, but the gear can surely be compared one-to-one.

 

An M8 body is equivalent in price to a Canon 5D and a handful of primes, for example.

"Are they cheaper in white or something? Is there a big discount because they are extra

special boring?"

 

Gosh, if you want an exciting lens Leica and Canon are two companies to ignore. Ever seen

a 1700 f/4 Zeiss?