MMMMMMM!...Rummors...

<a

href="http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/PMA_news_Leica_to_develop_fullframe_digital_rangefinder_camera_news_177351.html">jUst

saYing</a>

MMMMMM! I'm a buyer!

 

But it's too darn long till Phokina ...

Ooops. I meant PHOTOkina.

My M2, M3, Md-2, M5, M7 (.72) and M7 (.85) are collecting dust on the shelf because of my 40 D. And I wont give up zoom, autofocus, high ISOperformance, auto sensor cleaning etc. (and the money in the bank) for an M8/9

Bet they get rid of cyan vignetting and if very lucky, need for special filters.

I think dangling the carrot of the FF sensor Holy Grail in front of M8 owners is just that, a

carrot to sell the upgrade idea. There is simply no evidence that anyone has resolved (or

has any real interest in resolving) the problem of using a FF sensor in an M body with M

lenses. It would be a huge technological breakthrough without a payoff for a maker of

sensors. If you can already easily make FF sensors for DSLR's which sale in large numbers,

why would you pour R&D money into a breakthrough sensor intended for a camera that

sells within a tiny niche?

 

It sounds to me like Leica is selling a lot of sizzle.

If it doesn't require physical changes to the chassis, existing M8s could be upgraded in the factory. Alternatively, they could go the M6 / M6TTL route, and just label the thing an M8FF.

Interesting what you about your 40D Torben - my experience is somewhat different to yours - my Canon 1dsmk11 and a bunch of L lenses sit there gathering dust - the M8ate files are much better for me to work with and print from. I look forward to the full frame version so my 21 is a 21 and my 28 is a 28 and my 50 is a 50.

<i>..a carrot to sell the upgrade idea.</i>

<p>

I think that ("upgrade of M8") is an indication what the price of an M9 would be.

<p>

My guess- 8500 Euros.

<p>

I will be able to buy a >20mp D4 at that time and for far cheaper prices.

<p>

Leica really ought to sell their name to Cosina and let them make things better and cheaper.

I don't get it. Why is the M9 still being discussed? If the M8 is built to last (seems to be), and all the components that would become outdated can be replaced, what would be the reason for a M9? You don't want a bigger or heavier body, otherwise it's no longer a M. Remember, it's still 50% about the lenses, and right now they cost more than the camera. If a full frame sensor can be put in there and the computer chip replaced and the shutter replaced, and the software replaced in the "box" the size of the M8, then there's no need for a M9, unless its just a slightly modified body.

 

Everyone's missing the implications for used M8s. Right now what you'd like to find is a user M8 with a scratched LCD and malfunctioning shutter for say about US $2,000. Then send it to Germany to upgrade and overhaul (which they said they'd do with the upgrade). Your new backup camera would become you main camera. Okay, even if you buy a used one for $4,000, the upgrade would still make it worthwhile. This takes us back to the days of the ol' M3 or M6 that just needs be sent in and relubricated, parts replaced, and adjusted. This is exactly what anyone would want out of Leica. FF is the final piece. Can they fit it in that box or not. First they need the sensor to be developed, then we'll find out if they designed the M8 box with that in mind. If not, M9

Now w/FF, my only excuse for not getting one is that I can't afford it!

Gets funnier all the time. Someone on the Leica forum mentioned a recent Ebay sale of a Mint used Leica for US $3,800. So, lower than the $4,000 I mentioned. But this is too high. Who needs mint if you're going to upgrade it? $2,000 for a banged up M8 would be better.

 

Here's what looks like more bad news for something called a Photo Business forum. The author things the M8 upgrade is a horrible idea too late. Here's the interesting part:

 

"Further, I know of several Leica professionals (yes, that would be people who actually use the Leica for paying work, not as an accessory to their Aesculapian staff) who are selling their M8's (for a loss, no doubt), and have stated their intent to wait until Leica produces a professional camera that's ready for prime time."

 

Keep on selling them, guys. When it gets down to $3,000 maybe I'll buy a second one, upgrade it, and sell my current one for $4,000. And while we're at it, keep those M lenses and look for new ones to buy. What happens if a FF sensor does appear. Where's all the needed lenses?

Larry -- they say in their letter that they are only offering the upgrade certificates to

registered customers, so if you bought your M8 used, you probably cannot get the upgrade.

vi, why not put your money where your big mouth is? why criticize a product, which this forum is devoted to, if you have no intention to purchase or even try it? trolling, imo. when, if ever, has the $$$ ever affect the buying decisions affect our well healed buyers? you are preaching to the choir. quit.

Mo, I have tried it: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=708448

 

Superb camera for UV captures.

 

As for my purchasing powers or the lack of it- I am not publishing it here or anywhere.

"My M2, M3, Md-2, M5, M7 (.72) and M7 (.85) are collecting dust on the shelf because of my 40 D. And I wont give up zoom, autofocus, high ISOperformance, auto sensor cleaning etc. (and the money in the bank) for an M8/9"

 

My Canon 40D is sitting gathering dust (actually my girlfriend uses it) while I shoot roll after roll of 35mm film on my M3 and M6. I wouldn't qive up small, discrete, film quality aesthetics's, with prime lenses for any DSLR.

 

I find it strange as one post stated that Pro M8 photographers are selling their M8's because they're waiting for a real Pro M camera. A pro who uses a rangefinder would use a range finder because of its unique attributes. It would imply their work couldn't be done, by them at least on a dslr. You wouldn't here of a DSLR user dumping their SLR gear for a range finder simply due to some extra pro qualities on a range finder. The camera types are too different with very different advantages and ways of working.

Sheldon -- Ha !

I would guess that the MSRP for a FF Leica would be huge, at lwast 10K. It is typical that the minor upgrades to the M8 cost 1200 Euros.

With all its flaws, the M8 got a great reception. The M8FF will be better. Ya here this big voice echoing "If you build it, they will come?" :-)

"Steven Lee, chief executive officer of Leica Camera AG, today told Amateur Photographer that the camera could form part of a future upgrade option for the current M8."

 

With out changing the shutter? I thought Leica's standard line on the matter was the current shutter in the M8 would not allow for a FF sensor. Then again maybe they were just saying that to get the hold out to shell out for an M8.

 

BTW great title for this thread.

Did Leica ever fix the IR shift problem, or if you buy a brand new M8, do you still have to have filters for your lenses? I know some will say it's not a design flaw, but I really don't want to go through that fantasy discussion again.

Nice idea...I'd be seriously tempted with a ff sensor.

Michael. Leica are trying to tout the M8's IR sensitivity as a "feature".

 

They have not woken up to its splendid UV response, yet.

Thanks Vivek, I should look forward to the night vision model then<g>.

I would be happy with no full frame ever in a digital "M" if someone would come out with wide/fast lenses that only covered the R-D1 or M8 sensors. Keep the cost and size down at least somewhat and give digital RF users the same focal lengths & low light ability that they are used to with their film gear.