bobtodrick Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Hope this hasn't been posted before, but I just talked to our local Leica rep. He was involved in a phone conference from Leica HQ this past week, with all the reps involved (isn't technology great). The basics...Leica will definitely be shipping the Digital M by mid year (2006). Leica expects to post profit increased of 50% or more for next year (this may be dreaming). They will strive to ship all special orders the same day they are received. They will be introducing a number of new 'innovative' products. The bank involved in their financial difficulties last year is keeping close tabs on them and feels they are making very positive forward steps. Maybe they aren't dead yet!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eliot_rosen1 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Reports of leica's death appear to have been premature. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anand_n._vishwamitran Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 If Leica dies (I hope that never happens), their gear would probably go for more in the used market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 I guess then I'll have no more excuses to avoid exposing pixels with my M lenses ;-) ...and Brad and his cohorts will have no more excuses to avoiding buying Leica cameras. Outa m'way, boys! Digital Al is gittin' closer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_.1 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Obviously they used some sales projections, but at current and ever-increasing prices I wonder if this will hold up over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Hmm, Al, what about the price tag for an excuse... if Leica is planning to increase their profit by 50% or more? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 ...which, BTW, would be valid for both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Well Grant, if "not full frame" is the major determinant than there aren't many worthwhile digital SLR's out there either. If the sensor will work OK using my 21/3.4 S.A. and 15/4.5 Heliar I can live with the reduced format. Full frame the 15 is a fun lens but the 21 is more all around useful optic. The 15's coverage on the reduced size sensor is pretty close to what the 21 puts on the film frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brambor Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 I feel the same way about the full frame. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Would an MP3 player be built in or offered as an "a la carte" option? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_Es Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 This is interesting news, Bob. When I spoke to the Leica reps in Osaka a few weeks ago they said that they were going to wait until Photokina 2006 to formally introduce the digital M. That would be toward the end of the year. If they are aiming for summer, 2006 that is good news indeed. What I got was that the digital M prototype already exists. As I write Leica is presumably testing it. The digital M is apparently going to sell for 4000 euros. That means around $5000 to $6000 at the current overpriced euro rate. Wonder if Leica gives educational discounts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon_dai Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 If they're targeting at sometime in mid 2006 then they should announce the product at PMA just around the corner in Feb ... I can live with a 1.33x cropping factor as rumoured - a 21 still covers a FOV of 28, which is good enough to me. But I agree, that could be a good excuse for both camps ... LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtodrick Posted December 9, 2005 Author Share Posted December 9, 2005 Oh...I didn't mention...it's DEFINITELY NOT full frame. Should boost sales of the 21mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_meeker Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Bob, You're half right...It will boost sales of the CV 21 lens...:) Regards, Frank M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Well, I've got a digital SLR with a crop factor, not "just to have it" but to put my manual primes to good use - as I would with a digital M. So, what am I, two markets? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtodrick Posted December 9, 2005 Author Share Posted December 9, 2005 Actually G4, it's not that senseless. The reason most camera companies have gone with the smaller sensors has nothing to do with cost (what many people assume) or difficulty making them, but with edge sharpness. To be 'sharp' a pixel well (where the pixel resides) needs the light to enter at a perpendicular angle. If the light enters at less than a perpendicular angle you have sharpness problems. So standard and telephoto lenses tend to be sharp, whereas wideangles, where the rear element is closer to the film/sensor plane (meaning the light exits the rear element and 'bends' to hit the film/sensor plane) have sharpness issues at the edges. Lens manufacturers have tried to get around this with new optical designs, but these cannot be used on full frame sensors, in effect using only the 'sweet spot' of the light exiting the rear element. I don't think Leica users would stand for soft corners, nor are they going to buy two different series of lenses, one for their film cameras, another for the digital. And before anyone gets on my case, these are very minor sharpness issues that probably only the camera/lens makers are really concerned about...so no snarky replies about how you've never noticed any unsharpness in your 20d... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Grant, of course I know that! Designing lenses for an SLR is easier because they sit way out from the plane of focus, with a relatively steep angle of incidence. I don't think that rangefinder traditionalists would be happy buying all new wide angle glass and putting up with the size of complete retrofocus designs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_brookes5 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Why do you need full frame ? I thought there had been experts on this forum to show it's not necessary. (Something about lenses needing to be too large and heavy to use it) What are the facts ? If a full size chip is essential why would like make use of a lesser size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_brookes5 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Sorry - Finger trouble - "why would Leica make " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 I can't believe Al has to wait for Leica to make a digital rf before he tries digital. Actually, I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Some might, Grant. Some won't. A lot of pros working for the media today lose out on work if they're not digital. There's still a major difference in handling an M body with one of our crummy ol' wide angles compared to the typical pro digital SLR and it's oversized zoom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Eric ~, I'm trying to retire, I'm still getting assignments, and I'm selling prints. Why should I go out and spend a fortune on a new system than I neither need nor want? A single camera body? Not such a big deal. Maybe I'll unload one or two of my other M bodies. Maybe not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 this isn't the first m lens accepting digital body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Jeepers, Eric ~, you don't slack off, do you? I'm not trolling the digital forum. I can also afford to give photonet $25 but you keep avoiding that. Yup, I got me a Bessa L and I know there's a digital Bessa out there. I also know about build quality of my Leicas and of my Bessa. When somebody is paying me to shoot I want as close to 100% reliability as I can get. I have confidence in Leica's products. I'll take the Bessa body with me on a paid shoot but I always have an LTM/M adapter handy in case I need to stick the 15 on a Leica. Next time I reply to you will be when I see the "hand bearing gift" next to your name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin m. Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 With any luck, Leica will do what Canon hasn't, and that's make fast, wide prime lenses for whatever sensor crop the Digital M ends up using. The 24mm Asph Elmarit would make for a slow, very expensive 35mm-ish lens, for example. Kinda defeats the purpose of using the M system, to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now