Why can't Leica make the M9 the size of an MP?

<p>I find it interesting that Leica markets the M9 as true M camera and compares its handling to the original M3. I know a lot of people hated the M5, and Leica almost went under because of it's size (personally I love the M5). Maybe the M5 size comparison is too harsh, but why couldn't Leica make a digital M the size of the original M3 or MP? When they make a digital M that has the profile of a M3, I'll will buy one. </p>

<p>You can't cram 50 pounds of mud into a 5 pound sack</p>

<p>Everybody's digital cameras are larger than the film cameras. More stuff to go in there. Look at all the Nikon/Canon/Sony DSLRs, for example. Only exceptions are tiny-sensor point&shoots.</p>

<p>Tristan, that would be nice, although current technology doesn't seem to allow it. When Leica and Canon produced digital SLRs instead of their film cameras, the size increased as well in many cases, such as a Nikon F3 versus D3 comparison. The full frame M9 is quite an achievement in limited size and weight, nonetheless, certainly in comparison to the top of the line DSLRs, which are huge in comparison.</p>

<p>Effectively, the space required by a film and the pressure plate is quite limited in the front to back direction, whereas sensors and screen monitor require more space. The rest of the front to back space is required by the design of the lens (I think it is 28,8 mm), as in a film Leica. The rest of the digital Leica has to house all the electronics andextra controls, as well as the usual shutter mechanism and the considerable space requiried by the VF-RF system (more than 100 physical parts). </p>

<p> </p>

<p><em>why couldn't Leica make a digital M the size of the original M3 or MP?</em></p>

<p>Because a battery, sensor, memory card and writer, LCD screen, control wheel and buttons, and powerful computer take up more room than a roll of film, take-up spool, and film winding mechanism.</p>

<p>Consider this. The M8 and M9 come with a built-it motor drive. Put the current Leica motor drive on your MP or M6 and compare it to the M8 and M9. You will find the M8 and M9 to be more compact and lighter. Quite remarkable when you think about it.</p>

<p>Gee whiz, it is for all practical purposes the same size as a film M... you gotta be kidding me if the tiny bit larger it is than the film M's is an issue... and as Alex says that includes automatic film... uh.... frame advance and shutter cocking.</p>

<p>But never mind with this digital stuff. I just got an Olympus OM-1N w/ 35mm lens in the mail today... 180 bucks. What a beautiful camera, about the same size as a Leica. Can't wait to see what kind of pix it makes. </p>

<p>Congratulations Ray. I have been using an OM2n with a 28. The Olympus lenses are astonishingly small and light. Hard to believe the elements are made of glass. The OM body size is Leica-like but I prefer the Leica-like heft of Nikon in an SLR. But my next camera is an M9. Just don't know when. I am sure I'll be happy with the size of it.</p>

<p>Really, Tristan, it's pretty close in size. Is that really an issue for you? I'd worry more about the price tag:) </p>

<p>I thought it was pretty close in size. A tad thicker than an M7, which is a tad taller than an MP. But we are talking millimeters here...</p>

<p>Why can't Epson or Cosina make a full frame digtal M mount RF cam? I'm sure they could do better than $7K? That's a better question.</p>

<p>Personally I'm waiting on the sub $1000 Nikon "full frame".</p>

<p>For the same reasons you can't. If you think there should be a product like the M9 within M3 size housing then go ahead and make one yourself. Otherwise, write Leica and give them some feedback. Else, quit complaining.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The M8 and M9 come with a built-it motor drive.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What does the motor drive do anyway?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Cocks the shutter</p>

<p>Miles, where did your standard-platitude-for-pnet Word template? For once try going ahead yourself and throw in something new – and thought out by yourself. </p>

 

<p>As long as its compact, which it is, I d be more concerned with its robustness and the quality of its imaging.</p>

<p>A better question might be why can't (or more likely, doesn't) Leica make the M9 the same <em>price</em> as the MP. $4400 is still a large amount of money compared to other digital cameras, considered it has <20mp, no live-view, no evaluative metering, no autofocus, no GPS, no weather sealing, etc. And $4400 is about what an M9 with 500 actuations will sell for on the 'Bay in 18 months.</p>

<p>"A better question might be why can't (or more likely, doesn't) Leica make the M9 the same <em>price</em> as the MP."<br>

The sales vlolume is lower; they must spread the tooling and development costs over a small number of units.</p>

<p>I cannot imagine the M8 has not sold far far more units since 2006/10 than the MP, or that the M9 will not sell far far more units from now on than the MP. I believe the MP sold well for the first several years when there was no Leica digital M and the same MP was priced <$2500, but I am sure very very few people today buys a new MP @ $4400.</p>