One more nail in Leica,s coffin.

[canfred]

This relates to Erwin Puts test report of the DMR. The back is well

designed and functions but no match for existing equipment.

Too little too late it seems.

[james_.1]

Ahh, well, as we know if Leica and its buyers were busy keeping up with the Joneses we'd

all not be interested in Leica as we know it.

[Uhooru]

I've heard very favorable reports about the DMR, Erwin Puts doesn't have any secret

knowledge or wisdom over those people actually using it. Its just one opinoin.

[e_b7]

Yeah, and there are advantages to silver halide (I know, the DMR is digital): it is archival (silver-based emulsion is stable, and people can see it with only their eyeballs in 2050), and has a greater contrast range, which is particularly useful for backlit subjects. I have a friend in publishing who uses digital exclusively for work, but archives her personal stuff with film. My fifty year-old Kodachrome slides look the same now as when they were taken. So what's the point? I doubt film will be dead for quite some time, which, I believe, will keep a niche market going for Leica as a company. Leica digital products may very well be on less solid ground, and I agree that this will be the bulk of the photography market.

[__jon__]

Erwin who? Oh yeah, that guy with the super-cheesy 'model' shots on his site... think his

reviews are about of the same quality.

[canfred]

Well EB I do agree with you ,no reservations. The problem is around 80%

of new camera buyer's do not. And for the comment on Erwins DMR just go and check up on his report. I am sure its not biased. Actually my statement was one more nail ,not the last one I hope.

[jerry_lehrer]

Manfred,

 

In reading about the DMR vis-a-vis contemporary digicams, I am reminded of the Packard Autumobile Company in the 1950s.

 

Jerry

[sandy.]

Troll!

 

Ten months ago, every troll has nothing better to do was projecting Leica's demise is imminent. Go to the archives and have your silly fun there, this subject is too old and stale here. Just don't understand. Why do you want Leica to go under? Do you have anything personal to gain? Pure nonsense.

[david j.lee]

gee... i?ll better give away all my leica stuff right now and buy a nikon. i am

really scared....

[stuart_richardson]

Well, regardless of reports, nobody seems to be making the point that every single DMR

Leica makes is being ravenously bought up. There are literally people waiting in months

long lines to buy the thing. Most reviews and user comments seem to say that it fares very

well against the top-shelf Canon and Nikon equipment, while falling just short of their

level of performance. For someone who has a R8/9 setup already and wants to go digital,

this is probably a more attractive solution then selling all their Leica gear and buying it all

again in Canon or Nikon. For someone without an investment in Leica R gear, it is

somewhat of a tougher sell. Of course, I would have hoped that the DMR would clearly

best the 1Ds mark II, but the fact that it is a high quality digital solution that works within

the existing Leica R system is not something to scoff at. Hopefully they can learn from the

problems in making the digital M.

[e_b7]

Manfred, I hope it's not the last nail either. I'm getting used to 80% of the population not agreeing with me on one thing or another! Music is another example. Thanks for the post!

[e_b7]

I like Erwin's girlie pictures. Not of the traditional artistic style, but I must admire his taste.

[isaac_octavo]

What is the link to this report?

[beepy]

<a href="http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/digital/DMR/ddmr.html">The link to the DMR

test report</a>.

[dave_chadderton]

I kind of agree - too costly and perhaps too much trouble.

 

However, it's perhaps better to look upon it as a test-bed for future Digital SLRs (and even RFs) whilst offering the existing R8/9 owner an expensive interim solution.

[ky2]

I'm confident many collectors are actually WAITING for Leica to go under. This would increase their prized collections value tenfold.

 

The DMR, imo, is a cool addition-- and I've seen stellar shots done with it. Erwin is also relying on Rawshooter for processing these RAW images, software that considerably favors existing RAW formats (just as Photoshop RAW) over the newly introduced format of the DMR. I would expect Erwin to process each RAW with the manufacturer's supplied RAW converter before making assumptions over the sensor's technology (from what I gather, the DMR's software is very capapble).

[ben z]

As far as the DMR's effect on Leica's survival, the critical issue IMO is whether Leica figured rationally when costing its development, in terms of the total numbers of them they could expect to sell. If they calculated that the DMR will be bought primarily by some but not all owners of R8 and R9 cameras (whose sales numbers they have to have), followed by perhaps a few sales to owners of R lenses and earlier bodies, and a handful of 1st-time sales to the curious and affluent, then maybe they'll come out ahead on it. If they based their biz plan on the notion that the DMR would bring an influx of new customers to the Leica R brand, or that its sales would sustain for years to come, then IMO the "nail in the coffin" comment is accurate.

[malcolm_tentt]

More nails than needed. It's that Teutonic overbuild-everything ethic.

[gabrielma]

I was going to say. How many nails does this noneucledian coffin has it had? It's alive! It walks!!! RUN!!!

[gabrielma]

(fe de erratas): snip the "does"

[fotografz]

What does Mr. Puts know about digital?

 

I know a little bit ... well, maybe more than a little bit, but it's enough to get great images

with the camera ... I personally like the look I'm getting just as much as images with my

1DsMKII, maybe even more. It's a CCD and doesn't have a filter in front of the sensor. The

look is clearly different ... so it's worth it. I like using it, the feel of it, more than the Canon

also.

[rolfe_tessem]

I agree with Marc. The megapixel race is largely irrelevant anymore, as all the top level

cameras will do a decent job. Myself, I hate the pastic skin look that seems to be most

prevelent out of Canon products. The look I've seen from the DMR seems more textured or

something. It is definitely different, and for that reason alone is worth it (at least to some).

[bob haight]

One thing I noted in the Puts review is the need for lens quality is greatly lessened with digital because the image can be enlarged by software without loss or distortion, thus average lenses can take great digital shots. The point being there is not really a need for Leica quality glass with digital, as Puts results showed, thus, Leica's success with digital cannot be based solely on their lenses but must be most focussed on the camera and software. This is a departure from the past where the quality of the lens ruled the day.

[mark_chappell]

<I>One thing I noted in the Puts review is the need for lens quality is greatly lessened with

digital because the image can be enlarged by software without loss or distortion, thus

average lenses can take great digital shots.</i><P>

 

In my experience, and that of others as discussed on PhotoNet, this concept (you don't

benefit much from good lenses in the digital world) is simply flat wrong. A high end DSLR

will

painfully reveal lens flaws that you wouldn't notice on film. And as for software

enlarging, the standard old computer phrase 'garbage in, garbage out' still applies. Yep,

average lenses can take great digital shots -- or great film shots -- if the photographer

has skill and vision. But DSLR images, handled by someone who knows what they're

doing, really show off what a fine lens can do.

[gabrielma]

<i>"One thing I noted in the Puts review is the need for lens quality is greatly lessened with digital because the image can be enlarged by software without loss or distortion, thus average lenses can take great digital shots."</i><BR><BR>

Many people think that computers can generate something from nothing, just like the alchemists once thought they could summon gold if they could only find the philosophal stone (or governments can pay their bills if they only crank the money-making machine). You can only extrapolate. Extrapolating mediocre quality just gives you more mediocrity.