Next step of Leica?

[Peter_in_PA]

Jeffrey,

 

That's the conventional thinking, but I've found that very well-made high-end modern guitars (Breelove, McPherson, stuff

like that) sound way better than MOST old guitars, both acoustic, and especially electric. Which is why I think that the

analogy is very good. But you're right, it's off topic. Again, I notice that NOBODY has the brand loyalty that you Leica-

philes have. (I'm not saying that's a bad thing... just noticing...)

[warren_lafever]

on a side note, i wish i could say i only use olympus but i bought a minolta 35mm x700 mps with 50mm f1.7 lens at goodwill for 30$ and i bought a graflex 22 at an antique store for 35$. i also have a holga and an olympus 35rc rangefinder (12$ from an online auction). for digital though i have only ever used olympus. c-4000 (no longer have) , e-500, e-520. i shoot with anything i can get my hands on as long as i can afford it. i like taking photos and i am willing to overlook any faults a camera might have or be percieved to have. i must have been fortunate when buying because i have never had an issue with anything i own or owned. btw, i eat my hamburgers plain because i want to taste the meat.

[carbon_dragon]

"But the 'old fashioned' Leica meets the contemporary condition of disposibility and obsolescence of digital camera

reality -- two concepts in antagonism -- which seems to encourage a very fullsome negativity regarding the M8 well

beyond anything I can recall about any other camera digital or film. "

 

I found this difficult to follow, but here's what I think it means and I think it is a good point. Digital cameras today

seem to have introduced an obsolescence schedule much more rapid than existed before. Granted, Nikon probably

didn't intend for the Nikon F2 to last as long as the Leica M3 either, so perhaps the trend has been around longer

than digital, but digital has certainly accelerated it. That trend affects the M8 too because the M8 has memory cards

and file formats and computer interfaces which go obsolete faster than the physical frame of the camera does. On

the other hand, the "old fashioned" Leica standard of long lasting cameras wants to produce cameras made of hand

crafted materials which are designed to endure for a long time. These two trends don't go together. It's like producing

a solid gold water bottle you're expected to throw away after drinking the water. What you end up with is a camera

which costs more than it should because the frame is engineered (at a high cost) to last longer than the electronics

inside will be useful (or usable). I have to say this bothers me.

 

I think they could be reconciled. Consider what would happen to the M8 concept if the M8's electronics could be

swapped out every couple of years so that you get a new sensor, new CPUs, a new card reader, new firmware, etc

for say $2000 (which is admittedly a LOT for an upgrade). Then all of a sudden that "old fashioned" brass and

chrome makes sense because 50 years from now maybe you're still using your M8 only the electronics is state of

the art for 2058. But if you're not meant to do this, if you are meant instead to buy an M9 and M10 and M11, etc.,

then cost is a lot more important because the lifespan is shorter. And THAT's why you prefer to see the "good

enough" ruggedness of polycarbonate to the multi-decade ruggedness of brass and chrome.

 

(naturally the economic argument for a professional is wholly different)

 

"If you read my answers in the forum, you will see that my Canons have been gathering dust on my shelves since

the M8 came out."

 

Which is fine, but it also tends to negate any scientific conclusions you might draw about whether the M8 when

presented with the same subject as the 5D will produce an image that is "better" in some way -- maybe better in the

sense that there was more picture detail, or perhaps that it had less noise, or perhaps that it had more dynamic

range, or something. There's no need for you to do this unless you are actually trying to convince us that your 10MP

camera can really compete with the 5D's full frame 12MP sensor or the 1DsMkII's 16MP sensor or the mkIII's 21MP

sensor (or the D3's 12MP sensor). Then I'd want some actual evidence. But none of that might matter to you

because you are in the best position to evaluate whether that particular camera works for you and whether it makes

economic sense for you. No-one else can make that decision for you, nor should they try. Sorry I'm an engineer, I

have to think this way.

 

Note also that it IS possible for an X MP camera to give you better image quality than an X+Y (larger) MP camera. I

demonstrated that when I compared (reasonably well I think) my Sony A350 14MP camera to my Canon 5D. With

equivalent lenses, the 5D actually gave an image with more discernable details than the APS-C sized Sony sensor.

But you have to be careful to make the test fair -- prime lens to prime lens, same tripod, cable release, careful

selection of aperture and equivalent shutter speed, etc. I would be VERY interested to see that done with an

identical image, with say an equivalent image crop or two.

[asad_shah]

I like old school Leica RF bodies. I held the M8 in my hands and it immediately did not feel like a Lecia to me. It looks like one but it didnt feel like it. I would only buy one if the dimensions were identical. I heard that annoying sound for cocking the shutter and was horrified. They should have just left the film winder in place and let us use it to cock the shutter when we felt like cocking the shutter...why does it just have to do it on its own and make that distracting noise. What happened to the rangefinder being better than SLRs bequase its quiet? And in my opinion, Leica is 'top of the line' because of its superb lenses....then how could they use a non FF sensor and make us pay so much for their lenses and then use it on a body that changes the focal length????? This is insane. I pay $2k for a lens to see 35mm angle of view and my pics show 45mm angle of view....who are they kidding? I'll never buy a new Leica body....I wouldnt buy a new Leica lens for that matter....they are known for their old stuff, so buy their old stuff. Eventually they will either go out of business or have to realize their customers are diehard and we want what we want, and we're not going to buy sub-par crap with a Leica logo on it.

[jeffrey_prokopowicz]

Peter, I have three Martin guitars, all relatively new, and I've never had the pleasure of playing a pre-war Martin, but the Martin folks who have can be very persuasive about which sounds better, and I've been swayed. I have heard sound clips though, but I fear that my hearing is not refined enough. Honestly, I can't imagine an acoustic guitar sounding better than my "Golden Era" D-18, built in 2001, so I would tend to side with you. Martin is even building "new" 18-series mahogany guitars dubbed the D18 "Authentic," even assembled with hide glue. There's probably a lot of myth involved with the whole thing, sort of like Leica. ;)

 

<"But the 'old fashioned' Leica meets the contemporary condition of disposibility and obsolescence of digital camera reality -- two concepts in antagonism ">

 

Don, let me chew on that for the next hundred years and I'll get back to you. ;) I stand corrected--I think. :)

[warren_lafever]

david, i think you just made my point better than i made it. apples should be compared to apples. 10mp should be compared to 10mp and sensor sizes should be the same or close to similar. other wise its like comparing an F1 car to a dragster. (ooops another car referance) both have four wheels and an engine but, both are not designed to do the same thing in the same way.

[warren_lafever]

a note on old acoustic guitars- as the wood ages it becomes warmer sounding with less bright overtones. thats why a strativarious violin is prefered. he used 450 year old wood to make them and now they are priceless

[emiliogtz]

I don't own a Leica. And can't see how could I own one in the mid-, long-term. Still, it's one of those things I'd like to do before I die. Photography is a hobby for me, It's not something I do for a living, just pleasure. I also tend to appreciate craftsmanship, built-to-last construction, and good quality materials. Which is perhaps the main reason I want to take photographs with a Leica. The "Leica experience" if you mind. Few things are a such a pleasure to own, as they are to operate. To me Leica cameras fall in that category.

 

I hope they can survive doing what they do best. I even like the idiosyncratic aspect. Hey, that's one of their strong points, isn't it?

[jeffrey_prokopowicz]

Emilio, just a heads up, if you're serious about wanting the "Leica experience," get at an M6, a 35 or 50mm Summicron, and shoot some film. There is no other way to know what made Leica a legend.

 

The thought of someone getting an M8 and then saying "I don't see what all the hoopla was about" bothers me more than you can imagine.

[luis-a-guevara]

"Emilio Gutierrez , Jul 30, 2008; 05:36 p.m.

I don't own a Leica. And can't see how could I own one in the mid-, long-term. Still, it's one of those things I'd like to do

before I die. Photography is a hobby for me, It's not something I do for a living, just pleasure. I also tend to appreciate

craftsmanship, built-to-last construction, and good quality materials. Which is perhaps the main reason I want to take

photographs with a Leica. The "Leica experience" if you mind. Few things are a such a pleasure to own, as they are to

operate. To me Leica cameras fall in that category."

 

Funny that you don't own one ,yet you have managed to understand what Leica is all about. The "Leica Experience" has not

been equaled by any other German or Swiss manufacturers much less from any of the rest of the world. It is a feeling of

Empowerment , mixed with stimulating sensuous precision, that makes you think that you can photograph whatever it is

that excites you, knowing that you will get the best image possible.

 

Unfortunately this last part is no longer true in the digital arena where leica has become a follower .The real challenge that

Leica faces is about restoring their position as Leaders in Photography. Designing a FF DSLR inline with the current crop of

Japanese cameras will only perpetuate their current position as "Followers". They would be hitting the market with a still-

born product while the rest of the Japanese manufacturers moves onto the 24 MP Generation of FF.

 

The success of Barnack's first 35 mm camera was that it was a light , small , handheld ,high I.Q. replacement for the

cumbersome view cameras and medium format cameras of its time. This success would not have happened if the Image

Quality wasnt equal or better than the cameras it was targeted to replace.

 

If Leica is to reinvent itself it needs to repeat Barnack's strategy of jumping ahead of the Medium Format capabilities , that

everybody knows are not sleeping , but on the contrary seem to be going through their own revival and really leading the

image quality issue.

 

The next Leica-R camera has to offer better resolution , larger Mega Pixel count , and introduce new technologies like the

Foveon sensor Tricolor pixels . Anything else is just lateral development . What is needed is Revolution rather than Evolution

of the inherently defective Bayer technology

__________________

Luis:

[dogbert]

The success of the 35 mm camera was due to its convenience not image quality, which was always surpssaed by properly exposed and focussed medium and large format film. Once it became the standardised format economies of scale drove prices down further still such that complete slr systems, a full range of lenses and propriety flash technology, motor drives and metering systems call all be offered at relatively affordable prices.

 

Leica was competing on more equal ground because film was not owned by camera companies, so Leica only had to comepte on the basis of lens quality and build quality. While most of the Japanese manaufacturers went for convenicience with motor drives, electronic metering and using computer technology to offer ever more features, Leica opted to remain largely within a niche - that of a fully mechanical camera, stripped down to its bearest essentials. Some like this, and it is clearly a valid niche but the trouble with being in a niche it that by definition you are not going to appeal to the mainstream. And the mainstream professionals by and large opted for the convenience and advantages that a fully developed, computerised slr system could offer.

 

In the digital age Leica faces a much bigger problem. Computerisation means that products are on short cycles before obsolescence. The "film" is no longer generic to the industry as each camera manufacturer makes its own sensors and sensor quality and computer image processing that goes with it is integral to the image quality and user experience. So Leica now has to compete in an area that favours large R&D budgets, which can only be financed by mass production. All of this runs counter to Leica's traditional strength which has been to produce a very expensive niche product expected to last decades if not a lifetime.

[Alex_Es]

Ray, I've posted a lot of what I and a few others consider "good stuff" shot with M8. Some of my M8 stuff, blown up to

A2 size, was exhibited last March at the 21st Century Museum of Contemporary Art, Kanazawa and appears in the

latest issue of Viewfinder. I also shot some of my best theater shot (Hamlet) in May with the M8. The Hexar AF is just

fine and needs to be used more. Below is a recent shot with the M8 and the Summilux 75/1.4 (one heavy guy) that has

proven to be fairly popular on Flickr, for what its worth.

 

<p></p>

 

<a href=" title="L9991967 by Alex Es, on Flickr"><img

src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3077/2623612479_c40067ea8e_b.jpg" width="1024" height="683" alt="L9991967"

/></a>

[garrison_k.]

"If you read my answers in the forum..."

 

I'm sorry, my apologies Tina. I thought I read in there that you did take the Canon along with your M8's. Like Andy, I didn't read this whole thing...

[Alex_Es]

Here is another. <i>Hamlet</i> Ophelia going mad. M8 + Summilux 50/1.4 with IR/UV filter @ ISO 2500.

 

<p></p>

<a href=" title="L9991696 by Alex Es, on Flickr"><img

src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3259/2552265433_45992fceb1_b.jpg" width="1024" height="673" alt="L9991696"></a>

[michael s.]

<i>Italics</i> off ?<p>

 

Like the 9:10 photo very much, Alex.

[warren_lafever]

i say r10 is the next stop for leica. maybe a FF digi with tilting lcd and some surprise features no one would have though of.

[Alex_Es]

Thanks, Michael S.

 

Looks like we are stuck with italics for a while. Sorry about that.

[02Pete]

This thread started by posing the question of where Leica might best focus its current product development

efforts. It got highjacked by people arguing that the current M8 is overpriced and inferior to current Nikon

and Canon DSLRs, and by other people offering counterarguments that the M8 is the greatest thing since sliced

bread. The real question here, however, is: where should Leica go next?

 

My own view is that Leica should focus on developing a second-generation digital camera body that is less

expensive than the current M8, takes M-mount interchangeable lenses, is close enough in layout and control

configuration to Leica M cameras to offer a reasonably short learning curve for current Leica users, provides a

full frame sensor if reasonably possible without compromising the other design objectives, offers better

performance at high ISO ratings, and solves or at least minimizes some of the technical problems that M8 users

have reportedly experienced. In terms of target price range, they should be trying to deliver a camera body

that can be sold for $1,500 to $3,000 US retail without a lens. Put another way, they should try to develop a

less expensive, better performing M8.

[peteradownunder]

</i> So everyone is in agreement then? A better version of teh M8 at half th price will do the trick?

[warren_lafever]

i tried to get the thread back on track with my view of where they should go. R10. but either way we agree that it should cost less!

[dogbert]

It's hard to diagree with a better camera at half the price, but that goes for any manufacturer.

 

I think Leica has to go the way of replaceable digital backs. That way they can appeal to people who want to believe that a Leica is long term investment, while offering them a digital back (rather than a whole new camera) that can be changed out every few years as technology progresses.

[warren_lafever]

very interesting! this would solve all the issues anyone had. as long as the digital backs were resonably priced. 1000-2500$

[warren_lafever]

sort of an updated digital modul R?

[nzdavid]

Leica needs to keep it simple:

 

1) Leica M digital

 

2) Leica M film version

 

3) Leica R DSLR

 

4) Compact but capable Leica digital all-in-one.

 

5) And, of course superb optics!

[fran__ois_p._weill]

Tina wrote :

 

>> "For the pros, they don't need that particular niche and are much happier with a 1DsMKIII or II or 5D or D3 or whatever and it serves them better. But psychology is a powerful thing. Maybe you really do take better pictures with the M8. That wouldn't really mean it's a better camera, just better for you."

 

I have a 1DMII and a 5D. I've compared the photos from corner to corner at 100% and there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the M8 produces vastly superior results. (Not to mention even being able to get the photos I want in the first place.) Psychology has absolutely nothing to do with it; however, as I said, that is strictly my opinion based on my experience. YMMV. <<

 

Dear Tina,

 

First I want to apologize for the late answer to your kind response.

 

From my personal experience, I think there is always a strange thing which happens or not between a photographer and the gear he or she used... I called it "alchemy" for the lack of a better word.

 

I love rangefinders cameras and I ever feel well using them. But I don't feel the alchemy is working as well with all models alike... I had the opportunity to use an M3 which was collecting dust in a closet of the first paper I worked for. It was my first physical contact with a Leica. As we worked in B&W and I began to take pictures long before TTL metering was generalized, I knew how to use a hand held meter and - if the situation requitred - to use the "sunny 16" rule. I will never forget this first experience and the exceptional results I got. But this didn't blind me about the relative slow process it required when using slide films with it (which required hand held metering almost for each pic) I experimented for my own pleasure.

 

A few years later I had the opportunity to buy an M4-P. I found it pleasant t use but not to the extent the M3 was (perhaps because of the lower finder magnification) and, as color was now slowly taking a greater importance in my work, I found the absence of TTL metering a liability. The alchemy didn't fully worked between me and my M4-P.

 

Sometimes life is not as "rosy" as it should be and I was forced to part with my Leica gear...

 

During all these years, my main gear was composed of a bunch of Nikon SLR's and lenses, mostly because of the variety of picture types I was assigned to take. I can't say the pics I got from them were inferior or superior to the ones I got from my Leica. They were simply different, particularly when it goes to B&W ones, where the Leica lenses "magic" is more present (at least in my humble opinion). I had an humble Nikkormat Ftn to begin with, then I went to the F2, and replaced the Nikkormat by a FM then added a FE and finally replaced both the FM and the FE by an FE2. All these Nikons, but the Nikkormat, produced that bizarre alchemy. Then I quit for a time the small format world and got an Hasselblad gear. First an humble second hand C, then a brand new 553 ELX. The alchemy worked with the Hasselblad gear too.

 

I also worked earlier with a Mamiya C 330 TLR and a Press Universal and never felt quite at ease with them...

 

When my Hasselblad gear was stolen, I was deprived of cameras... For lack of proper budget to replace it, I went to a second hand Leica M5 and I can say this body was probably the M I liked the best. It was really a user's machine with exactly the minimum required to take the pictures I wanted. Unfortunately, after a few years of intense use, the shutter was done. After a long thought and a week of intensive test, my dealer convinced me to buy a Hexar RF new. I still have it but it is now for sale, despite the alchemy worked with it too. Meantime I got a full gear of Mamiya 645 1000S second hand, and the alchemy worked but not to the extent it worked with my stolen Hasselblad or my Hexar RF. This gear is also now for sale.

 

So, I perfectly understand your feelings toward M cameras in general and your M8's in particular. I think you feel M cameras in general and your M8's in particular are made for you. And I'm sure they help you to express your talent (I really DO appreciate your pics). and I'm also sure you sincerly think you would be unable to take the same pics with any other gear and perhaps you're right because I experienced myself the power of the alchemy between a photographer and his gear. It gives you confindence and helps you to give the best of yourself. I know that, because I was never able to extract the same picture quality with the F4s and My F 801s which were my last Nikon SLR's to date.

 

But the alchemy between a photographer and his gear is highly subjective...

 

When I first saw your work, it made me think of the work once performed under the authority of the Roosevelt administration by a bunch of highly regarded between the wars photographers on the rural victims of the Great Depression... I think their approach to the subject was not unlike yours: staying with your subject for a time long enough to be part of their natural environment (a luxury seldom enjoyed by a Press Photographer nowadays). In fact, the situation of both the photographers and the subjects are very comparable to the one of your subject and you... Except on one point: these 1930's pics were taken with a 4'x5' Speed Graphic, hardly an unobtrusive gear ! ...

 

The few times I was authorized to stay long enough with a subject or on occasion when I took pics of them when interviewed by a journalist, I expererienced a similar behavior, the subjects forgot the camera (and the photographer) and begn to act naturally. Though my pics seldom (if at all) equalled yours in quality, they were probably the more expressive ones I took. But I insit on that, whatever the camera I used, provided I felt at ease with it ! ...

 

I think the approach is far more important than the gear used.

 

I'm now reaching a point I have to go digital. My son went digital before me with an humble Canon 30D and after a while I just realized I borrowed it so often my film gear is collecting dust. I don't feel particularly at ease with the EOS system but it is so practical and fast to take digital shots than to resort on films and scan them.

 

My budget is not limitless and as I don't regularly take pictures professionally anymore, I can't really count on a quick refund. I can't allow me the luxury of having multiple systems as before (the work I'm asked to perform from time to time is very varied) so, I need some polyvalence from my future digital equipment. I can't afford a back up for the time being and, provided the lenses I can use are first class, I don't care about them being bought new or used...

 

My first move would have been toward a M lens compatible digital camera but with three pre-requisites: a reasonable price for the performance, a total reliability and the capability to use my existing M lenses at tehir nominal FOV as I'm unable to afford the Tri-Elmar wide in addition to the cost of an M8 (this means a full format is mandatory). Unfortunately, the M8 is way overpriced for what it brings, despite your experience, there is too many documented "horror stories" on its reliability (and this is compounded by unacceptable delays to fix a defective body), you've to add the cost of IR filters, it is ot a good performer beyond ISO 640 and it is not full format... Regretfully it is not the DRF I'm dreaming of. The worst part of it, is I will have to part with my M lenses.

 

Now, I'm just waiting for my existing gear to sell and I've decided to go for a Nikon DSLR, it will be either the D3 or the D700; according to the money I will get from my present film gear (I will just keep my Rolleiflex). I won't buy the Nikon with a bunch of modern zooms (I don't care about zooms) but with sound second had lenses, manual under 35mm, AF primes for longer ones. It won't cost me a fortune and I think it will suits all my requirements... I regret the absence on the market of a proper "21st century" reasonably priced full format DRF though. Regretfully, I don't think Leica will issue it... Zeiss may be, one day. But it will be too late for me.

 

But, Tina, please, continue to shoot your splendid pics with the M8, as it seems to suit you so well.

 

FPW