Leica M9 later this year

[kens]

<p>Did you guys see Tom's follow-up post above?...<br>

<em>"No it was AUD$15000, so that would be around US$8-9000."</em></p>

 

[kievnut_den]

<p>I went to the largest Toyota dealer in Australia and ask for the option of buying a Corolla to take my kids to school but the trustful dealer told me to consdier a Lexus LS Hybrid at $106,035.00 which is much better than a Corolla.....</p>

[ty_mickan]

<p>Kievnut, this is the Leica forum. Perhaps the moderators would be kind enough to move your post to the Toyota section. </p>

[jakelester]

<p>Kievnut: That is irrelevant; the Lexus is not full frame.</p>

[stephen_asprey2]

<p>"Leica is hanging its hopes on the S2 and the yet-to-be released R10".<br>

Yes and no. The S2 is Leica's strategy to get into the MF studio market. They have a fight if Phase One and Leaf, not to mention Nikon with their MX, have their way.<br>

There will be no R10. The R series have been discontinued by Leica and the current M's body is not thick enough to cater for the distance between the M series lenses and a FF focal plane. It would mean a whole new body.<br>

Don't forget that the Leica camera division is only a small part of their whole business. They, like everyone, are watching their pennies.</p>

[ty_mickan]

<p>Leica camera is not a division of Leica. They use the brand Leica under license from Leica Microsystems as do Leica Geosystems. These three company may share the same name, but they are not one in the same. I have a Leica Geosytems franchise, and I do not get a single cent discount on Leica cameras.</p>

[dave_redmann]

<p>At today's exchange rate (I just checked), "closer to $15 000" Australian dollars means something like $9999 US. (Today, $9999 US would be $14127 AU.) In comparison to a $7999 Nikon D3x, that doesn't sound out of line, especially given Leica's historical pricing relative to Canon, Nikon, and the like. (Yes, I realize that the prices in different countries are far from a straight currency conversion.)</p>

<p>When or even whether a good system can be developed to let a full-frame sensor use M lenses is something few of us are truly qualified to say. Just remember that, not too long ago, most people were saying that sensor-based image stabilization would never work with full frame, but the Sony A900 proved otherwise. (Yes, I realize that Leica does not have Sony's technology or money.)</p>

<p>I have no idea about Leica's plans. Frankly none of them have made total sense to me for quite a while. But then again, Leica's market of a decade (or two) ago made little sense to me, in some ways. Unless they want to abandon the prospect of future M lens sales, which might appear to be their best chance for profit (on cameras at least), they'll need an M8.2 successor at some point, and probably sooner rather than later.</p>

 

[ty_mickan]

<blockquote>

<p>At today's exchange rate (I just checked), "closer to $15 000" Australian dollars means something like $9999 US. (Today, $9999 US would be $14127 AU.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Dave, we here Australia get shafted on pricing. It would be nice for us if were simply a matter of exchange rate but we often pay closer to double the price of the US. A Nikon D3x is about $13-14 000 over here.</p>

[arthuryeo]

<p>>In comparison to a $7999 Nikon D3x, that doesn't sound out of line, especially given Leica's historical pricing relative to Canon, Nikon, and the like.</p>

<p>Leica is never a volume producer and their pricing is managed based on low volume niche market demand.<br>

The M9's sensor and dynamic range better be really attractive before I even look at it.</p>

[trex1]

What's wrong with film? I don't get all this digital stuff. I have yet to see digital print which beats anything from film.

[ty_mickan]

<p>nothing wrong with film, i shoot wedding almost exclusively, and m3,4 & 6 are my cameras of choice. i find it especially well suited to weddings. but there are times when digital is handy, especially for fill flash. that is why i rang to enquire. i have the nikon d200 which does a splendid job but it is bulky to use along with the m's. i wanted a small camera like a d-lux 4 to use for the rare occasions that fill was required or under some tricky lighting. I don't think the d-lux 4, but that is why i was speaking with the dealer.</p>

[trex1]

The Nikon D70 had no upper limit for synch speed, and was pretty compact and lightweight. Maybe one of the newer Nikons has this hi speed synch feature as well.

[ray .]

<p>The M8 does exceed image quality in some respects over film M's, assuming the photographer has some mastery of the process. Film and digital are simply different from one another, but this should be apparent to everyone by now. </p>

[sitemistic]

<p>Darius, Canon and Nikon DSLR's will sync at any speed with their matched flash units, but it's a trick that reduces flash range. The magic is in the flash that fires continuous pluses of light the entire time the shutter is open. You lose the motion stopping ability of flash in HS mode along with about a stop of output power, but it's a very useful thing to have available.</p>

[hultstrom1]

<p>Ah, the once and future M9. My pixies tell me that it will have a full frame 32 MP Phase One + sensor producing flawless 16 bit files. It will have sensor shifting image stabilisation and automatic sensor cleaning. It will shoot virtually noise free from a base ISO of 25 to 2500 and, with binning, 8MP to ISO 10000 or 2 MP to ISO 40000. It will be as thin as a film Leica, as quiet as any cloth shutter and still go to 1/16000s with a flash sync speed at 1/500s. Oh, and you will be able to read the exposure on a top side dial, and ISO will be set on its own dial around the shutter release with a lift and turn collar to change the binning.</p>

<p>Anyway, that's what my pixies tell me.</p>

<p>/M</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>"Unless they want to abandon the prospect of future M lens sales, which might appear to be their best chance for profit (on cameras at least), they'll need an M8.2 successor at some point, and probably sooner rather than later."</p>

<p>I'd expect an M 8.3 instead. Current M 8.x owners can upgrade for only $5,621 US. They'll get ostrich skiin camera leather, an updated reuby-encrusted Leica logo, and a matching wallet.</p>

[trex1]

<p>Jim, the D70 had a special shutter that could synch up to 1/500 of a second, and in fact up to the top speed if it was a non Nikon flash. It is not the FP hi synch you are talking about.</p>

[Bill Blackwell Images]

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=2336892"></a></p>

<p>"... The S2 is Leica's strategy to get into the MF studio market... There will be no R10. The R series have been discontinued by Leica and the current M's body is not thick enough to cater for the distance between the M series lenses and a FF focal plane. It would mean a whole new body...</p>

<p>Stephen:</p>

<p>You need to check your facts.</p>

<p>1. Yes, the R series has been discontinued. However, the R10 will reintroduce the R series into the digital medium, which will be released sometime within the next 12-months.</p>

<p>2. From its announcement, the S2 has been touted as Leica's new flagship camera. That sounds to me like they are hanging their hopes on it.</p>

<p>3. There is no reason a FF digital M camera can't be the same thickness as the M8. The distance between the rear lens element and the film plane is not a variable. If current lenses are moved away from the film plane they will not focus properly. The only other alternative is to completely redesign M lenses for FF digital. For obvious reasons, Leica is NOT going to do that.</p>

[joshroot]

<blockquote>

<p>You need to check your facts.<br>

1. Yes, the R series has been discontinued. However, the R10 will reintroduce the R series into the digital medium, which will be released sometime within the next 12-months.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree. I keep pointing out to people the response I got from Leica last month when I asked them about the R line:</p>

<p>http://blog.photo.net/?p=4051</p>

<p>But people keep repeating the "R line is ending" rumor. All they said was that the R9 was ending and implied that a digital R was coming. They said nothing about lenses ending and nothing about the R line ending. Now, if you want to say "I don't believe that Leica will actually come through with a digital R camera, that's a fair opinion to have I suppose.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>If you read Leica's web site it clearly says that the R system, including lenses, is no longer in production. If they planned to reintroduce an R series body, surely they would not have discontinued all lenses.</p>

[charles_tuthill]

<p>There is a video somewhere on internet that contains a recent interview with the head of the S2 production unit (unfortunately I don't know where I saw it). In the first section of the interview she discusses the R system, and mentions that it is being discontinued in its current form.<br>

She goes on to say that it will be reintroduced with the R-10 and a series of auto focus lenses using the same mount. The lenses will be compatible with current R lenses, though she does not go into detail regarding metering with the various versions (rom, 1,2,3,3rd cam etc).<br>

If someone could please help me out with the url of the video that would be helpful. Thanks.</p>

<p> </p>

[giidii]

if nine was ten ...

<p>

the successor of M8 will be called M10, because 9 is outside the "octagesimal" number system which Leica adopted for M-numbering as a usually reliable source close to the truth pointed out:

<br><center>"See, thus it's done!<br>

Make ten of one,<br>

And two let be,<br>

Make even three,<br>

And rich thou 'It be.<br>

Cast o'er the four!<br>

From five and six<br>

(The witch's tricks)<br>

Make seven and eight,<br>

'Tis finished straight!<br>

And <b>nine is one</b>,<br>

And <b>ten is none</b>.<br>

This is the witch's once-one's-one!"</center> <br><small><a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/14591">-- JWvG</a></small><div></div>

[joshroot]

<p>If that is the case, I stand corrected. I also stand annoyed that they would send me an incomplete set of information.</p>

[charles_tuthill]

<p>Sorry, did not realize that the link to the video was provided on the blog mentioned earlier in this thread.</p>

[charles_tuthill]

<p> I should also add that it is the link on the blog is near the top, in Doug Herr's posting. The video is dated 3-19-09.</p>