The M9 Monochrome digital Leica

[pierre_claquin1]

<p>http://leicarumors.com/<br>

We should know more on May 10.</p>

 

[r22eng]

Hard to believe a monochrome M9 version would sell very well at even $3,000.

 

A Fuji X-Pro 1 is only $1,600 and it includes color. If Fuji or a third party comes out with a Leica lens adapter the business case for the

M9 and M10 would be a lot tougher to make.

 

I like the Leicas. They are great cameras and lenses. Hopefully they are thinking more like Porche than Kodak in terms of business

strategy and products.

[john tonai]

<p>Although it wouldn't be a huge seller (no Leica is), I would guess that it would have very strong support from all the B&W film Leica users. Black and white photographers don't need color. Image that sensor with no Bayer array-every photosite records the information without interpolation. I've seen images from a Phase One monochromatic back and it is absolutely amazing-even compared to the color version.</p>

[HarryBaker]

<p>There is a Leica lens adaptor for the Fuji X Pro 1 made by Kipon. I have one and it works with Leica M-mount lenses. Fuji will soon release its own adaptor.</p>

[ulrich_brandl]

<p>Dont't forget that the Fuji is APS-C and the M9 (or a possible BW version) is full frame. Canon and Nikon photographers are ready to pay a big premium for full frame too. Full frame is the way to get the best out of good lenses producing sharpness wide open paired with a smooth bokeh. Why pay 5K+ for a lens and then giving up what makes it shine. I don't doubt that the Fuji X Pro 1 is a good camera and the 35mm f1.4 Fujinon is a good lens but I never would buy this camera for shooting with Leica glass.</p>

[Sanford]

<p>I think leica will charge MORE for this camera, not less than the current M9.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>Definitely more (if they do it), just like Nikon charges more for the D800E than for the D800.<br>

The cost of full-frame sensors is the miserably low production yield of the chips. The Bayer filter layer is a very small fraction of the cost of the finished chip.</p>

[HarryBaker]

<p>What Ulrich says may be true though in my experience of full frame Canons there are more issues with vignetting especially with wide lenses. I've used both the M8 and the Fuji X Pro 1 and much preferred the newer Fuji. I got rid of the M8. As Ricky says the M9 costs a lot more than the Fuji X Pro 1. Does the difference in performance reflect the price difference? I just don't know. But there has been a lot of discussion here:</p>

<p>http://leicarumors.com/2012/04/11/quick-leica-m9-vs-fuji-x-pro1-image-comparison.aspx/</p>

<p>The reviewer concludes that image quality is similar and at high ISO there is no contest.</p>

[cjbroadbent]

<p>Well, it would get rid of the guilt of mendaciously converting colour to simulate the noble medium.</p>

[Bill Blackwell Images]

<p>If there is <em>no</em> LCD screen (likely the case) and it's not a short-run special edition model, it is possible it <em>could</em> be priced in the $3,000 range. </p>

<p>Regardless, if it's priced anywhere near $3,000 I'll be the first in line to buy one.</p>

[stuart_richardson]

<p>The only way it will cost three thousand dollars is if it doesn't come with a battery, and you need to buy the battery from Leica for 4000 dollars. </p>

[steve_bellayr]

<p>I personally would have no interest in a B&W M9. An M6 with high quality scan covers that issue for me. What I am most intrigued with is the upcoming M10. (If that is a real possibility.) If Kodak no longer makes the sensor what new sensor will be introduced and what new features and of course how exorbitant the price.</p>

[john_dey]

<p>I've never shot one single roll of color film in any of my Leica's in 15 years. Maybe Leica knows their customers? I'm just saying.</p>

[keven_anderson]

<p>There are a lot of options they could implement with a straight monochrome sensor:</p>

<p>Eliminating the bayer filter would give you 4 times the resolution on the same chip.<br>

You could go with 6 times larger photo sites and be the ISO king.<br>

You could do a twiner and get better resolution much better ISO and better dynamic range<br>

You could implement a higher bit file size (16 or even 20 bit) and still have smaller end file sizes</p>

<p>Without needing to do color there is a lot of chip real-estate and computational power available to play with - it will be interesting to see what they have come up with.</p>

[stephen_york3]

<p>Leica has a history of exploiting a model before going onto the next. And that's what they're doing.</p>

[kyoken74]

I'm interested in a digital body without an LCD. There are only two things I do with the LCD: To set the ISO and to set the

white balance. I prefer an ISO dial in place of an LCD so I can get to that control more easily. And, with a B&W sensor,

white balance is not necessary.

 

If they could also bring back the shutter rewind lever and couple it to on/off switch (so I can rewind whenever I want

opposed to having the shutter automatically cocked after making an exposure) it would be even better.

[jason]

<p>i doubt even Leica could be so dumb as to build and try sell a monochrome digital.. The next Leica M-10 presumably will have to have "live view", a possibility of auto-focus lenses and an Evil finder to take care of a zoom or two. Rumors are wild gossip. Leica has a base to sell more cameras, the X1 is done. Fuji, Sony and Oly-Pan have seen to that. Maybe a smaller APS system maybe with another company.<br>

i worry that leica is over extended! The new factory smell so like Hasselblad, who never really moved into their new place! Remember Leica today is not Leitz. That's good and bad.<br>

Kodak had a DSLR with superb monochrome way back.. The sensor might be the reason for changes..Kodak sort of gone.</p>

[02Pete]

<p>We should find out more about this within the coming week. A digital Leica M body with a full-frame monochrome sensor having high resolution, fine gradation of tonal values, and low noise at high ISO speeds, allowing the use of Leica M lenses, and not having a unnecessary viewing screen on the back, going for $3,000 or so, would be an attractive proposition. Obviously it wouldn't replace an M9 if it were limited to monochrome, but it would still allow high-quality results. Currently, I'm shooting on film and getting a photo CD from the local CVS (a chain of pharmacy stores, for anyone outside the US reading this), but the scans are relatively low resolution and the end product is not as good as it could be. The M9, while excellent, is very expensive. For less than half the price of an M9, a $3K digital Leica M offering high-quality monochrome output would be of real interest.</p>