Leica R10: Any ideas?

[thrid]

Originally Posted by tummydoc

Furthermore, the R loyalists are a polarised lot, with part desirous of autofocus and image stabilisation and other 20th-century features, whilst the other part soundly denounces them. Leica is in a position of damned if they do and damned if they don't vis a vis the R10. It will be very interesting to see what they offer, and how successful it is.

Very true. THe R world is divided. I think the smart thing for Leica to do would be to take a page out of Nikon's book. Nikon managed to go autofocus, while still retaining backward compatibility with their manual focus lenses and original mount. Historically Leica has already done this when they moved from LTM to M and preserved compatibility with a simple adapter.

Stabilization in the lens would keep the cost of the body down. To me this makes more sense. Slow zooms and very long lenses benefit more from stabilization than your average prime.

[telyt]

Originally Posted by tummydoc

If anything, the notoriety Leica achieved as a result of issues plaguing M8 will serve to dissuade owners of other high-end DSLRs from switching.

OTOH both Canon and Nikon have had problems with recent cameras, the 1D Mk III and the D200 for example.

[R10dreamer]

At this moment Leica isn't even in the digital market for pro's or serious amateurs. Unless you include the discontinue and now very hard to find DMR. How long can they go before they become an afterthought in the SLR world? Not much longer in my opinion. If present owners of the DMR lose use of their DMR what do they do? Their Leica options are slim to none. Leica has to fish or cut bait, so to speak. They could, at the least, tell us what we are waiting for. No information could mean, no new camera.

[R10dreamer]

Originally Posted by telyt

OTOH both Canon and Nikon have had problems with recent cameras, the 1D Mk III and the D200 for example.

At least Canon and Nikon have digital cameras!!!!

[tummydoc]

Originally Posted by thrid

Stabilization in the lens would keep the cost of the body down. To me this makes more sense. Slow zooms and very long lenses benefit more from stabilization than your average prime.

IMHO in-body IS is the way for Leica to go for the reason that they are highly unlikely to sell very many R10s outside of those already vested in the R system, and it would be a strong benefit to have IS available for their existing arsenal of lenses, which does include some slow(er) long lenses and zooms. And the cost it would add to the body would certainly be less than the cost of say, trading a current modular-tele kit for a new one with IS. Not to mention that considering Leica's difficulties with QC in general and electronics specifically, one shudders to contemplate the fallout from a host of lenses with in-built electronic stabilisers.

[Jamie Roberts]

Originally Posted by R10dreamer

At least Canon and Nikon have digital cameras!!!!

Um, yes.... and your point? What is the M8 if not a digital camera? Oh--you mean dSLR? Wait for Photokina; I'm sure there will be something.

@Vinay--I like the idea of in-body IS, actually... a lot. That would go a long way to being one of those "wow" features the new R might need.

On the other hand, if they can come up with some Summarit-like lenses that are not insanely expensive (especially a couple of f2.5 zooms) and some convincing focus mechanism or confirmation, and match the low-light capability, then they will be able to eat into the 1d3 / 1ds3 and D3 market a wee bit more.

There's a lot of frustration with the glass on the Canon side of things. What good is a low-light 22mp camera when everything reasonably wide is incredibly soft and distorted?

[ptomsu]

Originally Posted by Jamie Roberts

Um, yes.... and your point? What is the M8 if not a digital camera? Oh--you mean dSLR? Wait for Photokina; I'm sure there will be something.

@Vinay--I like the idea of in-body IS, actually... a lot. That would go a long way to being one of those "wow" features the new R might need.

On the other hand, if they can come up with some Summarit-like lenses that are not insanely expensive (especially a couple of f2.5 zooms) and some convincing focus mechanism or confirmation, and match the low-light capability, then they will be able to eat into the 1d3 / 1ds3 and D3 market a wee bit more.

There's a lot of frustration with the glass on the Canon side of things. What good is a low-light 22mp camera when everything reasonably wide is incredibly soft and distorted?

Agree

and this is the reason why I am waiting for the R10 while bridging the time with an E-3 (at least a reasonably cheap DSLR solution).

[thrid]

Originally Posted by tummydoc

IMHO in-body IS is the way for Leica to go for the reason that they are highly unlikely to sell very many R10s outside of those already vested in the R system, and it would be a strong benefit to have IS available for their existing arsenal of lenses, which does include some slow(er) long lenses and zooms. And the cost it would add to the body would certainly be less than the cost of say, trading a current modular-tele kit for a new one with IS. Not to mention that considering Leica's difficulties with QC in general and electronics specifically, one shudders to contemplate the fallout from a host of lenses with in-built electronic stabilisers.

Yes, but if IS was in the lens, then R8/R9 users would probably also benefit from it...

;-)

[sdai]

Originally Posted by thrid

Yes, but if IS was in the lens, then R8/R9 users would probably also benefit from it...

I think it better to do one thing at a time and we shall not expect every fancy stuff happen overnight.

Let's forget about IS and make sure AF will work to spec. first ... it would be a major blow to it if neither AF nor MF is at its best.

[Riley]

just dont think IS is going to work out on bodies at all, in lens will add to costs significantly. Probably better to shoot for a good average of iso1600 performance at something greater than 16/18Mp to keep R10 in the race over the years and make better use of available lens resolving power.

What Leica AG can do that others wont touch is keep with the ergonomics and maintain the analogue format of L1, aperture rings and speed dials. And to add to that have control wheels for iso, WB, ev +/-, rather than plug through menus to find stuff. Pro cameras should be about control, and this is key to a pro users enjoyment in the process. This enables a photog to keep the subject in the OVF and still change/maintain control over shooting options.

YMMV

[doctorlol]

I have given up the wait for R10 or whatever it wil be called. Gone for Nikon.

Happy New Year

[robsteve]

The R users are in the same position the Nikon users were in until the D3 came out. The Canon system seemed so much better, but you had to factor in selling all your Nikon glass and getting Canon Glass. I am going to be patient like some of the Nikon folks were and just use my existing R lenses and DMR until the R10 becomes available. I am sure it will be worth the wait.

[sdai]

Originally Posted by robsteve

I am going to be patient like some of the Nikon folks were and just use my existing R lenses and DMR until the R10 becomes available. I am sure it will be worth the wait.

I'm hoping the same, Rob.

The only thing that I'm worrying now is its backward compatibility ... the old lenses may work but to which degree, and how.

I have a strange feeling that there must be a reason why some people would dump their complete R system altogether and that's one of the reasons why I've let at least four 280/4 APO slipping through my fingers on eBay when the highest bid ended up between 2500 and 2900 US ...

I'm not sure if you've followed the price of DMR on eBay ... at a certain point of time, there's bunch of them going between 3000-3500 US, seems that some people are trying to get rid of them in a rush.

[robsteve]

Originally Posted by sdai

I'm hoping the same, Rob.



I'm not sure if you've followed the price of DMR on eBay ... at a certain point of time, there's bunch of them going between 3000-3500 US, seems that some people are trying to get rid of them in a rush.

The DMR may go up in price if the R10 comes out at $12,000

[adi sudarsono]

or if the DMR still can produce better images.

The DMR IMHO still has an advantage over "some newer offerings", IQ wise. Well you can only pack in so much electronics in a small camera.

[sdai]

Originally Posted by robsteve

The DMR may go up in price if the R10 comes out at $12,000

At 12k the R10 will only function as a status symbol. Digital medium format is pushing downstream and they'll be too close ... the choice is obvious.

[jlancasterd]

I'm pretty sure I won't be getting rid of my DMR even if the R10 is full frame and 16mp. It would be far too useful as a backup, and a good complement to the R10 - I have the 21-35 and 28-90 R-zooms and world probably fit the 21-35 to an R10 and the 28-90 to the R8+DMR if I were carrying both.

I could live with autofocus on an R10 provided it could be switched off and the VF screen incorporated a split image or microprism range finder as well as the autofocus aiming points.

[ptomsu]

I cannot follow the logic that a DMR should be able to produce better images than a R10. The DMR is then at least 8 years old concept when the R10 is coming 2008 and chip technology and signal processing have made many generations of improvements. If that would result in less quality than an 8 year old device then we could forget all developments and improvements in technology.

So better stop dreaming. The DMR will further go down in price, as will today's R glass. I had a long conversation with Leica Shop in Vienna last September (they have very good connections into Leica) and although they are a dealer and need to make money of buying and selling Leica gear (especially second hand) I fully trust them in this case. There is only some sense behind using old R glass in MF on an AF body, especially if the new glass can serve the full chip size of the new larger than FF sensor.

I luckily sold my DMR and 28-90 and R9 in time for a reasonably good price. I did not want to keep the R9 since I will not go back to analog photography and if so I still have an F5 and my M system.

Again, everybody has to decide for himself what value the current R system has but logically, realistically and economically it is better to sell in time or keep the gear. And time is becoming pretty short.

[robsteve]

Originally Posted by ptomsu

I cannot follow the logic that a DMR should be able to produce better images than a R10.

I don't think anybody said that.

[ptomsu]

Originally Posted by adi sudarsono

or if the DMR still can produce better images.

The DMR IMHO still has an advantage over "some newer offerings", IQ wise. Well you can only pack in so much electronics in a small camera.

Adi mention this .....