Making a case for the Digilux 2 Mk. II...

[audidudi]

After briefly playing around with the new Panasonic G1 last night, it dawned on me that the last “ingredient” necessary to create a new, improved Digilux 2 Mk II – specifically, a higher resolution, quicker refreshing EVF -- is now in volume production and available directly from Panasonic’s parts shelves.

Given the advancements in sensor technology over the past five years, an improved 2/3-size sensor and correspondingly faster image-processing pipeline shouldn’t be difficult for Panasonic to design and manufacture. And if it is, then I’m sure Leica could arrange to purchase / license one from any number of other sources, such as the one available in the recently announced modular video / still camera from Red.

By retaining the same 2/3-size sensor as used in the original Digilux 2, the size of the image circle needed wouldn't change, so there would be no need to replace or even redesign the original lens, which was one of the much-praised features of the Digilux 2. Yet the additional area of a 2/3-size sensor as compared to say, the smaller sensor used in the D-Lux 4, would still offer a meaningful improvement in noise performance, resolution, dynamic range, and file size, especially if the pixel count is kept fairly conservative (say 10MP, tops).

In fact, given the amount of room available inside the Digilux 2 body, it might not even be necessary to redesign that, either. True, the additional computing power required to speed up image processing might eat into its battery life, but improvements in battery technology over the past five years may well be sufficient that any increase in power consumption can be partially, if not entirely, offset with a higher-performance battery installed in the original Digilux 2 battery case and compartment.

And as for the marketing department’s concerns that an improved Digilux 2 might serve to cannibalize M8 sales, that seems less likely now that the M8.2 is here, with a retail price nearly 30% higher than it was when the camera was introduced two years ago. Adjusted for inflation, the Digilux 2’s $1850 MSRP in 2004 works out to ~$2,150 today, so even if the cost of a new and improved version went up to $2,500 (rather than down to $1500 due to economies of scale), it still represents no more than a third of what a basic M8.2 body and fixed-lens combo costs. As such, I can’t imagine anyone who might have purchased an M8.2 buying a Digilux 2 Mk II due solely to the cost savings.

While it's true that a Digilux 2 Mk II wouldn't help the sales of Leica's lenses any, it would serve as a nice step-up from the D-Lux 4 in terms of image quality, as well as an opportunity for Leica to jump on the non-SLR bandwagon about to be popularized by the new micro-4/3 sensor format, but more importantly, it would also serve as a transition from the D-Lux 4’s mostly automatic point-and-shoot style of operation to the M8.2’s mostly manual design, thus creating a logical upgrade path for new Leica owners and over time, potentially increasing the size of the market for the M8.2 dramatically.

Am I missing something here? Or is Leica being presented with a great opportunity to broaden both the appeal and accessibility of its cameras without compromising its design values or brand image?

[overgaardcom]

Interesting. One of the weak things in the D2 is the slow AF as well. As for battery, one battery can d0 1,500 +/- frames anyways.

We know that the Digilux 3 will be phased out now as Leica leaves the Four Thirds format (which has anyways become me micro Four Thirds), so they need bot a "mini R10" as well as a "daughter of M8."

It simply MUST be within their radar what a great camera Digilux 2 is/was, and doing an improved one would sell like water in sahara, and forever. It even looks like an M as well.

[John Thawley]

Originally Posted by audidudi

After briefly playing around with the new Panasonic G1 last night, it dawned on me that the last “ingredient” necessary to create a new, improved Digilux 2 Mk II – specifically, a higher resolution, quicker refreshing EVF -- is now in volume production and available directly from Panasonic’s parts shelves.

Given the advancements in sensor technology over the past five years, an improved 2/3-size sensor and correspondingly faster image-processing pipeline shouldn’t be difficult for Panasonic to design and manufacture. And if it is, then I’m sure Leica could arrange to purchase / license one from any number of other sources, such as the one available in the recently announced modular video / still camera from Red.

By retaining the same 2/3-size sensor as used in the original Digilux 2, the size of the image circle needed wouldn't change, so there would be no need to replace or even redesign the original lens, which was one of the much-praised features of the Digilux 2. Yet the additional area of a 2/3-size sensor as compared to say, the smaller sensor used in the D-Lux 4, would still offer a meaningful improvement in noise performance, resolution, dynamic range, and file size, especially if the pixel count is kept fairly conservative (say 10MP, tops).

In fact, given the amount of room available inside the Digilux 2 body, it might not even be necessary to redesign that, either. True, the additional computing power required to speed up image processing might eat into its battery life, but improvements in battery technology over the past five years may well be sufficient that any increase in power consumption can be partially, if not entirely, offset with a higher-performance battery installed in the original Digilux 2 battery case and compartment.

And as for the marketing department’s concerns that an improved Digilux 2 might serve to cannibalize M8 sales, that seems less likely now that the M8.2 is here, with a retail price nearly 30% higher than it was when the camera was introduced two years ago. Adjusted for inflation, the Digilux 2’s $1850 MSRP in 2004 works out to ~$2,150 today, so even if the cost of a new and improved version went up to $2,500 (rather than down to $1500 due to economies of scale), it still represents no more than a third of what a basic M8.2 body and fixed-lens combo costs. As such, I can’t imagine anyone who might have purchased an M8.2 buying a Digilux 2 Mk II due solely to the cost savings.

While it's true that a Digilux 2 Mk II wouldn't help the sales of Leica's lenses any, it would serve as a nice step-up from the D-Lux 4 in terms of image quality, as well as an opportunity for Leica to jump on the non-SLR bandwagon about to be popularized by the new m4/3-format, but more importantly, it would also serve as a transition from the D-Lux 4’s mostly automatic point-and-shoot style of operation to the M8.2’s mostly manual design, thus creating a logical upgrade path for new Leica owners and over time, potentially increasing the size of the market for the M8.2 dramatically.

Am I missing something here? Or is Leica being presented with a great opportunity to broaden both the appeal and accessibility of its cameras without compromising its design values or brand image?

I think your points are well taken. Though you overlooked one part of the equation.

The cost differnece woud be even greater since the M8.2 is body only. The Digilux 2 is ready to roll.

And I don't think it would cut into the M8.2 market at all. It would serve as a much more logical link in the digital line up from the C-Lux 3, D-Lux 4, "Digilux 4," and M8.2 - it makes a lot of sense. I think those that are in sticker shock over the M8.2 are spending thier $2500-$3000 somewhere else... plane and simple. And, what's worse, if they're doing it in a "system" camera, they're going to get committed to another brand. A "Digilux 4" my enjoy good resale value at some point and make the move to the flagship model of Leica.

There's obviously becoming a cult-like following of Digilux 2 users. One would hope that someone at Leica would pick up on the "rumble." The Digilux 3 was not the upgrade Digilux 2 users were looking for. I would love to have my Digilux 2 with a good clean 8 megapixel, with quicker write times and a better view finder. DO NOT TOUCH my lens.

I guess we can dream. Meanwhile, there's an old saying.... "happiness is not having what you want, it's wanting what you have." I really like this camera.

JT

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by overgaardcom

Interesting. One of the weak things in the D2 is the slow AF as well. As for battery, one battery can d0 1,500 +/- frames anyways.

1,500 frames on a battery? I rarely manage more than 300 frames on a single battery, even when I'm using my higher-capacity D3/L1 batteries. I usually carry with me one spare battery more than I have 2GB memory cards (i.e., if I have three cards, I'll carry four batteries with me).

We know that the Digilux 3 will be phased out now as Leica leaves the Four Thirds format (which has anyways become me micro Four Thirds), so they need bot a "mini R10" as well as a "daughter of M8."

Agreed. Leica needs to create its own upgrade path for each of its camera lines if it ever wants to be more than a specialist, niche camera maker again.

It simply MUST be within their radar what a great camera Digilux 2 is/was, and doing an improved one would sell like water in sahara, and forever. It even looks like an M as well.

And if Leica feels they absolutely must start with all-new technology, then they can do a Digilux 2 version of the Panasonic G1, with or without an interchangeable lens. I'm not sure they would need to go this far themselves, but perhaps it would be a better fit with Panasonic's needs henced more likely to encourage their participation?

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by John Thawley

I guess we can dream. Meanwhile, there's an old saying.... "happiness is not having what you want, it's wanting what you have." I really like this camera.

Prior to the G1's existence, an improved D2 has been pretty much just a dream. However, post-G1, it's now clear the pieces necessary to turn this dream into reality are available today and for the most part, off the shelf. If Leica comes out with an improved Digilux 2 as you've outlined and is able to keep its price under $2,500, I'll place an order for a pair of them as soon as they announce it. How's that for putting my money where my mouth is?

[John Thawley]

Originally Posted by audidudi

If Leica comes out with an improved Digilux 2 as you've outlined and is able to keep its price under $2,500, I'll place an order for a pair of them as soon as they announce it. How's that for putting my money where my mouth is?

Probably about 9998 mouths short from Leica's perspective. LOL - Though I'd be good for two, Thorsten would surely spring for two and one each for his kids and wife... So, we only need to sell another 9990. I think we're onto something.

JT

[Ruhayat]

Originally Posted by audidudi

And if Leica feels they absolutely must start with all-new technology, then they can do a Digilux 2 version of the Panasonic G1, with or without an interchangeable lens.

That sounds nice -- take the innards of the G1 and put it into the Digilux 2 body without changing anything else. The fixed lens, to me, is part of the D2's appeal; no need to mess around with endless upgrades. I like the images from my R lensed Olympus very much, but when I'm just heading out for walks it's the D2 I grab every time.

I wonder if it's possible to just create an m4/3 upgrade package that would fit into existing D2 bodies; then the D2 would be a camera for life like the M8 (which might not fit into the Panasonic philosophy of new cameras every 6 months, though). A real son of M8, in other words.

But if we're going new, then perhaps they could make the body the slightly smaller size and overall feel of the Epson RD1 -- the Digilux 3 was simply too big. And, having played with an articulating LCD screen on a Canon compact, I suppose that's one new useful feature.

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by Ruhayat

I wonder if it's possible to just create an m4/3 upgrade package that would fit into existing D2 bodies; then the D2 would be a camera for life like the M8 (which might not fit into the Panasonic philosophy of new cameras every 6 months, though). A real son of M8, in other words.

The 4/3 and m4/3 sensor are approx. twice the size of the D2's 2/3 sensor, so (unfortunately) you would need to replace the D2's original lens with one that has a larger image circle and in order to match the F2.0 speed of the D2's lens, it would also have to be quite a bit larger still.

[Ruhayat]

Originally Posted by audidudi

The 4/3 and m4/3 sensor are approx. twice the size of the D2's 2/3 sensor, so (unfortunately) you would need to replace the D2's original lens with one that has a larger image circle and in order to match the F2.0 speed of the D2's lens, it would also have to be quite a bit larger still.

In that case, make mine a 2/3 upgrade package! But since no one makes a 2/3 sensor anymore, this is very likely a pipe dream. So how about that D4 with D-Lux 4 compact lens technology and an m4/3 sensor eh?

[daveleo]

very nice ideas on the D2 Mk11 ... all the technology is there (even old, by technology timelines !)

upgrade the EVF, (as John Thawley stated) don't touch the lens, update the 2/3 sensor (probably not possibe to stuff a 4/3 sensor without changing the lens, but then what do i know), possibly thin up the body (?).

cut into M8 sales ? .... absurd ... i (and probably the large mass of potential D2 buyers) will never drop $$$$ on the M8 because i just ain't that good as a photographer. but i will drop $2000 on a D2 enhancement right this minute (i was planning to do that after Photokina, but the G1 was not what i had hoped for).

and .... if Leica gets 1 person to drop $2000 on a D2 .... that is more cash flow than zero people NOT dropping $4000 on an M8 .... right? .... everybody wins.

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by Ruhayat

In that case, make mine a 2/3 upgrade package! But since no one makes a 2/3 sensor anymore, this is very likely a pipe dream.

The just announced Red Scarlet camera will be available with a latest-generation 2/3-size sensor. While it's true that video and still cameras place different demands upon their sensors, I think adapting a sensor oriented to video apps to still apps should be a lot easier than vice-versa. See: Red Scarlet: Red Scarlet 3K HD Pocket Pro Camera Under $3000

So how about that D4 with D-Lux 4 compact lens technology and an m4/3 sensor eh?

That would be nice, of course, but I don't think it's possible without also making at least the lens portion of the camera physically larger or optically slower. This is the primary reason why the Sigma DP1 lens was limited to f4.0 ... anything faster would have been too large to keep the camera semi-pocket sized.

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by daveleo

cut into M8 sales ? .... absurd ... i (and probably the large mass of potential D2 buyers) will never drop $$$$ on the M8 because i just ain't that good as a photographer. but i will drop $2000 on a D2 enhancement right this minute (i was planning to do that after Photokina, but the G1 was not what i had hoped for).

I, too, had high hopes for the G1, but after actually holding one in my hands, it's clear it doesn't offer the type of "photographic experience" I hoped it would and have decided I'm not interested in purchasing even one of them, let alone two. Perhaps the Olympus m4/3 camera will do the trick for me (assuming Leica doesn't come up with something else to offer in this category)?

[farnz]

I'd fork out for one in an instant too.

But if Leica did convert this pipe dream into a reality they must add a decent buffer to speed up the write times too.

Pete.

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by farnz

But if Leica did convert this pipe dream into a reality they must add a decent buffer to speed up the write times too.

If the Red Scarlet can do 120 fps (!) in RAW format with its 2/3-size sensor, then surely Panasonic can come up with an image processing pipeline that can write files say, only 1/10th or even 1/20th as quickly?

[Ruhayat]

I wouldn't buy the D4 if it means a bigger form factor, be it lens or body. I'd be happy if they could just take the D-Lux 4 and grow that into a Digilux 4, aka "real" manual-capable camera with proper dials instead of the fiddly joystick -- I never felt at home with my late D-Lux 3 because of that "feature".

Shouldn't take much to achieve this either:
1. Put a shutter speed dial on top (I contend the program dial can be reduced to a simple thumbwheel: push and spin to select -- I have seen it done somewhere before);
2. Put an aperture ring at the lens base;
3. Put a manual focus ring on the lens itself (to me, even a "fake" one like that of the Digilux 1 is infinitely preferable to a joystick);
4. Install the G1 EVF into the camera body.

The body can be the size of the Canon G10 (but wider, like the superb E520 form factor), with the heft and feel of the Ricoh GR-D.

In lieu of a nice back-to-D2 Digilux 4, I'll take a 40mm f2 compact (with fixed lens, not the retractable type) from Leica very happily instead. It seems to be what I shoot most these days.

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by Ruhayat

In lieu of a nice back-to-D2 Digilux 4, I'll take a 40mm f2 compact (with fixed lens, not the retractable type) from Leica very happily instead. It seems to be what I shoot most these days.

One of the key points I was trying to make is that Leica doesn't need to design a new type of camera from a clean sheet of paper, which is sort of what you appear to be proposing by adding features, etc., but just update the camera they released nearly five years ago with currently available technology.

The assumption underlying my initial post was that the D2's lack of commerical success was due to the fact its performance was compromised by the technology of the day. If correct, then this suggests that an improved D2, built using currently available technology, might be well positioned for commercial success today, especially since the historical emphasis on pixel count as a measure of quality seems to be finally losing some steam, hence opening the door for a high-performance 2/3-size sensor with a reasonable pixel count.

The market for "traditional-style" cameras may not be as large as the market for "wunderplastic" DSLRs, but it may be large enough to sustain a small player such as Leica, especially if the cameras can be built with off-the-shelf parts from other cameras. This is because using parts from volume production cameras is the next best way to keep costs down and profit margins up if volume production itself isn't possible for a particular camera design.

[overgaardcom]

I think the 120 fps is video-size images in RAW, not full 4,9 MP images. But whatever.

I thought the D2 was an okay success. But might not have been. And the D3 is not. The D-Lux 2-3-4 i a success, is my impression.

I think much Leica sales depend not on the actual equipment, but rather that Leica has been unable to get the word out that they have it. Which is my worst fear about the S2, because even it's a world revolution, few in the segment know about that the camera will be coming (which I hope Capture One will be able to do differently than if Leica did it them self).

Anyways. As for the D2, keep size, lens and functions as is, just improve the few things that are needed, and get it out. Sped up AF, ISO, buffer. Improve EVF and/or add an optical viewfinder as the D-Lux 4. Mark II will do. Don't change the name either. Make a black one as well. And they might steal a few things from the S2 evolution, such as the round viewfinder.

Leica should be this:

M8 - M8.2 - M9 - M10
R9 - R10 - R11
R10d, R10d mark II, R11d (the mini-R)
S2 37.5MP, S2 50MP, S2 80MP
D-Lux 4, D-Lux 5, D-Lux 6
C-Lux 4, C-Lux 5, C-Lux 6
Digilux 2 Mark II, Digilux 2 Mark III, Digilux 2 Mark IV (the mini-M)

Stay with what works well, don't spend resources inventing new camera models to replace "classics" or for stuff that works, beat up distribution, keep production cost down, work towards a market position with nice prices, big numbers in sales, well earned profits.

Focus on IQ, "camera for life" (short life that is, given the age we live in ;-), simplicity and the subject in front of the lens.

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by overgaardcom

I think the 120 fps is video-size images in RAW, not full 4,9 MP images. But whatever.

According to Red's website, their 2/3 sensor has 3.2 micron pixels and produces 4.9MB files in a propietary RAW format that measure 3072 x 1620 pixels. Not my preferred 4:3 format, unfortunately, but I could adapt if I absolutely had to, as I enjoy shooting 16:9 with my DMC-LX1...

I thought the D2 was an okay success. But might not have been. And the D3 is not. The D-Lux 2-3-4 i a success, is my impression.

I think the fact that no other camera emulated its design is proof of its lack of commercial success. I do agree with you about the D3 and D-Lux cameras and their respective success or lack thereof.

Anyways. As for the D2, keep size, lens and functions as is, just improve the few things that are needed, and get it out. Sped up AF, ISO, buffer. Improve EVF and/or add an optical viewfinder as the D-Lux 4. Mark II will do. Don't change the name either. Make a black one as well. And they might steal a few things from the S2 evolution, such as the round viewfinder.

My thoughts exactly. A "parts-bin special" in the best sense of the phrase.

[John Thawley]

Originally Posted by audidudi

One of the key points I was trying to make is that Leica doesn't need to design a new type of camera from a clean sheet of paper, which is sort of what you appear to be proposing by adding features, etc., but just update the camera they released nearly five years ago with currently available technology.

Ah.... but there you are.

Let's talk about "brand character." The coolest thing about the Digilux 2 when it came out was it LOOKED like a Leica. (or is that Leica Leica?) Nearly everyone I knew went "wow... that's cool." But, $1800 was a bit of an eye-opener too. Especially when everyone is looking for mega-megapixel count and tiny, and available in 8 colors and.... under $400.

But, times change... the pendulum swings. We're maxed out in megapixel packed "model o' the month"... the damn things are too small. Or.... (for the gentleman shooter) lugging around a Rebel XXX with 3 or 4 lenses and a manual has proven to be too much.

Needs change... we all change... the market changes. So, all of a sudden, we find ourselves looking around for "the gentleman's" camera. Not quite as "dumb" as point n' shoot. Not quite as "lofty" as an M8.2, but a respectable full function camera with the control and "RIGHT" features and one that produces outstanding QUALITY images and files. A camera that stands above the yelling and screaming.... and marketplace induced BLING.

It's really simple... and if you build it, they will come.

Leave the style and ergonomics as is. Make the look "the look." It's brand characteristic. You know what it iis... and you should always no what it is... at a glance. 7.5 -10 megapixel. 3-5 frame burst - 30 jpeg buffer - 10 RAW - make the viewfinder earthshaking/revolutionary... and keep your damn hands off the lens....

Update the insides every 3 or 4 years and build a following... of gentlemen photographers.

I need a cold shower just thinking about it.

JT

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by John Thawley

It's really simple... and if you build it, they will come.

Leave the style and ergonomics as is. Make the look "the look." It's brand characteristic. You know what it iis... and you should always no what it is... at a glance. 7.5 -10 megapixel. 3-5 frame burst - 30 jpeg buffer - 10 RAW - make the viewfinder earthshaking/revolutionary... and keep your damn hands off the lens....

Update the insides every 3 or 4 years and build a following... of gentlemen photographers.

In a nutshell, this is exactly what I'm proposing. And given that it appears it can now be done using many off-the-shelf parts, the development and production costs shouldn't be so high that it will need to sell in significant volume in order for it to be profitable. I'm no marketing guy, but if Leica isn't thinking about a product along these lines yet, then I think they stand to miss a great opportunity.