And you thought that it was only the camera which became obsolete

[marcg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Per Ken Rockwell:-

One company has figured out how to make your lenses go obsolete so that you can't keep using the same great lenses from decade to decade.

 

Ricoh figured out that if they permanently attach sensors to the back of lenses, that these lenses will develop digital rot just the same as cameras, so that you'll have to keep buying new lenses every few years.

 

You have to admit that his logic is faultless.

 

All the more reason for sticking to M series or Nikon or Canon etc systems.

 

It certainly worries me the possiblity of buying an X1 only to find that the entire thing is old hat a couple of years down the line. In fact, much of the X1 - and regretably the M9 is already old hat.

 

I found a secondhand LX3 to support my M7 and my CLE. I'm quite pleasd with the LX3 and don't see the point on spending more for a red dot. I'm, just not that rich.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jsrockit]

It certainly worries me the possiblity of buying an X1 only to find that the entire thing is old hat a couple of years down the line. In fact, much of the X1 - and regretably the M9 is already old hat.

 

You don't buy a Leica if you want the most bang for your buck and you don't buy digital if you are worried about it being outdated in a few years. The M9 is old hat why exactly?

[earleygallery]

I never understand when people say a digital camera is outdated after a couple of years. OK there might be a newer model with more features and MP's but assuming the old camera can produce a perfectly acceptable result quality-wise surely you can continue to use it until the electrics pack up?

 

My new digital is a Canon 20D - plenty of photographers made a living from using them a few years ago and the quality isn't any worse now than it was then.

[sgilder]

Agreed. I had a 20d as well and it was a great camera, especially for what they sell for now. And the only difference between a 20d and a 30d (or even a 40d, really) is the size of the LCD screen on the back!

[marcg]

Per Ken Rockwell:-

 

 

You have to admit that his logic is faultless.

 

All the more reason for sticking to M series or Nikon or Canon etc systems.

 

It certainly worries me the possiblity of buying an X1 only to find that the entire thing is old hat a couple of years down the line. In fact, much of the X1 - and regretably the M9 is already old hat.

 

I found a secondhand LX3 to support my M7 and my CLE. I'm quite pleasd with the LX3 and don't see the point on spending more for a red dot. I'm, just not that rich.

Yes, old hat for the M9 was not the correct term. However I think that I may mean that it is not up do standards which are presentl;y permitted by the available technology.

Of course pulling the full frame trick was quite a coup. But after that there seems to be a range of problems which have not yet been addressed. People here are hoping that they will be addressed by a firmware update - but it hasn't appeared yet. I hope that it will but imagine if such niggles as colour casts, purple fringing, slow to format, slow replay blah blah - any one or two of these and the other issues which have been picked up, had to be dealt with in a new model.

I think that there is little doubt that Leica's quality control has been found to be flawed -yet again - and I suppose that you could say that those kinds of standards are old hat.

 

I'm not talking about new features either. Features which do not (in my view) conflict with the Leica tradition such as visible and/or audible focus confirmation, "heads up" frame lines which appeared for any lens which was used and made the "not in use" ones disappear would be very welcome - plus a larger and better quality LCD - properly protected as per M8.2 are features which are bound to be implemented in this next model or the one after. Maybe even liveview!

I fully expect that that there will be a much more frequent introduction of new models. It has already started with the M8/M8.2/M9

 

I saw an M8 sold for £1300 a couple of days ago. I know that it and the others will remain useful cameras but a very large number of people will prefer to get the latest model.

 

I have to say: why not? Leica is simply getting in on the act. They want to survive.

I think that the way things are, Leica lenses will continue to be great lenses and will hold their value. Their new digital cameras won't.

 

This is not necessaroiy a bad thing for Leica. If more people are able to afford to buy into Leica systems by getting cheap secondhand cameras, those same people will want to buy the high quality secondhand lenses which means that there should be a buoyant market for new ones.

 

I think that I am going to stick with my film cameras for the mo - but if an M10 fixes the flaws and includes the new features I have suggested above then I might stretch to one.

 

 

I don't think that I could ever splash out £1k for an X1 when I am pretty sure that there will be an X2 just round the corner. Good IQ, yes but that isn't what is going to improve my photograph making.

[adan]

The glass-half-full version would be that at least Ricoh allows one to upgrade something. The lens and sensor in your LX3 and all other P&Ss are just as permanently attached together as those in the Ricoh whatever-it-is.

[jsrockit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think that the way things are, Leica lenses will continue to be great lenses and will hold their value. Their new digital cameras won't.

 

I don't think that I could ever splash out £1k for an X1 when I am pretty sure that there will be an X2 just round the corner. Good IQ, yes but that isn't what is going to improve my photograph making.

 

No manufactuer's digital bodies will hold their value, so why single out Leica? Maybe the depreciation will be much larger with Leica vs. the others... but it doesn't seem to be the case.

 

I wouldn't count on an X2 being right around the corner... the X1 isn't even out and once it is available, it'll take awhile to fill the orders. Leica doesn't pump out cameras quickly.

[marcg]

No manufactuer's digital bodies will hold their value, so why single out Leica? Maybe the depreciation will be much larger with Leica vs. the others... but it doesn't seem to be the case.

 

I wouldn't count on an X2 being right around the corner... the X1 isn't even out and once it is available, it'll take awhile to fill the orders. Leica doesn't pump out cameras quickly.

 

I don't especially single out Leica but on the other hand they invite scutiny as they are the only company which is asking for £5k for a digital 35mm body.

 

You say that Leica doesn't pump out cameras quickly but I think that by Leica standards, they do now.

 

In response to Adan, any digital camera allows you to upgrade to something - the next new model.

 

I was pleased to pick up a nearly new LX3 for £180. If I upgrade at some point, it will be to whatever brand provides me with what I value in my next P&S. I won't have bought into the brand because I won't have bought into a system.

 

I have a D300 which I have owned for about 3 years. I don't feel a need to upgrade it although I probably will get a Nik FX at some point in the next 18 months and keep a 28mm prime on it for most of the time but this would be in addition to the D300.

 

I think that the whole point of this thread really was to say, yes what an amazing trick if Ricoh can start a culture of "disposable" lenses as well as bodies.

Let's hope that they don't all go this way. Leica certainly won't because of its lenses pedigree.

 

I think that responsible photographers should discourage newcomers from buying into systems such as Ricoh as I think that as Ken Rockwell (peace be upon him) points out, this really is just another way of exploiting and devaluing the market.

 

Will that do?

[jsrockit]

I think that responsible photographers should discourage newcomers from buying into systems such as Ricoh as I think that as Ken Rockwell (peace be upon him) points out, this really is just another way of exploiting and devaluing the market.

 

I understand your point and I agree. However, is it really that different from computers 20-30 years ago? People paid a ton of cash to get the best of the time and now they are worth nothing in most cases... now it's similar with digital cameras. To me, I'd like to keep it where the body is the updatable part of the equation. However, I'm most likely going to buy a X1 knowing damn well it will depreciate over the next few years and will not be upgradable. However, those years of use should be fun and the camera works for my style of photography.