Video mode on future M

[mjh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If they were to take on the big guys head on they would not last long. In order for them to survive, they need to have a brand that is markedly different from Nikon/Canon.

Of course. That’s why Leica refrained from competing with Canon and Nikon in the DSLR market – hence the cancellation of the R10 project.

 

By the same token it makes sense for Leica to enter the EVIL market, the very market Canon and Nikon seem to be afraid of entering in earnest (or do you take the Nikon 1 seriously?). Will the EVIL system offer Leica quality? In the way the X1 offers Leica quality, surely.

 

There is not likely to be a new system

They said they are working on such a system and I for one believe them.

[Advertisement]

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

[swamiji]

They said they are working on such a system and I for one believe them.

 

But they have said many things about that system you do not believe... Photokina is less than a year away. We will see!

[Eastgreenlander]

Its been interesting to read the replies. If it does not interfere with your process of shooting a photo or changing settings for photo, I don´t see the problem. You can simply ignore video mode, like many 5DII owners do.

The only thing that change if video mode is added is the concept. Changing the concept is not easy, many here are in love with the concept, an emotional attachment. Many is proud to the part of a photographic community or concept/philosophy that a M will give you. Adding a feature, any feature, goes against this concept of being a simple photographic device where the user is involved in the process without being disturbed by unnecessary features. Adding video would not disturb or interfere this process or even the basic concept. I see it as evolving.

[Olsen]

I believe that if the Leica M system shall survive as a design and brand beond the future of us oldies that use this camera today, the camera must be 1)modernised and made 2)cheaper. By this I don't mean 'cheap', but it will be impossible to make fine mechanics to a affordable price in the near future. The M-cameras have to be solid state to be cheaper to produce.

 

Take the rangefinder mechanism of the M-series. Does anyone know what it cost to produce it? Most likely, future electronic viewfinders will be far cheaper, - and 'almost' as good. As soon as that is a fact Leica should tear out that ridiculously expensive RF mechanism and put in the more price competitive electronic viewfinder. A intermediary short cut could be to introduce 'live view' on the current lcd. Sure, I can hear (almost) all the chest banging from my own generation; 'over my dead body' and so on. But 'live view' is now available on just 'any' camera today. - Even on telephones.

 

Do we have to wait for live view?

 

The same goes for the shutter. Less than 10 years down the road cameras will not be made with mechanical shutters. - It is hilariously stupid that we still got these mechanical shutters in digital cameras today. They are totally unnecessary. The shutter job can be done by software! By trading them in for electronic/'digital software' shutters we will get less movable parts, a cheaper and far more reliable camera. And less noise.

 

Why shall we wait for a cheaper shutter without moving parts that is dead quiet?

 

AF? But of course! Today it is more expensive to equip a car with the old mechanical window crank than electrical windows. This because electrical servos are so cheap to produce. This might not yet be the case with camera lenses, but it just might be in the near future. AF is an intuitive and effective way of taking pictures and a 'must' if Leica shall recruit the younger generation - when we, the current M-series customers are in our graves - which isn't that far down the road. Then it's too late. The first two camera models could have dual capability; handling both old manual lenses as well as new AF ones. Then drop the manual lens capability altogether. The customers will 'scream of economical pain' - but fill Leica's coffers. - As when Canon introduced the EOS-system.

 

Video? That is not within us old guys' hemisphere, because we come from the 'film age'. The future of photography will be different. Communicating with 'visuals' will be more 'on the Net' than on albums or paper sheets on the wall that we were used to. Those cameras without a decent video capability will not be sold to the younger generation. - Soon the older generation will not be around...

[mwilliamsphotography]

I believe that if the Leica M system shall survive as a design and brand beond the future of us oldies that use this camera today, the camera must be 1)modernised and made 2)cheaper. By this I don't mean 'cheap', but it will be impossible to make fine mechanics to a affordable price in the near future. The M-cameras have to be solid state to be cheaper to produce.

 

Take the rangefinder mechanism of the M-series. Does anyone know what it cost to produce it? Most likely, future electronic viewfinders will be far cheaper, - and 'almost' as good. As soon as that is a fact Leica should tear out that ridiculously expensive RF mechanism and put in the more price competitive electronic viewfinder. A intermediary short cut could be to introduce 'live view' on the current lcd. Sure, I can hear (almost) all the chest banging from my own generation; 'over my dead body' and so on. But 'live view' is now available on just 'any' camera today. - Even on telephones.

 

Do we have to wait for live view?

 

The same goes for the shutter. Less than 10 years down the road cameras will not be made with mechanical shutters. - It is hilariously stupid that we still got these mechanical shutters in digital cameras today. They are totally unnecessary. The shutter job can be done by software! By trading them in for electronic/'digital software' shutters we will get less movable parts, a cheaper and far more reliable camera. And less noise.

 

Why shall we wait for a cheaper shutter without moving parts that is dead quiet?

 

AF? But of course! Today it is more expensive to equip a car with the old mechanical window crank than electrical windows. This because electrical servos are so cheap to produce. This might not yet be the case with camera lenses, but it just might be in the near future. AF is an intuitive and effective way of taking pictures and a 'must' if Leica shall recruit the younger generation - when we, the current M-series customers are in our graves - which isn't that far down the road. Then it's too late. The first two camera models could have dual capability; handling both old manual lenses as well as new AF ones. Then drop the manual lens capability altogether. The customers will 'scream of economical pain' - but fill Leica's coffers. - As when Canon introduced the EOS-system.

 

Video? That is not within us old guys' hemisphere, because we come from the 'film age'. The future of photography will be different. Communicating with 'visuals' will be more 'on the Net' than on albums or paper sheets on the wall that we were used to. Those cameras without a decent video capability will not be sold to the younger generation. - Soon the older generation will not be around...

 

Is there no haven against the onslaught of electronic Lemmings? Must everything share the DNA of an iPhone? Why not add texting to the list? Following your line of reasoning the upcoming generation would LOVE that since that's all they do all day : -)

 

Changing a premium brand's positioning and fundamental point of difference because "the current generation of customers will be kicking off, and then who will buy the product?", can be a flawed or even fatal concept. The "next generation" is already here, and Leica cannot make enough of their flagship Rangefinder camera or the lenses that go with it.

 

Premium products that maintain their positioning and functional integrity are what ANY generation aspires to ... because it has nothing to do with generation, and everything to do with reaching for the stars. Only a handful of brands have this in each category of products, and Leica is one of those brands.

 

Move further and further toward the electronic middle and Leica will run smack into Sony ... it is just a matter of a few short years and Sony will be the EFV do all, go to solution at the top of the heap that takes anyone's lenses including Leica's, and ... oh, wait, they already are!

 

IF the upcoming generations are so set on only e-wiz-bang devices as you seem to think, then Sony will own the photographic market in 10 years or less. However, all generations have always gravitated to the rare and more conservative brands as aspirational ...and they have always been willing to pay a huge premium for that privilege.

 

I personally don't care if Leica makes a less aspirational "tweener cam" with all the e-toys they can cram into it ... add texting and the latest installments of "House Wives of Butan" for all I care.

 

However, the minute Leica stops being the premiere rangefinder camera that I aspired to, and worked hard to master, is when I have bought my last Leica M.

 

My 2.5¢ worth.

 

-Marc

[Sp12]

I believe that if the Leica M system shall survive as a design and brand beond the future of us oldies that use this camera today, the camera must be 1)modernised and made 2)cheaper. By this I don't mean 'cheap', but it will be impossible to make fine mechanics to a affordable price in the near future. The M-cameras have to be solid state to be cheaper to produce.

 

Take the rangefinder mechanism of the M-series. Does anyone know what it cost to produce it? Most likely, future electronic viewfinders will be far cheaper, - and 'almost' as good. As soon as that is a fact Leica should tear out that ridiculously expensive RF mechanism and put in the more price competitive electronic viewfinder. A intermediary short cut could be to introduce 'live view' on the current lcd. Sure, I can hear (almost) all the chest banging from my own generation; 'over my dead body' and so on. But 'live view' is now available on just 'any' camera today. - Even on telephones.

 

Do we have to wait for live view?

 

The same goes for the shutter. Less than 10 years down the road cameras will not be made with mechanical shutters. - It is hilariously stupid that we still got these mechanical shutters in digital cameras today. They are totally unnecessary. The shutter job can be done by software! By trading them in for electronic/'digital software' shutters we will get less movable parts, a cheaper and far more reliable camera. And less noise.

 

Why shall we wait for a cheaper shutter without moving parts that is dead quiet?

 

AF? But of course! Today it is more expensive to equip a car with the old mechanical window crank than electrical windows. This because electrical servos are so cheap to produce. This might not yet be the case with camera lenses, but it just might be in the near future. AF is an intuitive and effective way of taking pictures and a 'must' if Leica shall recruit the younger generation - when we, the current M-series customers are in our graves - which isn't that far down the road. Then it's too late. The first two camera models could have dual capability; handling both old manual lenses as well as new AF ones. Then drop the manual lens capability altogether. The customers will 'scream of economical pain' - but fill Leica's coffers. - As when Canon introduced the EOS-system.

 

Video? That is not within us old guys' hemisphere, because we come from the 'film age'. The future of photography will be different. Communicating with 'visuals' will be more 'on the Net' than on albums or paper sheets on the wall that we were used to. Those cameras without a decent video capability will not be sold to the younger generation. - Soon the older generation will not be around...

 

I agree with many of your points but Leica doesn't sell to the new generation based on features or ease of use -- it sells exactly because it uses antiquated operation. It's an emotional thing, a vintage thing, a luxury thing. Leicas are Veblen goods, and thus the argument for new features is moot.

[sblitz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

actually the dna of leica is revolutionary not holding to ancient traditions. the building of a 35mm camera pre-war when professionals where using those big things that Weegee carried about to shout murder victims in NYC in the 30s and 40s. Those ur cameras were the EVIL cameras of the day. Then again the M3 was also a revolutionary camera that moved the camera industry forward. When the world went to the SLR the Leica became hopelessly old fashioned, hide bound in sustaining tradition and almost went out of business -- no through-the-lens meter until the 1980s?

 

The M9 is, IMHO, a revolutionary camera or at least a step in that direction. It is the big DSLR that is the evolving dinosaur and Leica with its bias towards light small cameras with supreme professional standards can once again move to the front of the line and be the cutting edge producer. We will see what they come up with, but the technology and their historic bias have now intersected to the extent that this opportunity is sitting there to be taken. We will see what they do.

[mmradman]

.. but Leica doesn't sell to the new generation based on features or ease of use -- it sells exactly because it uses antiquated operation. It's an emotional thing, a vintage thing, a luxury thing. Leicas are Veblen goods, and thus the argument for new features is moot.

 

With such advice and God forbid approach Leica may well close the shop and die.

Current M9 & S2 range will not provide planned growth.

Highly priced Leicas regardless of the feature set sell in limited numbers and appeal to narrow market. Special editions that either hark to the past or appeal to luxury brand conscious are convenient ways to keep company account afloat at lean times but not the way to grow business.

[Olsen]

The thread title notwithstanding we were talking about the lenses for the new system, remember? M lenses will continue to be manufactured in Solms or Wetzlar and in the traditional way, but how do you think Leica will meet a price point well below the M system? Leica is after a larger market share with the new system and they won’t achieve that goal with M system prices. (Whether lenses are manufactured in Germany or Japan isn’t that important really; if Leica set up a Japanese factory to build M lenses, those lenses wouldn’t be significantly cheaper to manufacture. More affordable lenses have to be designed so they allow for a less expensive mode of manufacturing.)

 

Agree.

 

For quite some years now Japanese labour cost has been far higher than that of Germany. With the ongoing Euro crisis this difference will increase even further.

 

Still: Neither Japan nor Germany have such low labour cost as a range of low wage countries around the world. Both Japan and Germany have higher labour cost than USA. Which explains that it is more to it than just labour cost when producing a product to a competitive price. Like efficiency, design, organisation/leadership, industrial clusters, distance to the market - and governmental subsidies.

 

China is held up as the classical country with low labour cost. But it is not only the hourly pay that makes their products so cheap. But also the fact that they 'give' away their energy cost and sell a range of raw materials, from rubber to aluminium to domestic subsidized prices.

 

Neither Germany, Japan nor USA can compete with that...

[AlanG]

Is there no haven against the onslaught of electronic Lemmings? Must everything share the DNA of an iPhone? Why not add texting to the list? Following your line of reasoning the upcoming generation would LOVE that since that's all they do all day : -)

 

Changing a premium brand's positioning and fundamental point of difference because "the current generation of customers will be kicking off, and then who will buy the product?", can be a flawed or even fatal concept. The "next generation" is already here, and Leica cannot make enough of their flagship Rangefinder camera or the lenses that go with it.

 

Premium products that maintain their positioning and functional integrity are what ANY generation aspires to ... because it has nothing to do with generation, and everything to do with reaching for the stars. Only a handful of brands have this in each category of products, and Leica is one of those brands.

 

Move further and further toward the electronic middle and Leica will run smack into Sony ... it is just a matter of a few short years and Sony will be the EFV do all, go to solution at the top of the heap that takes anyone's lenses including Leica's, and ... oh, wait, they already are!

 

IF the upcoming generations are so set on only e-wiz-bang devices as you seem to think, then Sony will own the photographic market in 10 years or less. However, all generations have always gravitated to the rare and more conservative brands as aspirational ...and they have always been willing to pay a huge premium for that privilege.

 

I personally don't care if Leica makes a less aspirational "tweener cam" with all the e-toys they can cram into it ... add texting and the latest installments of "House Wives of Butan" for all I care.

 

However, the minute Leica stops being the premiere rangefinder camera that I aspired to, and worked hard to master, is when I have bought my last Leica M.

 

My 2.5¢ worth.

 

-Marc

 

 

All of this makes sense to me and certainly helps explain the success of the M9. I don't see why this philosophy can't carry Leica forward for some time as long as they keep a steady stream of gradual updates going. (Whatever these updates need to be is debatable.) Continuing with the M and S series this way will be fine so long as Leica is happy to maintain a niche role similar to what it has today. I do not know if there can be saturation of this market as it is not a market that is driven by having the most versatility or performance in a camera system. (M in particular)

 

However, Leica has announced that they want to grow the company to capture a larger share of the market and now has outside investment who presumably share the view of growing the company. This will require the introduction of a wider range of products probably at lower price points as there is only so much room at the top.

 

Where these are made and what they will be like is anyone's guess. But I have been around cameras for a long time and I strongly believe that the Nex 7 design is the road map for "serious" future cameras for some time. (At least until high resolution versatile lightfield cameras become available.) I don't see how any manufacturer could think otherwise. I imagine that Leica could also grow simply by putting more marketing muscle behind selling cameras re-branded from other parties until they are in the position to make more cameras of their own designs.

 

Despite that some may aspire to have a traditional mechanically based precision tool, a lot of people are more concerned with performance and there is no denying that electronics are making it possible to do more with a camera than the current M9 can do. (Which already has a lot of electronics in it.) While I don't necessarily expect to see the M at the forefront of technology, I think there will be no choice for it to have electronic upgrades over time which will also come with additional features.

[AlanG]

Is there no haven against the onslaught of electronic Lemmings? Must everything share the DNA of an iPhone? Why not add texting to the list? Following your line of reasoning the upcoming generation would LOVE that since that's all they do all day : -)

 

Changing a premium brand's positioning and fundamental point of difference because "the current generation of customers will be kicking off, and then who will buy the product?", can be a flawed or even fatal concept. The "next generation" is already here, and Leica cannot make enough of their flagship Rangefinder camera or the lenses that go with it.

 

Premium products that maintain their positioning and functional integrity are what ANY generation aspires to ... because it has nothing to do with generation, and everything to do with reaching for the stars. Only a handful of brands have this in each category of products, and Leica is one of those brands.

 

Move further and further toward the electronic middle and Leica will run smack into Sony ... it is just a matter of a few short years and Sony will be the EFV do all, go to solution at the top of the heap that takes anyone's lenses including Leica's, and ... oh, wait, they already are!

 

IF the upcoming generations are so set on only e-wiz-bang devices as you seem to think, then Sony will own the photographic market in 10 years or less. However, all generations have always gravitated to the rare and more conservative brands as aspirational ...and they have always been willing to pay a huge premium for that privilege.

 

I personally don't care if Leica makes a less aspirational "tweener cam" with all the e-toys they can cram into it ... add texting and the latest installments of "House Wives of Butan" for all I care.

 

However, the minute Leica stops being the premiere rangefinder camera that I aspired to, and worked hard to master, is when I have bought my last Leica M.

 

My 2.5¢ worth.

 

-Marc

 

 

All of this makes sense to me and certainly helps explain the success of the M9. I don't see why this philosophy can't carry Leica forward for some time as long as they keep a steady stream of gradual updates going. (Whatever these updates need to be is debatable.) Continuing with the M and S series this way will be fine so long as Leica is happy to maintain a niche role similar to what it has today. I do not know if there can be saturation of this market as it is not a market that is driven by having the most versatility or performance in a camera system. (M in particular)

 

However, Leica has announced that they want to grow the company to capture a larger share of the market and now has outside investors who presumably share the view of growing the company. This will require the introduction of a wider range of products, probably at lower price points as there is only so much room at the top.

 

Where these are made and what they will be like is anyone's guess. But I have been around cameras for a long time and I strongly believe that the Nex 7 design is the road map for "serious" future cameras for some time. (At least until high resolution versatile lightfield cameras become available.) I don't see how any manufacturer could think otherwise. I imagine that Leica could also grow simply by putting more marketing muscle behind selling cameras re-branded from other parties until they are in the position to make more cameras of their own designs.

 

Despite that some may aspire to have a traditional mechanically based precision tool, a lot of people are more concerned with performance and there is no denying that electronics are making it possible to do more with a camera than the current M9 can do. (Which already has a lot of electronics in it.) A lot of people simply want to make nice photographs and really don't care about the camera construction that makes this possible. They simply view the camera as a means to an end. (Especially if it is viewed as something that may become outdated technologically fairly quickly.) While I don't necessarily expect to see the M at the forefront of technology, I think there will be no choice for it to have electronic upgrades over time which will also come with additional features. CMOS, live view, video, and an EVF seem very likely at some point since Stefan Daniel highlighted his interest in them. So what the company actually will do seems like a wide open question to me. But in the case of the M they will surely need to balance the old with the new.

 

On M rangefinder with video/CMOS sensor: "Offering additional functions such as video and live view would extend the usability of the M camera significantly. CMOS is a prerequisite for it, therefore it will be the technology of the future".

 

On M rangefinder with AF: "we are totally aware that we could aim at a much larger clientele with AF and are currently studying solutions".

 

http://www.megapixel.co.il/english/archive/23834

[Olsen]

Leica got to grow to survive. They also got to modernise their range of cameras to keep up with competition. They also got to find cheaper ways of making their cameras. Not to make 'cheap' cameras, but just to keep up. Otherwise Leica M cameras will grow more and more expensive 'just sitting there' technologically.

 

The M-series got a good standing in the market. It would be a mistake not to develop this model/system to suit the future's demand. It already got one very important advantage compared to Nikon and Canon: Size.

 

The rangefinder mechanism is so complicated and expensive to produce (and maintain) that it won't survive the future. Leica got to come up with a some sort of solid state & digital rangefinder and, most likely, viewfinder. - Indeed: The future of the M-camera rests with the ability to make a solid state rangefinder that is accurate and reliable for it.

 

As an interim viewfinder solution, 'live view' should be introduced on the next M-camera to come out. Using the lcd as a viewfinder is the new way of photographing. We, the old guys, can bang our chests and protest as much as we like, but the world move forward. We photographers no longer use a black cloth hanging over our heads when looking at a glass plate viewing the scene up side down. And so on. Try to see the advantages of this. The whole frame line problematics would be history and the viewfinder will be 100% accurate. - If focusing by the lcd catches on with the M-users then - may be - the whole viewfinder mechanism can be thrown out. What a leap forward that would be!

 

Out with the shutter! With it the cost that goes with it producing it, putting it into the camera and adjust it. Free up space, weight and cost. What a leap forward that will be! Let the camera software control the shutter speeds. Either by manual inputs or through automatic settings. Have the photographer choose between different sounds to replicate the sound of the old shutter if he wants to. Or have no sound at all.

 

Introduce AF! This will push sales of a new range of AF lenses. But please, make it compact, with the ability to have manual override and use the old manual lenses with the same camera.

 

The introduction of Canon's latest 1Dx is significant. Number of pixels was reduced to make a faster camera. Both ISO wise and multiple shots - and video. A very important development. Future M-cameras don't need more pixels, but better high ISO performance - and - faster multiple shots/video capability should be given priority.

 

The M-camera will be a formidable video camera. Light, compact, top of the line optics. Why wait?

[mwilliamsphotography]

Forget about Nikon and Canon, they aren't Leica's growing competition. Sony and Fuji will be IF Leica does what you think they should.

 

I predict the next NEX after the NEX7 with be a full frame, 36 meg NEX8 with a nice set of Zeiss AF primes. I also seriously doubt Fuji is asleep at the wheel.

 

So when the all stuff you are talking about is accomplished ... then the Leica will be an ultra-expensive Sony, but bigger than the Sony, slower than the Sony, and not do as much stuff as the Sony ... who already makes video cameras and their own sensors to source ever newer technology at break-neck speed ... not to mention deeper pockets than Leica.

 

Good Luck trying to do that.

 

-Marc

[anupmc]

Leica got to grow to survive....

 

Yes, but...

 

They also got to modernise their range of cameras to keep up with competition....

 

The M9 has a fraction of the features of the latest Nikon/Canon, yet Leica can't make enough to meet demand. Based on what you're saying, that can't be happening can it? That should be your first clue that your logic is flawed.

 

...The rangefinder mechanism is so complicated and expensive to produce (and maintain) that it won't survive the future....

 

Perhaps you need to look at the Watch industry to see where this logic is again flawed.

 

[Double Negative]

If Breitling can make a living selling $5,000+ watches, I don't think Leica's worried.

[Olsen]

Forget about Nikon and Canon, they aren't Leica's growing competition. Sony and Fuji will be IF Leica does what you think they should.

 

I predict the next NEX after the NEX7 with be a full frame, 36 meg NEX8 with a nice set of Zeiss AF primes. I also seriously doubt Fuji is asleep at the wheel.

 

So when the all stuff you are talking about is accomplished ... then the Leica will be an ultra-expensive Sony, but bigger than the Sony, slower than the Sony, and not do as much stuff as the Sony ... who already makes video cameras and their own sensors to source ever newer technology at break-neck speed ... not to mention deeper pockets than Leica.

 

Good Luck trying to do that.

 

-Marc

 

Marc,

 

Leica is already ultra expensive. What I am suggesting is 'how to cope with future competition'. By reducing cost and staying competitive. Leica can't 'just forget about Canon and Nikon'. They will be around. I have both a 1Ds III and a M9 and see the obvious advantages with the M9. First of all size, compactness and weight. Still with a comparable file quality compared to Canon (and Nikon). Despite lower pixel count the M9 produces files with just as much resolution as the 1Ds III. If not better. The M9 is the smallest full frame digital camera on the market; an excellent market position!

 

There won't be a 36 million pixel Full Frame (24 x 36 mm) camera - ever. Max is somewhere around 23 million. to the price of drastically reduced low ISO properties etc.

 

None of the modifications I mention will make the M-cameras larger or more expensive. - (Possibly with the exception of AF, - but may be even that might make the camera cheaper. Depending on how it is done) They will make the M-cameras lighter and cheaper to produce. The changes I suggest will have to come. to keep the cost down and to keep up with competition.

[Olsen]

If Breitling can make a living selling $5,000+ watches, I don't think Leica's worried.

 

But it is still a watch that performs like most other watches. If Leica makes no improvements to M9 - the brand will die. ($ 5,000 for a watch? That was cheap. In the same street of Lugano, Switzerland you hardly get a decent pair of shoes to that price!).

[Olsen]

Yes, but...

 

 

Doing nothing they will die! Yes, but... - they got to grow!

 

 

The M9 has a fraction of the features of the latest Nikon/Canon, yet Leica can't make enough to meet demand. Based on what you're saying, that can't be happening can it? That should be your first clue that your logic is flawed.

 

 

M9 is closer to the 'features' of both top of the line Canon and Nikon then most know of. That' why they sell. Right now Leica is selling good, - but M9s are available in ample volumes. Not the least since Canon 1Ds III can't be found and the Canon 1Dx is not around before March next year....

 

Perhaps you need to look at the Watch industry to see where this logic is again flawed.

 

 

Bad comparison. Most of the Swiss watch industry is 'just brands'. The mechanics is done 'wholesale'. Or they are tiny family workshops. The industries not comparable.

 

If, however, Leica do nothing, Leica might end up as 'just a brand' too. That is stuck on some PS cameras made in China.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[stunsworth]

...($ 5,000 for a watch? That was cheap. In the same street of Lugano, Switzerland you hardly get a decent pair of shoes to that price!).

 

And what new features had the makers made to those shoes to ensure people bought them? Surely if they had exactly the same features as a 80 Euros pair they wouldn't sell?

[stunsworth]

M9 is closer to the 'features' of both top of the line Canon and Nikon then most know of. That' why they sell

 

I have to disagree on both counts. I can't think of anyone I know who's bought a Leica because it had a similar feature set to a top end Canon or Nikon. My experience is that they buy the cameras because they prefer a small rangefinder to a large SLR. The important thing being it's a rangefinder, not an SLR, not an EVF. This is Leica's USP. Lose that and the company will fade away.

 

By rangefinder I mean the means of viewing the scene, it gives a totally different view of the world than looking through an SLR. A bit like the difference between looking through a pane of glass and looking down a tunnel.