wattsy Posted January 12, 2007 Share #41 Â Posted January 12, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Their next turnover-maker will have to be the R10 - not a M9. Â I disagree. The money has always been in the M line. Don't be surprised if a more hard-nosed management decides to quietly retire the R line over the next few years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 12, 2007 Posted January 12, 2007 Hi wattsy, Take a look here M8's useful lifespan. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
khun_k Posted January 12, 2007 Share #42 Â Posted January 12, 2007 I disagree. The money has always been in the M line. Don't be surprised if a more hard-nosed management decides to quietly retire the R line over the next few years. Â Indeed, M was what set Leica apart from the crowd, not the SLR line. I believed M8 is as important as any historical M to be. In digital days the life of a camera tend to be shorter. But as long as the old 135mm images can last, M8 images can last as long. I think it is not how long the camera lifespan is but how long the images it made can hold the appreciation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4season Posted January 12, 2007 Share #43 Â Posted January 12, 2007 Their next turnover-maker will have to be the R10 - not a M9. Â That's my hope too, and Photokina 2008 would be just about ideal timing for me. Cost aside, DMR + R9 is a bit much for me to carry every day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest flatfour Posted January 12, 2007 Share #44 Â Posted January 12, 2007 Phil - Of course there will be a model life to it, otherwise Leica would close down. But I would bet anyone on this forum - who is a good photographer - could take exciting, or dramatic, or peaceful, or artistic photographs with a screwmount Leica 1. It's the photograph that counts. New tools rarely improve craftsmanship. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikau Posted January 12, 2007 Author Share #45 Â Posted January 12, 2007 Thanks to everyone for responding to my query - a really useful cross section of opinion. I guess at the end of the day, flatfour's comment cuts through all the tech. stuff and brings what it's all about into perspective! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted January 12, 2007 Share #46 Â Posted January 12, 2007 It's the photograph that counts. New tools rarely improve craftsmanship. Â Yea but I would have a greater chance of getting a better shot with a M8 than my D2 in low light situations so in some cases the camera does count. The same is said of film, different speeds for different situations Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted January 13, 2007 Share #47  Posted January 13, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yea but I would have a greater chance of getting a better shot with a M8 than my D2 in low light situations so in some cases the camera does count. The same is said of film, different speeds for different situations   Its the discretion afforded by the M8 over a DSLR that makes all the difference. Not to mention being relieved of having to drag around a full SLR kit. These things DO make a big difference to me. And still getting the same file qualities of a full frame camera (or close enough).  Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest flatfour Posted January 13, 2007 Share #48 Â Posted January 13, 2007 STNAMI and REX . I did say rarely, and you have spotted the strongest difference - the low light capability., Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.