DMR firmware

[John Maio]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If "real" Leica users think it OK to use Kodak sensors in a new R10, then why not Panasonic electronics lens design and components, but Leica glass elements? Seems like a much less risky and lower cost approach.

 

I can assure you that the Leica-inspired lens on the DigiLux-3 is well integrated with that camera, offering both competent AF operation AND image stabilization, and still offers the manual aperture ring and click shutter speed dial those (including me) who owned Rollei 6000 series outfits liked. Non-AF R lens would still mount and work - just like the Nikon paradigm.

 

Its not only the professional sports venue that benefits from fast and reliable AF.

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest guy_mancuso]

John not sure Panasonic would want to enter the fray of the DSLR's world. Although they certainly can financially

[ptomsu]

Peter what they can do today is take a existing sensor from Kodak that is made today for the MF for like the 22mg backs and use that. Have to check the sizes but that would eliminate a lot of development and just build the body around that sensor, certainly would come to market faster.

 

I need a sit down with Dr Kaufman. LOL

 

But then they also could use the 39MP sensor - should be same size ....

[jaapv]

So just bringing the R10 with all that features in 2 years from now is not enough, it is only the starting point and then they need to be prepared to have a higher end version available every 2 years or so, just like competition. If this is good or bad or necessary or not is not really debatable, it is what the market requires.

Peter

 

I fear that is just what Leica will be unable to do, certainly in relationship to companies with far deeper pockets and far larger R&D departments. So they need to develop a camera that through its niche status will be less sensitive in that respect.

[ptomsu]

I fear that is just what Leica will be unable to do, certainly in relationship to companies with far deeper pockets and far larger R&D departments. So they need to develop a camera that through its niche status will be less sensitive in that respect.

 

I disagree, they need to do continuous medel development. And this does not mean it is impossible, even for a small company producing small series. It can be even more an advantage, because if they get the concept right (body structure, light metering, additions to R mount for AF) basically all which can stay more or less constant for many generations, they only have to replace the sensor and the image processing part of the camere - which should not be a big issue, since the sensor comes in its latest incarnation from Kodak and the image processing from another partner.

 

Key is to select the right concept technically and the right partners. If they have that setup right then the story is easy. And even partners can benefit from Leica in terms of new technologies they learn like shifting microlenses, thin filters, image processing needs and advantages etc.

 

Peter

[jaapv]

I disagree, they need to do continuous medel development. And this does not mean it is impossible, even for a small company producing small series. It can be even more an advantage, because if they get the concept right (body structure, light metering, additions to R mount for AF) basically all which can stay more or less constant for many generations, they only have to replace the sensor and the image processing part of the camere - which should not be a big issue, since the sensor comes in its latest incarnation from Kodak and the image processing from another partner.

 

Key is to select the right concept technically and the right partners. If they have that setup right then the story is easy. And even partners can benefit from Leica in terms of new technologies they learn like shifting microlenses, thin filters, image processing needs and advantages etc.

 

Peter

 

Peter,

What you say is true, but the problem in the DSLR market is that most "upgrades" are gimmicky or uninteresting from a photographic point of view. Look at the Canon D30-D60-10D-20D-30D series. The only real sensor upgrade was between the D30 and the D60 and a minor tweak and new processor after the 10D. Pictorial quality beween 10D and 30D is only marginally improved. All upgrades were body size and ergonomics -not necessarily an improvement, I prefer the feel of the D30 to the 30D, Autofocus (that was the real improvement) and minor gimmicks. Yet the marketing managed to induce the public to move with the change time after time. I feel it will be very hard for Leica to get on such a merrygoround, even if their clientele would fall for it, which I doubt.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Peter, I think Leica's has two related problems with the R10. Can they afford to develop a competitive DSLR? Is there a profitable market for an in-house developed R10?

[ptomsu]

@ Jaap,

 

agree, if there is only minor change then a new model is not what Leica should bring nor what users should ask for.

 

But if you think about what was happening in the MF market over the last 3 years - Hasselblad went from 22MP in the H1 to 39MP in the H3 which adds also a bunch of other real improvements.

 

Same should be possible for Leica - if Kodak comes with a new sensor, which allows a significant improvement (and doubling the pixel count is definitely a substantial improvement) then they need to be able to have a new model on the market within a few months timeframe. This is only possible if they use a modular design, which I do hope they plan from the beginning into a R10.

 

Otherwise they will die sooner or later. But this way they even cn turn around the wheel and stay again on the forefront of digital photography. This way they also will be able to always lead digital image processing and can achieve new competence in this area, which might lead to new business opportunities as well.

 

Hasselblad did the same and they succeeded. Although they did an even more radical cut - from their old systems towards the all new H series. Maybe this would be also necessary for Leica, maybe with the fact that they keep their existing R mount in order to allow reuse of todays R lenses.

 

Peter

[carstenw]

Jenoptik ended the Sinar deal, not Leica.

 

If Leica truly just ditched the R line, that would shake everyone's belief in them too much to survive, I think that is pretty clear. I can only imagine that the worst realistic case is that Imacon's apparent refusal to honour their original commitment forces Leica to end their involvement with the DMR, above and beyond just keeping them working for current owners.

 

I don't think that Leica can survive with just the one pro range, the M line. They cannot just sell lenses the whole time, until the next generation. The dual lines provide their engineers with work after an M has been released and debugged, and vice versa. The consumer cameras won't ever sell that strongly, simply because the equivalent Panasonics are cheaper. They can only sell them to those who already love Leica as a brand, and that won't have come about in any other way than via an M or R camera.

 

I believe that Leica will continue the R line, as they have said. The DMR mess needs to be straightened out, and it may well be that current DMR owners will get a nice upgrade offer towards the R10, as an apology for the Imacon mess. I also believe that the pros who have switched to the R8/R9+DMR are not that interested in a fully automatic japanised camera. Focus confirmation might be nice, but beyond that, I think the DMR is good enough, conceptually. Do any DMR owners disagree?

 

Are there any current Hasselblad customers here? If I had any way at all to put pressure on Imacon, I would throw everything I have at them to honour the DMR development agreement. The current firmware situation is unacceptable.

[John Maio]

John not sure Panasonic would want to enter the fray of the DSLR's world. Although they certainly can financially

 

What I'm suggesting is an exclusive Leica-branded R10, but with Panasonic chips, actuators and electronics in the critical areas that would otherwise be very risky for Leica alone:

 

AF drivers and actuators assembled by Leica into a new series of lenses (all major MF manufacturers eventually added AF lenses that can be used on AF bodies - along with the existing MF lenses, Why not Leica?

 

Venus III (or later) processing engine

 

Optical stabilization electronics and drivers - in the body would be nice - or in the lens. Panasonic demonstrates capability both ways.

 

Internal AF electronics. This area is critical, as both Nikon and Canon have struggled over the years to get it right. Panasonic's implementation in the DL-3 seems both fast and precise, and could preclude Leica spending fortunes in this area plowing the same ground.

 

I'm sure there are other areas for collaboration. The real question in my mind, and what you seem to be alluding to Guy, is whether Panasonic would be willing to be a technology supplier to Leica, rather than the other way around.

[robbegibson]

Are there any current Hasselblad customers here? If I had any way at all to put pressure on Imacon, I would throw everything I have at them to honour the DMR development agreement. The current firmware situation is unacceptable.

 

Yes. I bought an H2/CFH late December of 2005. It took Imacon until November 2006 to provided all the features they said would be available by February('06). But they did get to it, just not in the original timeframe. Their story is 'we're working on supplying the 39mp backs'. The good thing about that is they seem to make the advancements in the newer backs backward compatible to the slightly older versions. That wouldn't apply to the DMR.

 

Robbe Gibson

[Guest guy_mancuso]

What I'm suggesting is an exclusive Leica-branded R10, but with Panasonic chips, actuators and electronics in the critical areas that would otherwise be very risky for Leica alone:

 

AF drivers and actuators assembled by Leica into a new series of lenses (all major MF manufacturers eventually added AF lenses that can be used on AF bodies - along with the existing MF lenses, Why not Leica?

 

Venus III (or later) processing engine

 

Optical stabilization electronics and drivers - in the body would be nice - or in the lens. Panasonic demonstrates capability both ways.

 

Internal AF electronics. This area is critical, as both Nikon and Canon have struggled over the years to get it right. Panasonic's implementation in the DL-3 seems both fast and precise, and could preclude Leica spending fortunes in this area plowing the same ground.

 

I'm sure there are other areas for collaboration. The real question in my mind, and what you seem to be alluding to Guy, is whether Panasonic would be willing to be a technology supplier to Leica, rather than the other way around.

 

 

Yea sort of because if they could do it or want to than one would think they would have there own DSLR out there already. Than they could use any lens mount they wanted including there own

[carstenw]

John not sure Panasonic would want to enter the fray of the DSLR's world. Although they certainly can financially

 

Guy, the L1 is already a DSLR. I don't think they'll start two ranges at once though.

[ptomsu]

Maybe in the end of the day Panasonic will buy Leica .....

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Thanks Carsten , i'm not that up on Panasonic product line.

 

Peter it would be a good move for Panasonic , not so sure it would be for leica though.

[carstenw]

I doubt Panasonic will, at least until they have better and more interchangeable lens cameras. Leica is all about the best lenses, and Panasonic doesn't need that. They need better sensors, for the most part, if you believe the reviews of their cameras.

 

For Leica it would be disastrous, of course. Then again, I doubt that Mr. Kaufmann bought Leica just to sell it. Apparently he adores Leica cameras, and is a fan of old-style European technology and quality, so I am guessing, and hope, that he is in it for the long haul.

[graham_mitchell]

I think many in here are dreaming about medium format sized sensors.

 

i) I doubt most Leica lenses have sufficient image circles

ii) the sensor, mirror and viewfinder would be significantly larger than a full-frame DSLR, making this too heavy and bulky for most users

iii) Even if you buy 22MP sensors from Kodak in bulk, the cost is something like $5K per sensor. Add the rest of the manufacturing and R&D cost, and you are suddenly looking at a $12K+ camera body, retail.

 

This makes no sense.

[bono0272]

Stephen Gandy has reported on one of his mailing lists that he has been informed (by a reliable source) that Leica is soon going to end support for the DMR. If true, it doesn't bode well for the prospects of the new firmware and is going to piss off an awful lot of customers.

 

Okay, back to the original question: will there be DMR firmware 1.3?

 

After Leica failed to lauch it by Dec 06, the next rumor says it will come in Feb 07. If the source quoted above is true, then we should forget Feb 07 as well.

 

There are lots of discussions on the expected R10. But I doubt I will spend that amount of money on the R10 (sure the R10 will not be cheap) if Leica cannot fix the problems of DMR/M8. By just leaving the DMR aside without supports is not a good decision, which makes the R users lose confidence on the future products. How about if the next R generation also gets problems (and most properly it will have some)? When you look back to the DMR experience you will not invest then.

 

May be we all the DMR users should work like the M8 users? In this digital forum nowadays it is hardly to find discussions about the DMR but all about M8. We should let Leica knows our concerns, just like the M8 users.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[rsolomon]

Richard

i agree with you , the m8 users "took over" the forum, and understandablly so, however the old saying " the squeaky wheel gets the oil" then we need to speak out loud and clear.

 

BTW: while i wait for firmware 1.3 lets also note that we expect many more firmware version to come out from leica. The harware is fantasic and i am sure once firmware 1.3 is available we will have ideas or fixes for it and i for one will be looking for continued support.

 

i'm not sure about the finances of the average leica R user...but this one expects a longer term investment from the DMR.

 

IMHO: a digital only R10 would not necessarily be an "upgrade" to the R9/DMR combo, leioca may be considering a lower priced camera to draw new commers.

[bono0272]

BTW: while i wait for firmware 1.3 lets also note that we expect many more firmware version to come out from leica. The harware is fantasic and i am sure once firmware 1.3 is available we will have ideas or fixes for it and i for one will be looking for continued support.

 

i'm not sure about the finances of the average leica R user...but this one expects a longer term investment from the DMR.

 

Richard S,

 

Yes I believe almost all the DMR users are happy with the hardware. To me I have the same comments as you: it is fantastic. I just want a better WB result. You know, although everyone is saying that by shooting RAW I can adjust the WB by C1 or PS or whatever software I want but this should not be the way to solve the problem. IMHO the software WB should be used for a fine tune if we want the original picture a bit warmer or cooler but it should not be that way that we originally want a 5500K and the DMR produces 6500K, then we have to use the software to calibrate.

 

And also, I do expect a longer term investment from the DMR. It is not cheap, compare to the Japanese flag ship products, so I would expect a better support from Leica. And Leica should also has committments to its supporters.