hamey Posted September 28, 2012 Share #461 Posted September 28, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Ben, when Hassleblad bought Imacon what was the first thing they did. STOP PRODUCTION OF THE DMR.......WHY DO YOU THINK. Ken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 28, 2012 Posted September 28, 2012 Hi hamey, Take a look here The R solution - more details. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wildlightphoto Posted September 28, 2012 Share #462 Posted September 28, 2012 I don't have this experience at all. I still can't find a better kit than my R8/DMR & 80 Summilux. What I was referring to is battery packs needing to be rebuilt, some viewscreens are no longer available, and if something internal gets fried the camera ends up in the parts bin. One of my battery packs has swollen and is no longer usable I'll put up any DNG from this kit against any current market DSLR camera. Anytime, anywhere. I've not had a lot of experience with the files from current DSLR cameras but I'm still delighted with the DMR's output. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted September 28, 2012 Share #463 Posted September 28, 2012 The Shiva err. Leica "third eye" could be less obtrusive though. Maybe they should put the "thirdeye" behind some kind of fresnel window... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krauklis Posted September 28, 2012 Share #464 Posted September 28, 2012 I've been thinking about what I'll need for nature photography, given the EVF's blocking of the flash shoe. - an M body - an EVF - a baseplate, the one with all the connectors, so I can then use - a flash bracket, so I can run an SC-17 cable up to my flash. That's four things to do what a single R10 would do. Eek! How I'm doing it with my R8 And it won't have a cable release! Well, not an electronic one. Does the M shutter button take a mechanical cable release? Right you are! As I don't want to have my Module Telyts (400-800mm) fitted with Leitax adaptors for Nikon, (David Llado strongly recommends to have that kind of surgery done in the Leitax House in Spain, rather expensive, transport risk, similar for reversal), I had been looking forward to any kind of R-solution from Leica. I won't buy the new M, as it lacks an electronic cable release, which is really essential for wildlife photography with long tele lenses. The (my) DMR only offers 400 ASA, which is not enough in poor lighting conditions, (early morning, end of day). The M goes up to 1600 ASA, that would be good for me. Similar to the DMR Leica should give the new M a socket for an electronic cable release ( and HDMI would be fine as well). krauklis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_dykstra Posted September 28, 2012 Share #465 Posted September 28, 2012 Krauklis, there's always the R-telephoto to S adapter, as shown here. I gather that Norbert Rosing is using this now. He doesn't have time for things that don't work. Too busy staying off the polar bear dinner menu. R-tele-lens to S adapter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krauklis Posted September 28, 2012 Share #466 Posted September 28, 2012 Krauklis, there's always the R-telephoto to S adapter, as shown here. I gather that Norbert Rosing is using this now. He doesn't have time for things that don't work. Too busy staying off the polar bear dinner menu. R-tele-lens to S adapter I know about that, thank you. If only the difference in price between M and S was a little bit smaller ... . krauklis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 28, 2012 Share #467 Posted September 28, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Both IIRC. Definitely in EVF. Works perfectly. Text on a page on the desk was turning red and the red flowed up and down the page as I changed focus. Might even sort out front / back focussing lenses? This will be an intriguing test to do with camera in hands and some notoriously "focus-shifting" lens : focus wide open - get the "red peaking" - start to close the diaph - see what happens to the "red stripes" .... if it is SO sensitive it's sign of a very good implementation of an interesting technology. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 28, 2012 Share #468 Posted September 28, 2012 Ben, when Hassleblad bought Imacon what was the first thing they did. STOP PRODUCTION OF THE DMR.......WHY DO YOU THINK. Ahem, no, that wasn’t the first thing they did. Fun fact: All DMR where manufactured after Imacon’s acquisition by Hasselblad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted September 28, 2012 Share #469 Posted September 28, 2012 Was that because of contractual obligation by Imacon of a number ? units Michael. It'a a pity they never produced any more. Ken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 28, 2012 Share #470 Posted September 28, 2012 Was that because of contractual obligation by Imacon of a number ? units Michael. Surely they were contractual obligations. The DMR was jointly developed by Leica and Imacon in 2004 (development work might have started earlier than that, though) and was introduced at photokina 2004. At around the same time in a different press conference, Hasselblad announced the acquisition of Imacon (and Leica was like “Huh?”). Production of the DMR commenced in 2005 and the first units did reach the market in the summer of that year. Another batch was manufactured in 2006. The demise of the DMR came in early 2007 but a couple of units continued to be available for several months. By 2006 it was clear that Imacon’s heart wasn’t in it anymore. Originally they had probably seen the DMR project as the start of a strategic partnership with Leica. Imacon’s portfolio did comprise high-end scanners and digital backs and as the scanner market was shrinking, they wanted to strengthen their position on the camera side. Only then there arrived another opportunity offering an even better perspective than a partnership with Leica, namely getting Hasselblad (or their owner Shriro) to acquire Imacon and install Imacon’s CEO Christian Poulsen as the new CEO of Hasselblad. Back then, Hasselblad had been happily spending Shriro’s money for quite some time and Poulsen promised to reorganize Hasselblad and make it profitable again. So it would be fair to say that in 2007, Hasselblad/Imacon preferred not to be bothered with making another batch of DMRs. But that isn’t the whole story. It seems that by then, demand for the DMR was already dwindling and it wasn’t clear that Leica wouldn’t actually lose money with the next batch. Also the DMR was supposed to be a transitory product between the analog R9 and an all-digital R10. A FF digital R was on everyone’s wish-list and there was no way to go FF with a DMR Mark II. I guess that by that time, Leica’s heart had ceased to fully be in it either. Later it became evident that Leica had already started the AFRika project eventually leading to the S2, and that they hoped that with the technology developed for the S2 they would be able to build an R10, a FF DSLR with a matching set of new autofocus lenses but also supporting existing R lenses. But while that might have worked out technology-wise, it made no sense business-wise which Leica eventually realised – unfortunately after semi-officially announcing the R10 only a few months before, at photokina 2008. So there were several factors leading to the DMR’s demise, Hasselblad/Imacon having become weary of that project being just one of those. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted September 28, 2012 Share #471 Posted September 28, 2012 Thanks for the info Michael. Hoping the Leica M will be more succesful. Ken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicapages Posted October 1, 2012 Share #472 Posted October 1, 2012 Well... Clearly I am not the only one being serious underwhelmed by the proposed digital R solution... In my humble opinion, while for some putting R glass on the M could work well, this is a "second best" option and not really a substitute for a true digital R solution. It actually feels like stepping back in time. How this could be presented by Leica as the definite digital solution for R users, is beyond me. I for sure will not buy the M to put my extensive R glass on it. The R8 and R9 bodies are very well made, hold extremely well in one's hands and are a joy to use (excellent viewfinder and all that) - these are characteristics that should be preserved with a digital R solution. Disappointing is the operative word. Pascal Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted October 1, 2012 Share #473 Posted October 1, 2012 Pascal - I find the shape/ergonomics of the R8/R9 to be better than any other 35MM camera I've touched, and on that we agree. However, My R8 has been very costly in two or three post-warrantee period services, and I'm far from alone in having that experience. I've seen quite a few other R8/R9 users on this Forum write about similar problems, and one, my colleague Andy Barton, moved to Nikon and Leitax partly due to the costly service problems. My DMR has also had journeys to Solmes, most recently for a mother board replacement. The M with adapter and EVF is not ideal, and on that too we agree. However, the M, smaller and lighter than my R8/DMR is still interesting, not to mention its sensor size, resolution and ISO vs. the DMR with the latest firmware. And based on my experiences with the D2 EVF (I really had to get used to it and still cannot “trust” it in some situations, and the EVF attached to my D Lux 5, which is far better than the D2 EVF) I’m hopeful that EVF improvements will be acceptable. Leica was quite clear – was it three years ago? – about there being no further Rs, and the likely R solution would be manufactured with a partner using an APS-C size or larger sensor. In light of that the new M with EVF and adapter though not what I’d hoped for is in several ways considerably better than what I expected. If it performs as I expect it to – and as we’ve frequently seen on these pages many of our fellow members condemn new produces from Leica and other manufacturers before actually seeing those products and before reading any reviews of them – and if I can afford it I’ll gladly move to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 1, 2012 Share #474 Posted October 1, 2012 ...I’m hopeful that EVF improvements will be acceptable... So am i but 30 fps will be too slow for moving subjects like this i fear. http://tinyurl.com/8kqr3uj Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted October 1, 2012 Share #475 Posted October 1, 2012 Disappointing is the operative word. The disappointment was as inevitable and it was to be expected. What you wished for was an SLR and Leica had made it clear years ago that the ‘R solution’ wouldn’t be an SLR but an EVIL camera of some kind. Also I had explained several times that it probably wouldn’t be a dedicated R solution but a camera that R lenses could be adapted to. Pretty much the only unknown was whether the R solution would be based on a live-view-capable M, or on an entirely new camera system. Originally I had thought that with the microlens shifting optimized for M, not R lenses, an M-based solution was less likely. But since Leica has found an alternative way of dealing with large incident angles, the new M has no difficulty accepting both M and R lenses. An M-based solution was thus the obvious choice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguewave Posted October 1, 2012 Share #476 Posted October 1, 2012 The disappointment was as inevitable and it was to be expected. What you wished for was an SLR and Leica had made it clear years ago that the ‘R solution’ wouldn’t be an SLR but an EVIL camera of some kind. Also I had explained several times that it probably wouldn’t be a dedicated R solution but a camera that R lenses could be adapted to. Pretty much the only unknown was whether the R solution would be based on a live-view-capable M, or on an entirely new camera system. Originally I had thought that with the microlens shifting optimized for M, not R lenses, an M-based solution was less likely. But since Leica has found an alternative way of dealing with large incident angles, the new M has no difficulty accepting both M and R lenses. An M-based solution was thus the obvious choice. Michael, you have been & remain prescient in this matter. One of the only sources that drew close to the mark. It is very sad to think that this new M can take the place or replace a true SLR like my R8 or the R9. It appears that Leica will exit that market, permanently. The ergonomics and size of this new M just don't compute. Many of the best R lenses, the 80 & 35 Summilux, the R19, don't have the sort of fulcrum necessary for using these lenses hand held. Forget about all the larger focal lengths, unless a mono/tripod is employed. Leica has abandoned that market, probably never to return. I love my M film cameras for what they are and the experience is unique. Having the ability to SEE what will be captured through the lens and not electronically, makes a huge difference for me and I'm sure I'm not alone. Leica may not be in the position to compete for this market and I understand that. For me, it's a very sad turn of events. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted October 2, 2012 Share #477 Posted October 2, 2012 Looking at this from the perspective of an non-R user, I can see why people are upset, but would also comment that R users possibly now have the best of both worlds. If they've got some of that outstanding APO glass they have the Leitax / Nikon solution (Leica lens for Nikon cameras). Less expensive than anything Leica's going to offer and with outstanding bodies / sensors ready and waiting. They ALSO have to chance to use the same lenses on the latest M body. Not a good solution for lenses below 90 in all probability - but for longer glass or macro, a valid solution when they don't want to hump a DSLR around. What's not to like? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pierovitch Posted October 2, 2012 Share #478 Posted October 2, 2012 I found an interim R/Visoflex solution for $550. Realized that the only M lens not Visoflex compatible was a 35mm with spectacles (60's Macro collector) already had a Pentax / Visoflex adaptor so a K-01 does the job and the Leitax treatment for any R goodies. I would not recommend this for sports but street photography is easy. Peaking focus is far easier than ground glass or focus lights and beeps for speed. Dials are better than touch screens or menus this would make the M an even better option. I even did something I would consider impossible. I used a 500mm mirror lens (iso 6400 shake reduction) to take a handheld shot of the moon and got sharp craters and noise free blacks Don't knock the design until you have got used to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted October 2, 2012 Share #479 Posted October 2, 2012 Looking at this from the perspective of an non-R user, I can see why people are upset, but would also comment that R users possibly now have the best of both worlds. If they've got some of that outstanding APO glass they have the Leitax / Nikon solution (Leica lens for Nikon cameras).... What's not to like? What's not to like? Nikon USA, and no longer being able to use the lens on a Leica-R body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguewave Posted October 2, 2012 Share #480 Posted October 2, 2012 Looking at this from the perspective of an non-R user, I can see why people are upset, but would also comment that R users possibly now have the best of both worlds. If they've got some of that outstanding APO glass they have the Leitax / Nikon solution (Leica lens for Nikon cameras). Less expensive than anything Leica's going to offer and with outstanding bodies / sensors ready and waiting. They ALSO have to chance to use the same lenses on the latest M body. Not a good solution for lenses below 90 in all probability - but for longer glass or macro, a valid solution when they don't want to hump a DSLR around. What's not to like? I will assume that you do not own or haven't used the DMR. The Nikon/Canon bodies don't come close, in any way, to the colors rendered by the DMR. They are worlds apart. I own a Nikon D3 and there's just no comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.