Jump to content

DMR survival


gdb

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest black_jack
Likely the DMR will remain at the forefront of technology for a long time i.e. 16 bit colorspace to Canon and Nikon's 12 bit. And, of course, the mightly Leica/Leitz glass. It's not all just megapixels as we are now learning.

best, mark

 

Why wasn't this 16 bit colorspace given to the M8?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Whi told you they only built 3.000 units, this is news to me!

 

/T

This info was never a secret? I put my name on the list as soon as it was announced, and waited a long time to get it. I was in Solms when it was being designed/produced and saw the first prototype at the shareholders meeting while HPC was at the helm. 3000 units is not necessarily small for Leica, there are many examples of small production runs. I simply asked the question and was given the answer, it was an unproven design/idea at a time of weak interest in the R line.

best, mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wasn't this 16 bit colorspace given to the M8?

Actually, I'm not sure what the colorspace specs of the m8 are, they are not printed in any of the material provided with the camera (that I have found)? The specs on digital sensors are largely dependent on the technology of a paticular group at the time of need. It is not practical for a company like Leica to order a sensor to their specs; they simply shop the sensors being built at that time i.e. Imacon, Kodak, etc. The companies making sensors are at the forefront of research and development, and each has it's own philosophy of the current and future needs and possibilities. I hope this helps a little, and I'll get back to you with colorspace info if someone doesn't beat me to it. best, mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

This months LFI discusses the bit space of the M8 - too complicated for me to fully understand but it is a non-linear 8bit conversion of an original 14 bit file (2 bits at the bottom are discarded as the signal to noise ratio is very low).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

you make a good point .... why would someone buy an R10 when they see the way leica supports the digital module-R. While i am pleased with the camera i am not please with the support of the technology, infact i think some great hardware, good people, and leica itself is being compromised by this poor support .

 

rich

Link to post
Share on other sites

you make a good point .... why would someone buy an R10 when they see the way leica supports the digital module-R. While i am pleased with the camera i am not please with the support of the technology, infact i think some great hardware, good people, and leica itself is being compromised by this poor support .

 

rich

 

 

Because there is no other choice if you have a fortune sunk into R glass?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica is under-going a corporate shift. If they do a good job supporting the M8 (please, neither sniping nor halelujahs right now) then any serious person considering an R should have confidence.

 

If they pull off the M right, then the R is a sleeping giant from a brand perspective. They could position it between the high-end Japanese stuff (5D, D2X, etc) and the Hasselblads of this world.

 

It's a tired comparison, but: Porsche may not have Toyota's size or revenue, but it's products are far superior with great brand loyalty AND they are the most profitable car company (by margin) in the world right now - with THREE good product lines (911, Cayenne, and the Boxter.) I'm sure Leica (as another German company) is looking at them every step of the way as a role model.

 

As an aside, there is such a thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the customers support the brand and the product lines, then things will go a little better. It's one thing to recognize mistakes and point them out asap, but it's another to constantly assume the worst and accuse the company of negligence, incompetance, and malfesance. Be supportive as often as you are critical, it makes the people working there all the more motivated to fix problems, and develop new products. Don't think they don't read forums like this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and BTW ... The DMR probably doesn't have much Pro level support, because few Pros support the Leica DMR.

 

Let's face it, a pro would be crippled with this camera. I love mine, but above ISO 400 and you're in amateur land. Lighting conditions have to be almost perfect for the DMR to shine. No TTL support, small buffer, and weak battery... so it compares unfavorably as a wedding and event camera.

 

Still like it, but ain't shelving the Canons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a C.... or N...., but I DO have a DMR and, ... a Porsche Cayenne. I love both and, using DNGs, do not really miss the 1.3 firmware too badly.

 

The HARDWARE is outstanding, and, at 3,000 units, I feel fortunate to be able to enjoy one!

 

Did I miss someting in this discussion?

 

Guy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I miss someting in this discussion?

 

 

No you don't. But most of the DMR users would be happy to make the hardward brilliant (not just outstanding) with a better firmware, from which also shows how considerate is Leica to its 'loyal' customers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe what i am missing is i thought the hard part was the development, engineering, marketing . etc.... isn;t the firmware the easy part ? again i really don;t know but i thought this was the "cheaper" part for leica to do.

 

Having said all that i understand the hassleblad/imacon issue -

 

what hurts most is hearing nothing ... when you do it's delayed... i m investing heavily and feeling like im not important .

 

i am holding onto my equipment, but i can't get execited about an R10,

Link to post
Share on other sites

what hurts most is hearing nothing ... when you do it's delayed... i m investing heavily and feeling like im not important .

 

 

That's exactly my feelings. From the DMR and M8 cases we can easily notice that Leica just neglects the R users at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wasn't this 16 bit colorspace given to the M8?

 

The A/D conversor seem to be one of 16 bits, but many of the tonal gradations in the shadows are affected by noise. Therefore, the camera works with 14bits of tonal resolution. This is compressed non-linearly to 8bits. Details at the shadows are preserved, but tonal variation is reduced in the highlights. This allows for smaller files (10MB instead of 20MB of the DMR), bigger buffer (relative to the size of the buffer) and faster writting of files.

 

I would have preferred some kind of 10-bit non-linear compression.

Link to post
Share on other sites

those who are concerned about the viability of Leica and in particular the R line are invited to read about Leica's new management:

 

http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/10-2006/msg00153.html

 

http://www.avenir.dhs.org/archives/leicareflex/10-2006/msg00223.html

 

Recall that before the DMR was introduced to the public, Leica's claim was that its image quality would be unsurpassed among 35mm-based DSLR cameras. Now they intend to give N and C some real competition. What that means we can only speculate - I think we'll have to wait and see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What interesting articles.

 

Anyway, my dealer has my DMR now and I will get it tomorrow along with some caviar and swiss chocolate from Schiesser (now that is customer service) :cool:

 

As for the R10 - lets wait and see and then upgrade when the R11 comes out in 5 years time...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...