Stefan Daniel Interview Offers Clues

[sdai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

At no point have they indicated that an M10 is imminent.

 

Exactly my thought as well ... a camera sitting between 3000 and 6000 dollars can't be a M - non-handicapped.

 

The MM is perfection IMHO ... no better sensor, electronics or gimmicks can help produce better images from a technical perspective. After all, the M was designed for snapshots from its roots and I've considered these pin sharp lenses are a huge waste for this exact purpose.

 

The SD interview is somewhat contradicting to the AP interview a while ago. While Dr Kaufmann clearly indicated that their EVIL/CSC model won't be shown at the Kina, the 3k/6k camera we are reading about here doesn't seem to fall into any existing category in market comfortably.

[algrove]

I own both. And although I have the money to buy new Leica product, my sense of value simply won't let me. My income and net worth have not doubled as Leica's prices have. There's just no rationalization that I can con myself with that allows me to accept that I should pay twice as much for the same lenses than they cost 4-5 years ago.

I couldn't con myself into paying double for a DLux-5 than a Panny LX5. The only new lenses I've bought in the past few years have been CV, which I thought were good values before, but have become stupendous values recently.

 

I really do like my M9 kit a lot better than my Canon kit, because hauling around a 5D and those bazooka lenses is more than I can handle anymore. But if I had to start over today, I would not be looking in Leica's direction.

 

Agree with your LX5 comparison and that's why I bought the Panny +VF. That circumstance surely opened my eyes to the exorbitant prices that Leica charges for their product, even that manufactured by a Japanese company for them. While many big names in Germany can (and do) hold prices on their quality product for years, Leica increases their prices with abandon.

[farnz]

Agree with your LX5 comparison and that's why I bought the Panny +VF. That circumstance surely opened my eyes to the exorbitant prices that Leica charges for their product, even that manufactured by a Japanese company for them. While many big names in Germany can (and do) hold prices on their quality product for years, Leica increases their prices with abandon.

<sigh - this ground has been covered many times before> The DL5 and LX5 weren't sold as identical packages so their price won't be directly comparable; the DL5 was bundled with LR3 and a 3-year warranty, which goes some way towards justifying the difference in price. You may not have felt that it was justified but I did in view of Leica's dedication to supporting its products long after they have been superseded.

 

Pete.

[Phil U]

But how does one explain away the price differential between the Leica EVF for the X2 and the equivalent Olympus? You pay for the name, no?

[algrove]

<sigh - this ground has been covered many times before> The DL5 and LX5 weren't sold as identical packages so their price won't be directly comparable; the DL5 was bundled with LR3 and a 3-year warranty, which goes some way towards justifying the difference in price. You may not have felt that it was justified but I did in view of Leica's dedication to supporting its products long after they have been superseded.

 

Pete.

 

Granted water over the dam many times, but I already had LR3 (like most of us with our M9's) and with a camera for US$400 who cares about a 3 year warranty. The saving between the camera and VF almost bought me a Leica VF for my 18 SEM.

[bocaburger]

<sigh - this ground has been covered many times before> The DL5 and LX5 weren't sold as identical packages so their price won't be directly comparable; the DL5 was bundled with LR3 and a 3-year warranty, which goes some way towards justifying the difference in price. You may not have felt that it was justified but I did in view of Leica's dedication to supporting its products long after they have been superseded.

 

Pete.

 

Fair point about the Lightroom bundle. I already got it with the M9, but even if I hadn't, I don't use LR with a P&S anyhow. As for the 3 yr warranty, I could buy 2 LX5s and have $100 change back from what a DLux 5 costs. And as far as support "long after [it has] been superseded", when that happens I will be able to buy the Panny version of the DLux-6 and still not spent as much as the DLux 5 would've cost. Oh, and that doesn't count the cost of an added handgrip for the Leica, which the Panny has built-in.

 

I had a DLux 3, so I've been at those crossroads before. It was 50% more than the Panny. This time there was a 130% premium and I felt that was not a good value.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Exactly my thought as well ... a camera sitting between 3000 and 6000 dollars can't be a M - non-handicapped.

 

He said the gap was between 2000 and 6000 Euros, which is about $2500 to $7600. Plus he never said that all of the additions would be in this range, nor did he give a time frame. The MM wasn't expected by most, nor was the 50 Summicron...at that price anyway.

 

Jeff

[Guest Ming Rider]

Exactly my thought as well ... a camera sitting between 3000 and 6000 dollars can't be a M - non-handicapped.

 

The MM is perfection IMHO ... no better sensor, electronics or gimmicks can help produce better images from a technical perspective. After all, the M was designed for snapshots from its roots and I've considered these pin sharp lenses are a huge waste for this exact purpose.

 

The SD interview is somewhat contradicting to the AP interview a while ago. While Dr Kaufmann clearly indicated that their EVIL/CSC model won't be shown at the Kina, the 3k/6k camera we are reading about here doesn't seem to fall into any existing category in market comfortably.

 

Maybe this is the long desired digital CL ?

[sdai]

Maybe this is the long desired digital CL ?

 

That would be very nice! I hope they won't delibrately cripple it with a non-FF sensor ...

[lars_bergquist]

Photography is a hobby. I doubt there are very many people who use film who, if they became hard of hearing, would reject a modern in-canal microprocessor hearing-aid in favor of an ear-trumpet on the basis the latter doesn't need batteries [ … ]

 

I was speaking of technical reasons. Most people in the 'digital vs. film debate' (or rather, confused collective noise-making) seem unable to make the distinction between a technical argument (on, hopefully, objective or at least intersubjective grounds) and purely personal predilections. So there are people who prefer film to digital, So there are those who prefer needlepoint to photography. This is perfectly all right. Why should all people have the same preferences? That would be a boring world indeed.

 

The trouble starts when personal predilections are 'objectivized', elevated into absolutes that are binding on everybody. Not "I prefer film to digital" but "film is superior to digital". The step from "man is the measure of all things" to "I am the measure of all things" is frighteningly short.

 

And enforced conformity has often been about things far more vital (or lethal) than photography.

 

The old man from the Kodachrome Age

[lars_bergquist]

Surely at some point, someone is going to raise the question of "what if there isn't an M10 in the pipeline" ?

 

Isn't the M9 the pinnacle of the Digital M and if so, isn't there going to be a whole group of people feeling betrayed and very annoyed through no fault of Leica ?

 

At no point have they indicated that an M10 is imminent.

 

You could do that 'no change' trick in film days, because it was the film that evolved and improved. You could buy a M3 in the mid-fifties and still use it, but it would be a completely different tool – because of the different films you would use in it. Today the camera IS the 'film'.

 

The electronics of the M9 is getting pretty long in the tooth. It is essentially the M8 electronics, of c. 2005 vintage. It must be updated, if for no other reason that the old components will not be available much longer. And, to mention the three most common proposals, a M should today have higher useful ISO, better battery economy and a larger and better rear screen. While my M9 will remain extremely useful for as long as I am able to hold a camera, its useful life as an industrial product is approaching is end.

 

So therefore Leica must announce a successor, if not at the Photokina then during 2013.

 

The old man from the Kodachrome Age

[oronet commander]

But how does one explain away the price differential between the Leica EVF for the X2 and the equivalent Olympus? You pay for the name, no?

__________________

Phil

 

Website

Flickr

 

It's an addittional link in the retailer chain, isn't it? Leica must have its cut. We cannot expect similar prices when there's one more to get revenue.

 

What may be considered nonsense is to pay more for the same product, so one should blame buyers if that happens.

[NZDavid]

Film vs digital, surely not!

 

My main concern is whether Leica will continue to strive for quality and reliability, or just focus on more sub-niche products.

 

Compatibility with memory cards and the M9 so the camera doesn't lock up and you lose all your images, for example. Firmware that works as advertised.

 

Or more weatherproof, rugged gear so you can change lenses and go out shooting without fear of more dust on the sensor.

 

Ruggedness and reliability never seemed to be such a concern with film Leicas. It certainly isn't just Leica, though. Introducing computerized componentry is the main reason: Software developers are far more eager to bring out new whizzbang features than concentrate on making existing features more reliable.

[marknorton]

Well, I fear I am not in Leica's target market for such an intermediate product. Not FF? Forget it. No M lens compatibility? Forget it. No rangefinder? Forget it.

 

OTOH, an M camera with a CMOS sensor and an optional EVF would be interesting. After all, Leica already sell a variety of viewfinder add-ons, so this one would be no different.

 

Problem is can Leica actually do it right without the marketing hype needed to paper over the cracks? They are much better at making lenses than cameras and whichever camera you look at - M8, M9, X1, S2, that old expression "A day late and a dollar short" comes to mind - 4 years late if you're thinking about the S CS lenses.

[jaapv]

I rather doubt that there is any connection between weatherproofing and sensor dust, as I cannot imagine any way of weatherproofing the process of changing lenses... Except for a red-dotted bin liner, of course.

Film vs digital, surely not!

 

My main concern is whether Leica will continue to strive for quality and reliability, or just focus on more sub-niche products.

 

Compatibility with memory cards and the M9 so the camera doesn't lock up and you lose all your images, for example. Firmware that works as advertised.

 

Or more weatherproof, rugged gear so you can change lenses and go out shooting without fear of more dust on the sensor.

 

Ruggedness and reliability never seemed to be such a concern with film Leicas. It certainly isn't just Leica, though. Introducing computerized componentry is the main reason: Software developers are far more eager to bring out new whizzbang features than concentrate on making existing features more reliable.

[-ph-]

Well, I fear I am not in Leica's target market for such an intermediate product. Not FF? Forget it. No M lens compatibility? Forget it. No rangefinder? Forget it.

 

OTOH, an M camera with a CMOS sensor and an optional EVF would be interesting. After all, Leica already sell a variety of viewfinder add-ons, so this one would be no different.

 

Problem is can Leica actually do it right without the marketing hype needed to paper over the cracks? They are much better at making lenses than cameras and whichever camera you look at - M8, M9, X1, S2, that old expression "A day late and a dollar short" comes to mind - 4 years late if you're thinking about the S CS lenses.

 

The M9 being based on the M8 was certainly not cutting edge even when it came to the market, but the S2 is very interesting. My understanding is, that except of the sensor it is completely developed by Leica, so even back then they had quite impressive capabilities, I would be much more optimistic to what they can do nowadays, where they can afford much larger R&D budgets.

 

If Leica wanted to make a more affordable camera and they next M would have a live view enabled sensor, they could make a camera - probably one shouldn't call it an "M", which completely removes the rangefinder and only offers an electronic viewfinder.

 

Such a camera could be as small as the X2 and much less expensive than an M camera. I think Stefan Daniel once said in an interview that the M rangefinder costs around € 1500, so this could lower the camera cost considerably. And due to the simplified design, other production costs might be cut too. An X2 sized camera which sports a 35 mm sensor and accepts M mount lenses for sure would be something to interest me...

 

Peter

[Guest Ming Rider]

Eeek. Live View, EVF, IS, Scene Modes? Will we shoot it like a compact as well ??

 

Oooh, I'm getting all weak at the knees.

[Guest Ming Rider]

I must raise a point about the Live View.

 

At what point, between seeing your subject, raising the camera to your eye and pressing the shutter, would you use it ?

 

Rangefinders have always been about speed. The only point at which I would use it would be in landscape (which I don't do) on a tripod, which the M is not meant for ??

[rosuna]

That would be very nice! I hope they won't delibrately cripple it with a non-FF sensor ...

 

The new camera (not the rangefinder, but the cheaper EVF camera) should have two characteristics:

 

1) Synergies with the M system, because in other case it implies a new and isolated system (like the M and S are). Compatibility with a APS-C camera is of not practical interest, and you already have that type of solution.

 

2) Strong differentiation, and differentiation cannot be based on the red dot alone. That worked with the panaleicas but Leica just buys the units to Panasonic, increasing the price and the markup thanks to the brand. The new system has to be developed and manufactured by Leica, which increases the costs and risks. I cannot see how Leica can differentiate a interchangeable lens system with APS-C sensor. It is impossible.

 

The two points ask for a 24x36 camera with M compatibility of some type.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[-ph-]

Eeek. Live View, EVF, IS, Scene Modes? Will we shoot it like a compact as well ??

 

Oooh, I'm getting all weak at the knees.

 

I like all technical features which help in getting the shot I want. So scene modes rather not, but live view and IS aid in getting the shot framed as I want it and with better sharpness.

 

Peter