thrid Posted January 4, 2013 Share #1 Posted January 4, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) How about it Leica? I'm certain there would be huge interest in an M-E with the sensor from the M 240. Remove all of the video features from the M 240 and ship it stripped down like the current M-E A variant of the MM with a mono 240 sensor would be the logical next step for that model. Just a thought... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 4, 2013 Posted January 4, 2013 Hi thrid, Take a look here M-E with new 240 sensor, new electronics, minus video etc. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
-ph- Posted January 4, 2013 Share #2 Posted January 4, 2013 The problem is, removing the video features from the M 240 wouldn't save a single cent in the manufacturing cost. Well, to be honest, a few cents for not having the video and the live view button. But that's it. The sensor would not get cheaper, and the camera would still require the same logic board - you could build a camera with a cheaper logic board, but as this would need to be developed separately, that would actually *increase* the cost of the camera unless it would sell in vastly higher numbers than the M 240. So price-wise, don't expect a cheaper camera with the sensor of the M 240 any time soon. Peter 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted January 4, 2013 Author Share #3 Posted January 4, 2013 (edited) The problem is, removing the video features from the M 240 wouldn't save a single cent in the manufacturing cost. Peter It wouldn't be the first time that a company has sold a camera with some features turned off as a lower end model, although the hardware is identical. As an example I own a Sony F3 digital cinema camera. Initially it shipped as two separate models. One that only shot compressed video, the other uncompressed 444 slog. Same hardware, same camera, some features turned off. But there was a price difference of several thousands dollars. You could upgrade to slog 444 by purchasing a software key for about $3000 dollars. In the long run it would probably be cheaper for Leica to go this route than handle two different assembly lines, suppliers etc. It may actually be cheaper and more profitable for them to consolidate. It works for Apple. They would also benefit from an economy of scale, because they would be purchasing larger quantities of the same components which drives down their cost etc. The sensor would almost certainly go down in price for Leica if they ordered them in larger quantities. Small scale production runs are very expensive, especially for semiconductors. Nikon can sell the D600 for under $2000 in part because Sony/Nikon make that FF sensor in very large quantities. Edited January 5, 2013 by thrid 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 4, 2013 Share #4 Posted January 4, 2013 Just don't go near the video button and your dream will come true! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest borge Posted January 4, 2013 Share #5 Posted January 4, 2013 The next M-E with the typ 240 sensor will probably be launched at a reduced cost when the next generation M is announced. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted January 5, 2013 Author Share #6 Posted January 5, 2013 (edited) Just don't go near the video button and your dream will come true! I'm not against the video features in the M240. This suggestion is not driven by ideology. I think the M-E is a good idea. I just think the M9 sensor is not very competitive in 2013. Edited January 5, 2013 by thrid 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted January 5, 2013 Share #7 Posted January 5, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Maybe there will be an entry-level M based on the M Type 240, but probably not this year or the next. There is no way Leica could sell such a model at a considerably reduced price; removing the video mode would do nothing towards reducing the manufacturing cost. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted January 5, 2013 Author Share #8 Posted January 5, 2013 Maybe there will be an entry-level M based on the M Type 240, but probably not this year or the next. There is no way Leica could sell such a model at a considerably reduced price; removing the video mode would do nothing towards reducing the manufacturing cost. I understand that. Most of the video features are software with some minimal hardware support. Removing video will not lower the costs. But pricing is related to marketing. And running two separate assembly lines and inventory is a lot more expensive than consolidating to one set of components. Producing the sensor in larger quantities drives down costs for Leica etc. For me personally it doesn't matter. I shoot film in my Leicas and have a D600 for when someone puts a gun to my head and insists on digital. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 5, 2013 Share #9 Posted January 5, 2013 Bit previous aren't you! Let's see what this new camera can do first. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted January 5, 2013 Author Share #10 Posted January 5, 2013 Bit previous aren't you! Let's see what this new camera can do first. It's not a new camera. By all accounts it's a repackaged M9. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted January 5, 2013 Share #11 Posted January 5, 2013 I think the M-E is a good idea. I just think the M9 sensor is not very competitive in 2013. Maybe. The problem is that the optical rangefinders of the other digital camera makers aren't very competitive in 2013. I went out shooting with my friend yesterday. He was using his NEX-7, which has a very good sensor. Granted we were shooting in daylight, and both using M-lenses, but I was much faster, and my focusing was much more accurate than his with an EVF and focus peaking. I did pre-order the M240, but I can honestly say that I could probably shoot happily with my M9 for many years to come, and I might actually be more productive if I didn't keep chasing the next best thing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 5, 2013 Share #12 Posted January 5, 2013 I'm not against the video features in the M240. This suggestion is not driven by ideology. I think the M-E is a good idea. I just think the M9 sensor is not very competitive in 2013. The older the sensor the worse the image? I think not. The DMR is still more than excellent at lower ISO for instance. Sensors compete by output, not by date stamp. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 5, 2013 Share #13 Posted January 5, 2013 It's not a new camera. By all accounts it's a repackaged M9. Yeah right, in the same way the M9 is a repackaged M3 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest borge Posted January 5, 2013 Share #14 Posted January 5, 2013 Yeah right, in the same way the M9 is a repackaged M3 The M9 and the M-E share the exact same firmware so they are infact based on the exact same hardware. Same hardware as the original M9 with a different wrapping and the removal of the USB port and frame selector switch. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted January 5, 2013 Share #15 Posted January 5, 2013 Oh and btw. I own a Contax 645 with a P25 back, which has a CCD sensor from I think 2005. The files from this sensor at low ISO are unbelievable, and there is still nothing like it at that price point. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted January 5, 2013 Author Share #16 Posted January 5, 2013 (edited) The older the sensor the worse the image? I think not. The DMR is still more than excellent at lower ISO for instance. Sensors compete by output, not by date stamp. Yes, the M9 / M-E sensor still delivers exactly the same IQ it did the day it was put on sale. The release of the M 240 did not cause a sudden degradation in the IQ of the M9 / M-E and you could happily keep shooting it until it stops working. But technology marches on and I can point to countless threads on this forum, with endless complaining about the M9 noise at higher iso and it's comparatively limited exposure range. Am I supposed to believe that it has somehow ripened like a fine wine? It is nearly 10 years old now, having evolved from the sensor that was in the M8. Are we having a collective attack of technological nostalgia? The M240 sensor promises to cure those issues, but of course if you are satisfied to continue shooting with a sensor that is almost a decade old, then by all means go ahead. To me personally the M 240 sensor is something of a milestone. If it really does deliver 13-14 stops of usable range, then we will finally have a sensor that matches the performance that film has delivered for the past few decades. In other words it could represent a technological plateau. I could live with that for a very long time. Edited January 5, 2013 by thrid Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted January 5, 2013 Author Share #17 Posted January 5, 2013 Yeah right, in the same way the M9 is a repackaged M3 You may want to take a look at the Leia site. You may be in for a surprise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted January 5, 2013 Share #18 Posted January 5, 2013 If my experience holds true, most folks who buy the M will rarely use it for video. Just tape the video button with black masking tape and your dreams of a still-only 240 will be answered. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 5, 2013 Share #19 Posted January 5, 2013 (edited) Sorry guys! I'm having a 'left field' moment. When I sailed competitively, I knew a sailor who spent hours polishing the hull of his boat before a serious regatta. I'm sure someone could measure the advantage that gave him in reduced friction, but seriously, if he paid more attention to the nut holding the tiller his performance would have have been extraordinarily improved. That's how I ultimately beat him, by upgrading my personal skills, despite my rough old boat. Likewise, my M9 (and others) are aging, so am I. I have just acquired a Leica 111f as well as some vintage lenses. All 1950's era. I am discovering that (I believe) my picture quality is improving despite the aging equipment employed, I think it is because I am being forced to think every aspect of my shots. The aging 'sensor' and 'klutsy' mechanics of the camera seem to evoke something better in this aging photographer. I will (just for a change) sit back and watch the release of the new M, which I am sure will be a great success and I may eventually get one. But I am not holding my breath on seeing a sharp improvement in image quality because of it. That can only come from you/me/us. Edit: ... and the whole point of having a camera is the image rather than it's technical superiority, isn't it? Edited January 5, 2013 by erl 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 5, 2013 Share #20 Posted January 5, 2013 Bit previous aren't you! Let's see what this new camera can do first. Thrid - I think that James is referring to the M, here, not the M-E Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.