Is R10 or a brand new Digital-R coming ?

[ptomsu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For what it is worth, the Tamarkin website makes the following statement:

 

We know that Leica is developing an all-digital Leica R and we believe they may have it completed in time for Photokina in September 2008.

 

Maybe that's just their opinion, or hope, but here is the full link:

 

http://www.tamarkin.com/catalog/products/leica/leicaslrusedlens.html

 

Something similar was already posted on some other sites few months ago.

 

Also if you read the LFI then you will find that Lee is at least mentioning that the R system is one of the core systems and that they are working (not developing) on a new digital R camera.

 

So do not worry, it will come - question is more if it really makes sense - aka for the much more mature DSLR systems available from other vebdors and if the number which can be sold of such a future R10 will be able to justify development and production costs :-(

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest guy_mancuso]

For what it is worth, the Tamarkin website makes the following statement:

 

We know that Leica is developing an all-digital Leica R and we believe they may have it completed in time for Photokina in September 2008.

 

Maybe that's just their opinion, or hope, but here is the full link:

 

http://www.tamarkin.com/catalog/products/leica/leicaslrusedlens.html

 

Do you really think there is any doubt. Have not read what the link say's and don't have too, Steven Lee is in charge folks and his only job is too make money, you can't do that sitting in the bleachers you need to be on the field of play.

[mgcd]

Guy

Leica are now out of the SLR market altogether.

 

I think that may be a bit of a misrepresentation... While production may have stopped on the R9, there is still product stock, R lenses are still being produced and bought. Granted the level of trade may be relatively lower at this point in time.

 

Furthermore, Leica is indeed working on the next R camera. Don't bother to ask for any info. In this web universe things get twisted and take on a life of their own... Just remember that Leica aims to be a radical traditionalist...

 

Cheers,

[Likaleica]

I've been watching this post closely for a few days and I have noticed a lot of angst about whether or not the R10 will be able to compete with the top end Canon and Nikon digital cameras.

 

I don't want it to, and I suspect I am not alone in this. If I want an ultra-fast, super-whiz camera with a zillion menus and photographic processing possibilities, coupled with an f2.8 14-800mm zoom lens, that will be obsolete by the next Photokina, then I'll get a Nikon or Canon. In fact, I have a D2X and the zoom lenses, but it just doesn't do it for me.

 

I want a simple, extremely high-quality digital photographic instrument, consistent with the entire Leica line from the beginning. I want it small-ish, simple to operate, and very ergonomic. I want it compatible with my manual focus, fixed focal-length lenses of wonder that I have accumulated over the years, and with whatever optical miracle comes out of Solms next. When I trip the mechanical shutter with my finger after winding it with my thumb (optional integral motordrive, of course), I want to feel like I am making a photograph that I have thought about and crafted, rather than spraying a barrage of photographic bullets that are EV- compensated, focus-compensated, and thought-compensated, hoping that the camera is a better photographer than I am and that when I scroll through the movie I have just created, I will find a couple of good frames.

 

I want to focus on the part of the subject that I want to focus on, not the little square on which the camera thinks I want to focus. Or, worse yet, the little square on which the camera thinks I should focus.

 

Leica, in my opinion, has (have, for you Brits) an opportunity to make the greatest SLR in the history of SLRs with the R10. It would be a mistake to try and play one-upsmanship with N &C.

[sdai]

I actually think it's a good sign when some photographers are comparing the R10 to either a Nikon or a Canon, naturally, a die hard Leica purist couldn't care less what Canon or Nikon is doing, the controversy shows exactly the camera is causing attention from the both the Canon and Nikon camps.

 

Any serious photographer should always put the quality of end results above all else, when these folks realize that the R10 could deliver what's missing from the Canons and Nikons, then Leica has got a winner.

 

You could punch a soft button on the touch screen then the Lexus LS 460 will parallel park for you hands free. Very cool and useful feature! ... not for a Porsche driver.

[R10dreamer]

Photokina Sept. 2008. A year away.

 

I own two R8's and a single DMR. If anything happens to the DMR I have an option of buying a used one at $4,500 approx. or waiting till NEXT September for the possibility of buying a potential R10. Leica has to understand that its loyal customer base can ONLY be loyal IF there are tools to use. No tools, no customer. Leica's product cycle's are archaic and not competitive in the world we all live in. Do I want an obsolete camera one year after I buy it? Heck no. But that is still better than NO option at all. Leica discontinued the DMR and left us R8/R9 digital shooters without any options. Stephen Lee may ask us for patience but he has a responsibility to run a company in a manner that is beneficial to his customers. I love analog but shooting film these days with 16-21 megapixel cameras is tantamount to shooting glass plates 10 years ago. Keep up or get out of the race.

[mgcd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Photokina Sept. 2008. A year away.

 

I own two R8's and a single DMR. If anything happens to the DMR I have an option of buying a used one at $4,500 approx. or waiting till NEXT September for the possibility of buying a potential R10. Leica has to understand that its loyal customer base can ONLY be loyal IF there are tools to use. No tools, no customer. Leica's product cycle's are archaic and not competitive in the world we all live in. Do I want an obsolete camera one year after I buy it? Heck no. But that is still better than NO option at all. Leica discontinued the DMR and left us R8/R9 digital shooters without any options. Stephen Lee may ask us for patience but he has a responsibility to run a company in a manner that is beneficial to his customers. I love analog but shooting film these days with 16-21 megapixel cameras is tantamount to shooting glass plates 10 years ago. Keep up or get out of the race.

 

Does your DMR still produce top quality files? Mine does.

 

Cheers,

[Angora]

I've been watching this post closely for a few days and I have noticed a lot of angst about whether or not the R10 will be able to compete with the top end Canon and Nikon digital cameras.

 

I don't want it to, and I suspect I am not alone in this. If I want an ultra-fast, super-whiz camera with a zillion menus and photographic processing possibilities, coupled with an f2.8 14-800mm zoom lens, that will be obsolete by the next Photokina, then I'll get a Nikon or Canon. In fact, I have a D2X and the zoom lenses, but it just doesn't do it for me.

 

I want a simple, extremely high-quality digital photographic instrument, consistent with the entire Leica line from the beginning. I want it small-ish, simple to operate, and very ergonomic. I want it compatible with my manual focus, fixed focal-length lenses of wonder that I have accumulated over the years, and with whatever optical miracle comes out of Solms next. When I trip the mechanical shutter with my finger after winding it with my thumb (optional integral motordrive, of course), I want to feel like I am making a photograph that I have thought about and crafted, rather than spraying a barrage of photographic bullets that are EV- compensated, focus-compensated, and thought-compensated, hoping that the camera is a better photographer than I am and that when I scroll through the movie I have just created, I will find a couple of good frames.

 

I want to focus on the part of the subject that I want to focus on, not the little square on which the camera thinks I want to focus. Or, worse yet, the little square on which the camera thinks I should focus.

 

Leica, in my opinion, has (have, for you Brits) an opportunity to make the greatest SLR in the history of SLRs with the R10. It would be a mistake to try and play one-upsmanship with N &C.

 

I second all of that. Plus: a metal body. That's what lacks on the market.

If I wanted an AF plastic body, I'd get a 5D. What I desire is an MF metal body, and I believe only Leica can provide that.

[AlanG]

...I don't want it to, and I suspect I am not alone in this. If I want an ultra-fast, super-whiz camera with a zillion menus and photographic processing possibilities, coupled with an f2.8 14-800mm zoom lens, that will be obsolete by the next Photokina, then I'll get a Nikon or Canon...

 

I can understand this sentiment because that suits my shooting style most of the time too. I come from a 35 year view camera background. But there is nothing to stop you from setting any pro camera on manual exposure, use a prime lens, and shoot on single frame and always use raw.

 

I shoot a lot of interior photos usually with studio strobes and therefor have little use for the in-camera meter. And most of the time I'm at ISO 100. I shoot slowly, on a tripod, tethered to a computer and generally focus manually. Usually when I set up the camera I turn it on, set the shutter speed, f stop, and then focus. I don't adjust anything else or look at any menus.

 

But that doesn't mean I can't appreciate or make use of many of the other features occassionally. They can be useful tools and sometimes I need them. This kind of versatility in a single camera is very attractive. I used to have to use 4x5, 6x6, and 35mm for what one dSLR system can do today.

 

So you may disagree, but I don't find any of those additional buttons or menus get in my way at all. Nor do they in any way affect my approach to photography other than to broaden it.

 

I think what you'll find when each person starts listing what he/she "must" have in a new Leica R camera that it is all over the place. If you leave out AF or IS, some will be unhappy. If you don't have 16+ megapixels, a good large LCD, some will be unhapy. If there isn't something like a 14-24 2.8 or 16-35 2.8 zoom, some will be unhappy. You get my point, it is probably unwise to make a camera system that appeals to the least common denominator.

 

There is no way to minimize the features and make everyone happy. (And why not please as many as possible?) But remember you don't have to use all the features.

[mgcd]

I can understand this sentiment because that suits my shooting style most of the time too. I come from a 35 year view camera background. But there is nothing to stop you from setting any pro camera on manual exposure, use a prime lens, and shoot on single frame and always use raw.

 

I shoot a lot of interior photos usually with studio strobes and therefor have little use for the in-camera meter. And most of the time I'm at ISO 100. I shoot slowly, on a tripod, tethered to a computer and generally focus manually. Usually when I set up the camera I turn it on, set the shutter speed, f stop, and then focus. I don't adjust anything else or look at any menus.

 

But that doesn't mean I can't appreciate or make use of many of the other features occassionally. They can be useful tools and sometimes I need them. This kind of versatility in a single camera is very attractive. I used to have to use 4x5, 6x6, and 35mm for what one dSLR system can do today.

 

So you may disagree, but I don't find any of those additional buttons or menus get in my way at all. Nor do they in any way affect my approach to photography other than to broaden it.

 

I think what you'll find when each person starts listing what he/she "must" have in a new Leica R camera that it is all over the place. If you leave out AF or IS, some will be unhappy. If you don't have a good large LCD, some will be unhapy. If there isn't something like a 14-24 2.8 or 16-35 2.8 zoom, some will be unhappy. You get my point, it is probably unwise to make a camera system that appeals to the least common denominator.

 

There is no way to minimize the features and make everyone happy. (And why not please as many as possible?) But remember you don't have to use all the features.

 

Sorry not even remotely interested. The main reason I stayed with Leica is that it stuck to the essentials and there was NO AF, and no bells and whistles. Those features do get in the way as they bring about compromises I, for one, am not prepared to accept as a long time user.

 

Cheers,

[AlanG]

Sorry not even remotely interested. The main reason I stayed with Leica is that it stuck to the essentials and there was NO AF, and no bells and whistles. Those features do get in the way as they bring about compromises I, for one, am not prepared to accept as a long time user.

 

Cheers,

 

I'm sure there are a number here who might agree with you. Possibly even after you layout all of the "essential" features in full detail. But that may or may not be a viable product.

 

How does image stabilization bring about compromises?

 

How far back do you want to go with what is essential? When I started out, none of my cameras had meters. Do we really need them? I calculated flash by measuring distance and using guide numbers. (Automatic flash and separate flash meters didn't exist then.) I can remember when automatic diaphrams and instant return mirrors were not universal. (And I really didn't like that mirror blackout on my Hassie and switched to the Rollei 6006.)

 

What is essential varies with the needs of each shooter. If you shoot sports or wildlife, a fast frame rate is pretty essential. If you shoot products or architecture, hi resolution is pretty essential. How much should Leica limit its potential market? At one time I used a 400 push-pull Telyt and a 640 Novoflex on an SL and shot motorsports. It was pretty fast focusing but I wouldn't go that route now.

[ho_co]

I don't want to agree with Simon more than necessary (), but you better believe Leica pays attention to what Nikon and Canon are doing.

 

Nikon says they (finally) have a zoom that is better than any of their primes in that focal length range. For at least ten years, many of Leica's zooms have been as good as or better than fixed focal lengths in the same range. That's a place where, to a degree, Nikon has caught up. Maybe their primes aren't as good as Leica's, but at least Nikon now has an f/2.8 wide-angle autofocus zoom that is better than its own comparable primes. That's serious progress that Leica must consider.

 

No, Leica doesn't want a camera that can do 9fps and is usable with reduced-format lenses. But neither can they afford to enter the dSLR market with a camera as out of date as the SL was perceived to be at its introduction.

 

Alan, your argument is very interesting and almost compelling. As M8 users, we appreciate the simplicity of the camera. Same goes, I think, for DMR users. The Japanese approach is quite different. You want GPS connectivity? We've got it. You want the camera to map out and mask dust spots? We've got it. You want the camera to enable you to detect modifications to its files? We've got it. Built-in intervalometer? Built-in 9-frame bracketing, all to the underexpose side if you want? Wireless remote control? It's all there.

 

Of course, that all comes at the cost of simplicity. But Canon has now removed the need to press two buttons simultaneously to access some functions. Nikon has simplified their menu system so that there are fewer levels to reach any function. In other words, they are both simplifying what can be simplified.

 

I don't know how Leica should approach the matter. We traditionalists want superb optics and simplicity of use. But are there enough of us to keep Leica afloat? We want it to feel like a Leica, but does the world care? The SLR market is quite different from the rangefinder market. The R10 has to have something very compelling if professional photographers are going to look at it. It isn't going to be a do-everything camera like the others; but it has to be comparable in some sense. Better lenses on Leica haven't been enough for most photographers to put it in the same category as Nikon and Canon. "Better" in one or two aspects isn't enough when placed against "more versatile."

 

--HC

[mgcd]

How does image stabilization bring about compromises?

 

Why is it needed? As a user, I simply don't need it, never really did, no real appeal for me. Again I would have gone into Nikon or Canon IF that was what I wanted or felt I needed.

 

Cheers,

[AlanG]

Why is it needed? As a user, I simply don't need it, never really did, no real appeal for me. Again I would have gone into Nikon or Canon IF that was what I wanted or felt I needed.

 

Cheers,

 

Well, a lot of my images are sharper because of it. For me, sometimes it is the difference between requiring a tripod or not, or a higher ISO or not or even getting an acceptable shot or not. However you don't need it. So maybe you always shoot with strobe or have lots of light or shoot static objects on a tripod.

 

But I want to know how the presence of image stabilization on a camera could lead to compromises. The only thing I'm compromising is my shakiness when I use it.

 

I would never buy a camera that didn't offer IS at least on a bunch of lenses if not in the body. The same with some other features. Now that I've used them, why would I choose a camera without them? I'm sure I'm not alone with this view.

 

So Leica shouldn't make a camera that appeals to me because I want too much? They should just tell me to use Nikon or Canon?

[sdai]

I don't want to agree with Simon more than necessary (), but you better believe Leica is aware of what Nikon and Canon are doing. ... neither can they afford to enter the dSLR market with a camera as out of date as the SL was perceived to be at its introduction.

 

You can always feel free to disagree with me but, please do not belittle Leica.

 

I've no doubt that Nikon is making progress but I know them all too well ... let's count what they have in the 14-24mm range ... a 14/2.8 ... since 2000, a 16/2.8 fisheye, from 1993, a 20/2.8 since 1994, and a 24/2.8 since 1993.

 

Big deal, they took 15 to 7 years to build a better zoomer.

 

Depending on how "out of date" is defined, we may come to different conclusions ...

 

I prefer to look at things on the brighter side Let's come back to the R10.

 

Worst case, Leica doesn't go much further, they just morph the DMR into its hosting camera and turn that thing into a FF one piece DSLR. Nothing else changes. From the absolute image quality perspective, it still blows the 5D, D3, 40D, D300, etc out of the water.

 

What can Leica lose?

[Jamie Roberts]

Why is it needed? As a user, I simply don't need it, never really did, no real appeal for me. Again I would have gone into Nikon or Canon IF that was what I wanted or felt I needed.

 

Cheers,

 

Well, not to be too contrarian, becasue I agree with Conrad on the R "simplicity" design choice...

 

But as I get older I do shake more than I did, and while I'm still proud that I can hand-hold a relatively long lens (like the 100 APO R) at a relatively slow shutter (say 1/60), I'm not getting any steadier, and certainly not with the longer lenses.

 

So I wouldn't have a problem with a new R 180 or 200 2.8 IS lens Really, I wouldn't... as long as it produced images as beautiful as the current Elmarit 180...

[hamey]

Guy

 

Production of the R9 has already stopped, according to other threads here.

Leica are now out of the SLR market altogether.

 

Has that information been confirmed by Leica.

If so, they should inform their loyal "R" customers.

 

 

Ken.

[andybarton]

If the R9 is anything like the R8, there will be new stock in the market for about 5 years, but I definitely read that the R9 production line has been closed.

 

It was on the internet, so it must be true.

 

I tell you what IS nice though, having an R line to discuss as opposed to "My M8 is rubbish, because..."

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest stnami]

..............sounds like a few gearheads have a couple of their bolts unscrewing their logic for them..................

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[paulmoore]

Sorry not even remotely interested. The main reason I stayed with Leica is that it stuck to the essentials and there was NO AF, and no bells and whistles. Those features do get in the way as they bring about compromises I, for one, am not prepared to accept as a long time user.

 

Cheers,

 

and this is why I switched to leica, I didn't care so much about AF or other N&C bells and whistles,.. I wanted a well machined tool, beatiful image quality,,and I got that with the dmr, for most of my work that is all I need, however there are times when the situation and job would best be served with a af..and fast buffer.. and I realize that most of the industry

is either used to this or in fact actually needs it based on the type of work they shoot.

I want leica to remain germanic in their build and image quality, but they have to be realistic about how few of us can live without AF, not enough to float this company and its stockholders... do they want to sell 1500 r10's or 30,000? Somehow I think they will figure a way to turn off the AF and and the fine focus will still be there, without compromise, or I too will not be interested.

I would bet someone a nice jelly doughnut that a 1000 r9's built and in stock would last them the next 5 years..maybe more.