How much would you pay for the Leica R10 DSLR?

[4season]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Let's assume that the R10 DSLR begins shipping in Nov 2008 and that it features the tried-and-true combination of 1.3x, 10mp and no optical antialiasing, but that it offers improved performance over the DMR and M8 in terms of white balance, high ISO noise and IR sensitivity. No new lens mount, no autofocus, just a very good and attractive R camera.

 

And let's also assume that the failure rates and repair turnaround times are about the same as the M8.

 

What would you be willing to pay for such a beast?

[Iron Flatline]

As someone who currently owns no R lenses, I would pay very little, no more than $3,500. If it had a full-frame sensor and subsequently more pixels, as well as focus confirmation, then I'd go to about $6,000 relatively easily.

 

Those are Leica prices with the premium factored in, for a Canon I'd expect to pay half of what I listed. It's insane, I know, but it's honest.

 

Ergonomics will play a big role in my decision.

[lct]

Let's assume that the R10 DSLR begins shipping in Nov 2008 and that it features the tried-and-true combination of 1.3x, 10mp...

I would say that it is outdated yet and i would wait for the full frame R11.

[rob_x2004]

...that the R10...offers improved performance over the DMR ... terms of white balance, high ISO noise ...

 

Is the DMR lacking in those? I dont have one, just assumed it was a pretty good beast in terms of files it delivers? From what I see teh m8 doesnt match it?

[rosuna]

I think it must be full frame, with 16-18MP (6.8 micron pixels) and a competitive price (less than 5000 euros).

 

In November of 2008 there will be several full frame cameras: the revised 5D (the 5D is less than 2000 euros now), the Nikon D3 (4300 euros), Canon 1Ds Mark III (6000 euros) and, likely, a new Sony Alpha camera (maybe less than 4000 euros). Pentax can't stay out of this new market of full frame cameras. Nikon could expand the full frame set of products. That is the competition for 2008.

[robsteve]

I would pay about what the current full frame 1 series Canon is selling for, maybe a bit more.

 

The R10 will probably be full frame or larger. The DMR was only 1.3x because the sensor had to fit between the existing film rails of the R9. The R10 will not have this limitation.

 

You can't expect the R10 to price like the consumer SLRs from Canon or Nikon.

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I too think that the R10 will be full frame - in fact Leica themselves have hinted at 'full frame or larger'.

 

I also think - and this is purely my own view - the it will feature AF and a new range of AF lenses, but I would very much expect it also to support the existing R lenses.

 

Price? It would certainly be in the ball park of the top end Canon/Nikon's

[marknorton]

I can't see how the R10 can be anything other than Full Frame, though they may go for a different aspect ratio, for example 5:4 which would be about a 6% bigger area image than a 3:2 frame fitted into the same image circle.

 

As for cost, my guess is somewhere above an M8 but not as much as the Canon 21MP monster. All slightly irrelvant to me though because I'm looking forward to spending Christmas getting to know a Nikon D3.

[miami91]

I agree with others. From public comments made by Leica at the LHSA meeting, and given the state of existing technology, it's almost certain to be full-frame, 16+ MP, and have an AF mount (with backwards compatibility, via adapter or whatever, for existing MF lenses). I will be willing to pay 6-8k USD for such a camera, assuming the file quality is as we expect it will be.

 

Jeff.

[sdai]

Price? It would certainly be in the ball park of the top end Canon/Nikon's

 

Nikon's top dog is very affordable by Leica's standard, James ... let's hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

[andybarton]

Let's assume that the R10 DSLR begins shipping in Nov 2008 and that it features the tried-and-true combination of 1.3x, 10mp and no optical antialiasing, but that it offers improved performance over the DMR and M8 in terms of white balance, high ISO noise and IR sensitivity. No new lens mount, no autofocus, just a very good and attractive R camera.

 

Nothing.

 

It will have to be better than my DMR for me to consider spending more thousands of pounds. Tweaks in high ISO ratings won't do it for me.

[sdai]

One's best bet is to buy a ticket to Baghdad ... hanging in the war zone for something interesting, then you'll probably get one for free by winning the Barnack prize. LOL

[rsolomon]

if the R10 is as you describe the used DMR prices will skyrocket, as it offers pretty much the same.

 

i am NOT convinced the R10 will be better then the DMR, i think leica will make an R10 that tries to gain more market share and will compete with N & C.

 

Perhaps this means:

 

some plastics and/or lower quality metals (but still enough high quality),

and/or

new lenses that are not quite up to traditional R lens capabilitiy - but close (eg the new M line of lenses)

 

newer isn;t ALWAYS better.... especailly when the sr mgmt team at leica is trying to change and expand the markt for their products

[telyt]

Nothing.

 

It will have to be better than my DMR for me to consider spending more thousands of pounds. Tweaks in high ISO ratings won't do it for me.

 

Same for me. BTW the DMR doesn't have IR problems, unless IR is what you want, then it's a problem

 

A better viewfinder could interest me, one more like the SL's viewfinder.

[4season]

I haven't gotten to see the new Summarit lenses yet (probably will tomorrow) but as I read the LFI articles about them, they seemed terrific: Solid back-to-basics products with the Leica cachet intact: Not so much an economy product as something new and appealing that just happens to cost less.

 

And that's kind of what I'd like the R10 to be: More Summarit than Summilux. $3500 or less would suit me just fine.

 

(and yes, I am feeling slightly broke as the 30% discount Noctilux has arrived!)

[ptomsu]

Well, to be realistic, I think a FF Leica DSLR will be in a price range of at least a Canon 1DSMkIII. So I would assume $8000-. range.

 

But far more important than the camer price is the pricing of the new AF lenses. If these are 2-3 times more expensive than the best glass of Canon or Nikon, then you can forget the whole system.

 

I personally would pay §8000.- for the R10, if lenses like a 2.8/24-70 would be in a range of $3000.- and a 2.8/70-200 in the same range.

[Guest stnami]

.a safe bet........Guy will buy it:)

[hankg]

It depends on the cameras specs.

 

If it is the rumored larger then 24x36 very high res R10 -it would be competing with the $8,000 Canon and the $10,000 Mamiya ZD. 8-12,000 would not be a surprise for that sort of camera.

 

If it's a full frame 16MP $5,600. That would probably be an almost 100% premium over the new 5D II.

 

If it's a crop format 10MP $2400. (but for 10MP I'd go for the weather sealed $1600. Olympus E3). I don't think they could sell such a camera unless it sold for a very un-Leica price.

 

Leica does not have the pricing flexibility with the R it has with the M. It is in a much more competitive market when it comes to DSLR's.

[lieberdavid]

Hi Everyone,

 

I've had every R model but the R9 and have loved them. Like many others I'm waiting for the R10. I have not yet bought a serious digital camera, because the specifications just aren't there yet. If the R10 comes out with the specs listed in the original poster's message, I'd have no interest in the camera at all.

 

I want to be able to make large prints, such as I have been doing for years with my film R's. This means I want to be able to make 26" x 40" prints at a minimum of 200 dpi. Arithmetic shows that a 40 megapixel sensor will be needed for this.

 

I have heard that Kodak has a new technology that will enable sensors of that size shortly. I'm going to wait for an R Leica to have it (M, too, for that matter).

 

Cheers,

David

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[hankg]

H

 

I want to be able to make large prints, such as I have been doing for years with my film R's. This means I want to be able to make 26" x 40" prints at a minimum of 200 dpi. Arithmetic shows that a 40 megapixel sensor will be needed for this.

 

Simplistic mathematical formulas will tell you nothing about the digital resolution you need for large prints. 35mm film will not give you a sharp 40" print so I don't know why you would expect a 35mm digicam to be able to do it. You might find them acceptable but A B them to prints made from MF or LF and any one would easily see the difference. The current camera will match the quality of 35mm color film up to sizes that would be reasonable for 35mm.

 

As a real world reality check -many critical Art Directors and agency clients that would not accept 35mm film -nothing less then medium format quality would do are taking 35mm DSLR files for 2 page ad spreads.