jaapv Posted January 8, 2008 Share #21 Posted January 8, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) You are not so wrong - it could possibly happen, the question however, is whether it will happen:o Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2008 Posted January 8, 2008 Hi jaapv, Take a look here kodak sensor upgrade when available? . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sdai Posted January 8, 2008 Share #22 Posted January 8, 2008 So buy a camera made in China - what is stopping you? You don't even get what I was talking about before you jump the gun .... I don't really care about the amount of money I spend, all I wanted to say is that the cost on material is much lower than those on labor or whatever, ok? Read my post carefully if you care to reply. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 8, 2008 Share #23 Posted January 8, 2008 Yup- And I am saying the cost of labor is much lower in countries whose social system we would not like to copy. Although: Union and Social Welfare sucks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted January 8, 2008 Share #24 Posted January 8, 2008 .... I don't really care about the amount of money I spend, all I wanted to say is that the cost on material is much lower than those on labor or whatever, ok? Simon, If cost is no object, then this discussion is moot -- right? As reflected by its prices, Leica is a luxury brand. Rather than begrudge a hard-working technician his wages, I feel lucky to be able to afford some of what the company makes. If my luck goes south; then I'll feel lucky to buy groceries. As far as the original topic is concerned, I think it's highly unlikely that Leica will ever offer a sensor upgrade. Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted January 8, 2008 Share #25 Posted January 8, 2008 Mark can correct me if I misremembered, but his teardown showed that the box containing the sensor, its dimensions defined by the battery on one side and the shutter mechanism on the other, was too small to allow a full frame sensor. These things would have to be redesigned a bit to fit one in, and retrofitting a FF sensor would require changing one or the other side. Plus some changes in the RF framing subsystem. I'm not holding my breath for a retrofit, but am saving for an M9. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted January 8, 2008 Share #26 Posted January 8, 2008 If cost is no object, then this discussion is moot -- right? Larry, it was part of my response to Jamie when he mentioned about the cost of parts inside - and I think it's trivial when compared to labor and markup, whatever ... and you're right, cost isn't an issue actually, technically ... it's simply not doable IMO (not at a reasonable cost at least). Of course, Leica could make the camera modular ... that's to separate the camera part from the digital functions but I'm afraid then it'll turn out to be a weirdo none of the die-hard Leica aficionados will like. I'll try to keep my response as simple as possible ... maybe I'm typing too fast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 8, 2008 Share #27 Posted January 8, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Mark can correct me if I misremembered, but his teardown showed that the box containing the sensor, its dimensions defined by the battery on one side and the shutter mechanism on the other, was too small to allow a full frame sensor. These things would have to be redesigned a bit to fit one in, and retrofitting a FF sensor would require changing one or the other side. Plus some changes in the RF framing subsystem. I'm not holding my breath for a retrofit, but am saving for an M9. scott Yeah...one difference for me is that I want my list and I don't really care if they keep the same size sensor, as long as it has the improved performance in terms of IR, noise, artifacts and final files. So Leica has an opportunity to make these updates available *alongside* an M9 that promises even more, like full-frame-ness and higher DR, etc... @ Simon--and yeah, my point was precisely about labour costs. It would cost next to nothing in labour to replace modular electronics; it costs a lot more to rebuild the rangefinder or the mechanics of the M8, no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbelyaev Posted January 9, 2008 Share #28 Posted January 9, 2008 M8 is a good camera. I see no reason to upgrade its sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilihead Posted January 9, 2008 Share #29 Posted January 9, 2008 And we will call it the "Liekon" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveSee Posted January 9, 2008 Share #30 Posted January 9, 2008 Sensor upgrade will never happen ... because all supporting electronics will need to be upgraded as well - which is no different from giving you a brand new camera. Think it this way ... when you go from Pentium 2 to Pentium 4 ... now Core 2 Duo, Core 2 QUAD, it's easier to buy a new computer. Going to FF would be a stretch, but having swapped out four main-boards in the same computer shell, Mr. Roberts is not suggesting an un-imaginable/doable/finacable feat. In fact, Mr. Norton's tear-down clearly shows that the camera's design could be "upgraded". The M8 has three distinct "nodes": VF, Shutter, Sensor. That's why Mr. Reid's "shutter release button" as "Sensor ASIC actuator" was a non-starter... and why the shutter-speed dial is either "A" or "manual". I'd agree that labor cost to swap the Sensor node(and likely power supply means) would be "costly", compared to selling an M9(sic); however, it would make more sense(if any) to sell new M8's with upgraded Sensor(including what folks here would desire) and the option to current M8 owners to upgrade, than to release an M9... In a few years, FF will be a MF P&S. Smaller sensors are not evil! Digital has drastically changed the game, as we know... even Guy's interested in an Alpa Who'd of thought LF lenses would race back to haunt us? Well, I've kept a few rgds, Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest andre56 Posted January 9, 2008 Share #31 Posted January 9, 2008 Use an analog M Model and you can upgrade the sensor whenever you want Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 9, 2008 Share #32 Posted January 9, 2008 . Smaller sensors are not evil! Finally somebody who has not been flattened by the Full-Frame marketing steamroller... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted January 9, 2008 Share #33 Posted January 9, 2008 Given the service backlog and turnaround times, I think it's highly unlikely Leica would offer an upgrade. There are all sorts of complications retro-fitting new stuff into an old body such as power requirements, warranty; besides, I expect Leica would much rather see a lower priced secondhand market established to allow a lower cost of entry by keeping M8s as they are. My M8 key issues list runs to these 7 items: - Frame Size - ISO Sensitivity/Image Noise/Dynamic Range - IR Sensitivity - Mechanical Noise - Body Thickness - Viewfinder Framing Accuracy - Focussing Accuracy so an updated M8 or M9 only makes sense to me if significant progress is made on each. An M8-2 mid-life makeover with just lower image noise and a la carte would be met by me with a shrug of the shoulders. That list sums up the whole camera as a quite bad piece of gear, doesn't it? Who would buy a thick camera which has focussing, noise and IR sensitivity issues, plus problems with framing accuracy, bad dynamic range, as well as being noisy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted January 9, 2008 Share #34 Posted January 9, 2008 oh dear - let's not get into the question of the quality of the existing camera (plenty of people more than happy with it) - but the sensor size question relates to the character of the lenses as well as the special characteristics of the sensors themselves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egibaud Posted January 9, 2008 Share #35 Posted January 9, 2008 BMW is about to update their 5 serie... can I take the new engine into my old 520i ? ....... Nikon just produced the new D3.... can I update my D2 sensor with the D3 one???? Come on give me a break !!!!! even if it was technically possible... why should they make a commercial non sense???? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 9, 2008 Share #36 Posted January 9, 2008 That list sums up the whole camera as a quite bad piece of gear, doesn't it? Who would buy a thick camera which has focussing, noise and IR sensitivity issues, plus problems with framing accuracy, bad dynamic range, as well as being noisy? Um, no: it's all relative. We all buy stuff that does better or worse at any given time. But the M8 does suffer from some imaging artifacts that should be vanquished. And if noise response can be improved by a hardware upgrade, then that would be great. Again, I don't see this as a way to get an M9 cheaply; it's about a philosophy of continuous improvement, conservatism of resources, and building things to last. These are novel industrial ideas these days, and certainly novel for camera manufacturers! That doesn't mean they're wrong any more than it means the M8 is a bad camera. It's not--but it could be improved. FWIW, the BMW upgrade from one model to another then isn't exactly the right analogy--it's more like upgrading the existing engine with new electronics, or replacing the engine with something that works better. Yes, you could do that; it wouldn't be cheap though, say around half the original cost of the car And as to why Leica should do it, well, I don't know their numbers but I know they're not in the same game as Canon or Nikon. They will never be in that race with the M series either. I actually think they could grow their entire market share this way, but that's just me, maybe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
okram Posted January 9, 2008 Share #37 Posted January 9, 2008 Um, no: it's all relative. We all buy stuff that does better or worse at any given time. But the M8 does suffer from some imaging artifacts that should be vanquished. And if noise response can be improved by a hardware upgrade, then that would be great. Again, I don't see this as a way to get an M9 cheaply; it's about a philosophy of continuous improvement, conservatism of resources, and building things to last. These are novel industrial ideas these days, and certainly novel for camera manufacturers! That doesn't mean they're wrong any more than it means the M8 is a bad camera. It's not--but it could be improved. FWIW, the BMW upgrade from one model to another then isn't exactly the right analogy--it's more like upgrading the existing engine with new electronics, or replacing the engine with something that works better. Yes, you could do that; it wouldn't be cheap though, say around half the original cost of the car And as to why Leica should do it, well, I don't know their numbers but I know they're not in the same game as Canon or Nikon. They will never be in that race with the M series either. I actually think they could grow their entire market share this way, but that's just me, maybe. I very much agree. Had a look at the Marknortons anatomy of the camera, and it does not look impossible, even looks easy to do (but my knowledge on this is very poor). Why does M8 have a FF (loud) shutter? "it's about a philosophy of continuous improvement, conservatism of resources, and building things to last." Nice sentence. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 9, 2008 Share #38 Posted January 9, 2008 {snipped}"it's about a philosophy of continuous improvement, conservatism of resources, and building things to last." Nice sentence. Thanks Marko--though it's a pre-coffee sentence I wish I had said "conservation of resources" instead. Ah well. It's something to think about, and even though I'd be delighted to see this happen, I'll be surprised if it does Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted January 9, 2008 Share #39 Posted January 9, 2008 As far as I can see, the only way the sensor upgrade idea might work for Leica is if they released a camera that was specifically designed and priced accordingly for that purpose. If what's been said in this thread is true, the design of a digital camera which gave this option shouldn't be too challenging, and Leica could then market it as 'the last digital body you'll ever need to buy'. But then they will need to sell it at a decent premium to reflect the increased longevity of a product which is nowadays part of a consumer-driven cycle of new releases. But the M8 has been designed, marketed and sold (and priced) as a model with a limited lifespan - and Leica will have done exhaustive calculations on the anticipated term before their user-base will need to buy the next model. I therefore can't see any logic in Leica deciding to sacrifice resources and M9 sales in order to maintain the goodwill of people who have already bought one of their cameras, rather than potential purchasers of an entirely new product. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted January 9, 2008 Share #40 Posted January 9, 2008 {snipped}But the M8 has been designed, marketed and sold (and priced) as a model with a limited lifespan - and Leica will have done exhaustive calculations on the anticipated term before their user-base will need to buy the next model. I therefore can't see any logic in Leica deciding to sacrifice resources and M9 sales in order to maintain the goodwill of people who have already bought one of their cameras, rather than potential purchasers of an entirely new product. Mani, you're probably correct. But again, I can see whole new markets opening up (and more M9 and follow-on sales) with a move like this; it's differentiation in a market which is very, very similar in its approach. For example, I would certainly buy the upgrade plus the M9 when available, and would forgo having an SLR backup (not an SLR, I still need one of those). If this was an indication of how Leica would do business, it might be very compelling for portable shooters. I don't think it makes sense where people primarily lease equipment like higher end MF stuff, though some of the arguments make sense. In one sense this is a tribute to Leica's getting the M8 ergonomics and design almost completely right (IMO). One reason other companies up date their cameras is to make them "easier to use" but the M8 is "timeless" in that sense (not to say it couldn't be improved, but the improvements are incremental and tiny, no?) Anyway, it's all speculation But Leica opened up the door themselves when they mentioned the possibility of upgrading the framelines for the M8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.