ken_tanaka Posted February 27, 2008 Share #41 Posted February 27, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Leica's statement, in itself, reveals no news. But that Leica, a normally mute little company, felt the need to issue any statement at all suggests that Lee's statement at PMA did indeed leave a bruise. Also this passage regarding the M system's future: "It is too early to say what changes will be made. However, it is likely that the path may differ from the one set by Steven Lee." "It is likely that the path may differ from the one set by Steven Lee." That's like a meteorologist saying, "It probably might snow sometime this month." This is a company bubbling, and babbling, in turmoil right now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 27, 2008 Posted February 27, 2008 Hi ken_tanaka, Take a look here Leica Statement on the M8's Future. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted February 27, 2008 Share #42 Posted February 27, 2008 You are making the classic internet hype mistakes here: 1. You are assuming and speaking for everyone. 2. You most definitely missing information. Excuse me? Where do I claim to be speaking for anybody? And it strikes me everybody is missing information. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted February 27, 2008 Share #43 Posted February 27, 2008 Excuse me? Where do I claim to be speaking for anybody?And it strikes me everybody is missing information. Jaapv I think the fallacy in your argument might be that you are assuming that the 25000 who bought the M8 don't want full frame. They bought the M8 because they wanted an M8, crop-factor and all, because that is what is currently available. You can't infer that they wouldn't want full frame if that was available. Maybe only 25 of these 25000 wouldn't actually want full frame if available, thus reversing your ratio? Who knows - I don't! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cordell Posted February 27, 2008 Share #44 Posted February 27, 2008 If you don't want either of the new features, $1800 is an insane amount of money to pay just in case your M8 goes wrong - 1/3 of the price of a new camera. Better put it in the bank and who knows, you might come out ahead. Yours is a valid point of course. But I've had both of my M8's shutters replaced under warranty because they both suddenly--and identically--developed bent blades and jammed. This is identical to a number of other reports by other users. I do not know if there was a small batch of faulty shutters, or if all of them are ticking time-bombs. Nobody knows for certain. I choose to believe, cynical as it may appear to some, that the "upgrade" shutter is a preemptive strike on Leica's part to make a profit replacing as many shutters as possible before they may otherwise need to replace them at their own cost under warranty. I've heard the "upgraded" shutter and contrary to the reports of others, it doesn't sound that much ($1800) quieter than the present one. So my thought was, given there may be a resonable chance my shutters may jam again after the warranty expires, it might not be wholly insane to have the upgrade done proactively, and get the damn things warranteed for another two years in the process. I would think, since Leica had a similar program for the M-film bodies, that they would offer to check/service the M8 and issue a 2 year warranty for let's say $500-600 without doing the feature upgrades. If they do, I'd go for it when my warranties expire. If Leica will not do it without changing the shutter, then (again, to my cynical mind) that would suggest that Leica does in fact doubt the durability of the present shutter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 27, 2008 Share #45 Posted February 27, 2008 Jaapv I think the fallacy in your argument might be that you are assuming that the 25000 who bought the M8 don't want full frame. They bought the M8 because they wanted an M8, crop-factor and all, because that is what is currently available. You can't infer that they wouldn't want full frame if that was available. Maybe only 25 of these 25000 wouldn't actually want full frame if available, thus reversing your ratio? Who knows - I don't! Nor I. But I can speak for myself - and 9 other M8 owners in my circle of aquaintances - and none have any interest, especially considering the technical difficulties with its attendant compromises and problems and likely price. If a 36 mm M camera were introduced today I cannot see it be priced at less than 10.000 Euro. I'm sure interest would turn out to be minimal..There is a silly poll going on on RFF on this topic right now, and most opinions voiced there seem to be in vein of "I couldn't care less" Anyway, it is a tradeoff between technical possibilties (nil as I see it at the moment), marketing considerations and price and I find it quite logical that Leica is trying to squash speculation created by Mr. Lee's unfortunate interview. As such I find the speculation about FF R cameras vs cropped M series cameras in AP the logical conclusion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted February 27, 2008 Share #46 Posted February 27, 2008 In theory, when I look at the photos from a regular distance, I see great image quality. But when it comes right down to it, 10 MP is definitely holding the better aspherics back. In high contrast situations, I still get strange blooming and other artifacts. And lets not even go there in regards to moire.. It's nice, but there is definitely room for improvement. There is always room for improvement and we can assume that the next model will be better then the last in pixel count and ISO performance. As to moire it's a trade off when you give up the AA filter that I for one am happy to make. Wouldn't want to be shooting a catalog for a manufacturer of tweed and herringbone fabrics though:) For a 35mm Rangefinder IQ is adequate. For most subjects, in print, the camera does a stellar job compared to other 35's. There are occaisions when the lack of AA or the 10MP will be limitations but it was never intended as a replacement for a DSLR. It is a camera that does well in it's niche. At this point it might be better if the M8-2 was the same image quality but cheaper and more reliable then the M8. That might do more to broaden the sales base. Of all the upgrades Leica could make to the M8 my pick would be an upgrade to the Leica service department. If I knew that my camera would be back in a week or 2 instead of 2 or 3 months in case of a failure that would do more then the possibility of a full frame sensor in terms of making the camera more attractive. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thai.charlie Posted February 27, 2008 Share #47 Posted February 27, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Of all the upgrades Leica could make to the M8 my pick would be an upgrade to the Leica service department. If I knew that my camera would be back in a week or 2 instead of 2 or 3 months in case of a failure that would do more then the possibility of a full frame sensor in terms of making the camera more attractive. Yes. Absolutely. I can't imagine how Leica can handle future upgrading on the M8 (even with booking times when you should send the camera in, etc.) when it seems they simply don't have the numbers of trained personnel to handle current issues... lens coding, calibration, etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guy Posted February 27, 2008 Share #48 Posted February 27, 2008 I don't see the problem really. Sure, FF would be fun and allow me to use my lenses differently, but I'm getting nearly all the IQ I want from the current sensor. Improve noise at higher ISOs - YES, bigger sensor? Don't really see much point - it's not a holy grail. Still happy with my one remaining M8 and happy to invest in a replacement for the one stolen on Monday. IMHO Leica's not dead, and neither is the M8 broken. Let's bet back to making pictures ... I don't find the speculation very helpful... I'm with Chris – at least on the first part of this post. FF isn't a big deal for me; improvements in high-ISO performance certainly are. I'd love to see Leica implement a sensor-replacement option in their upgrade programme (IF they persevere with the programme – and I'm hoping they will) but for my money the way to go would be a straight swap of the ageing cropped sensor for a shiny new up-to-date cropped sensor that can, ooh, let's say, take good shots with controlled noise and no banding at ISO 6400. That would make me a very happy bunny – enough so that I'd shell out the undoubtedly huge amount of cash that this would involve. I might even get toughened glass at the same time What the press statement from Leica does seem to leave hanging is whether the upgrade programme will continue to exist at all. They certainly seem in a bit of a spin. Fingers crossed... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted February 27, 2008 Share #49 Posted February 27, 2008 If I knew that my camera would be back in a week or 2 instead of 2 or 3 months in case of a failure that would do more then the possibility of a full frame sensor in terms of making the camera more attractive. This is the number one issue I have with the M8 and why I am considering selling it, the IR filters would be the second. If I have an issue with the M8 that requires that I send it in for service and it will be gone for 2-3 months, then I might as well not have it at all. This is where Leica needs to start first, proper service and perhaps a pro service level that is like CPS or NPS and gets the camera back in no more than two weeks. I can't even begin to look at overpriced upgrades that are not even supposed to start happing until nearly the Fall until Leica creates a better service T/A time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted February 27, 2008 Share #50 Posted February 27, 2008 Well, as a different data point only, I'd jump on a full-frame so fast it wouldn't be funny. That said, my priorities in a sensor / electronics update package would be these: no image artifacts remain (no green streak). This one needs fixing for event shooters, period. better ISO performance, but I don't care about ISO 25000. (much) faster buffer and SDHC supprt full frame and a bit more resolution (12mp would be fine for me). Why? I want my Leica wides to be wide, thanks . There is nothing fast and wide from Leica on the digital M side right now, and the crop only makes that more difficult to rectify. no IR filters necessary The faster Leica can do this, the better IMO. Service should of course be more effective and efficient, too, please. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted February 27, 2008 Share #51 Posted February 27, 2008 I guess I should talk about making a "good" profit instead of eying on "breaking even" ... especially when their Q3 profit of 1.8 millions is considered BAD by the board, then how much is GOOD? For a company the size of Leica (~950 employees) a profit of 1.8 million is better than a loss, but it's right next to a loss. Given the cost of labor and doing business in Germany, if labor costs go up at the rate of inflation, the profit would vanish... JC Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted February 27, 2008 Share #52 Posted February 27, 2008 Well, as a different data point only, I'd jump on a full-frame so fast it wouldn't be funny. That said, my priorities in a sensor / electronics update package would be these: no image artifacts remain (no green streak). This one needs fixing for event shooters, period. better ISO performance, but I don't care about ISO 25000. (much) faster buffer and SDHC supprt full frame and a bit more resolution (12mp would be fine for me). Why? I want my Leica wides to be wide, thanks . There is nothing fast and wide from Leica on the digital M side right now, and the crop only makes that more difficult to rectify. no IR filters necessary The faster Leica can do this, the better IMO. Service should of course be more effective and efficient, too, please. Nice list, I agree. The troubling thing is that not even a single one of these has been addressed in a $1,800 "Upgrade". Leica announced the upgrade program some time ago. So figure from the time they announce future upgrade packages, it might take them up to 6 months to even start on it ( of course well over that on this first one ). And who knows how many new upgrade packages we might see in a years time, one? That is a lot of time. I don't think any of the above list can be addressed with upgrades, I think it will have to be a new camera. I also don't think that the upgrade program will be very popular with mediocre upgrades like these for nearly two grand if that is the way it continues. And there is no clarity on what is going to happen. It is really about as vague as it can get. Some of us don't have time for vague, we have to get on with making pictures using products with proven track records, solid service for repairs and a reasonable outline for future product releases and or upgrades. Right now, the future of the M8 is in very murky waters. I don't know how much longer I am willing to wait and see what happens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Flatline Posted February 27, 2008 Share #53 Posted February 27, 2008 There is nothing to add to this thread, but in the hopes that Leica management reads these posts, here goes: The press release is confusing to me, and makes me worry about the future. It does not tell me whether an M8 will be upgraded or whether an M9 is coming... thus freezing my willingness to commit to the upgrade path. What would be the point if an M9 is only 18 months away? It does not tell me whether a digital SLR is coming - the flagship comment was confusing to me as well. I am in the market for a good dSLR. I have a number of Canon L lenses and some Leica R glass... and am waiting to buy a 1D until Photokina. If an R10 is coming, I will evaluate that. Saying the M8 will be the flagship makes me worry that no R10 is on the way any time soon, if at all. Leica's PR department needs serious help. I am German, I know everyone always goes ballistic when cultures are perceived in a generalized way, but let me tell you... German businesses are typically not good at PR, and Leica seems to be doing a crap job even by German standards. I think Kaufmann needs to hire some professionals... and then let them actually do their job! It might prove to be in the best interest for his investment... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afineman Posted February 27, 2008 Share #54 Posted February 27, 2008 There are 2 reasons that I want a full frame digital rangefinder that takes my Leica M lenses: Reason #1 is my 28mm f2.0 lens Reason #2 is my 21mm f2.8 lens I am getting by with my 15mm Voigtlander now, but I miss that extra f-stop in both of my lenses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
danyves Posted February 27, 2008 Share #55 Posted February 27, 2008 There are 2 reasons that I want a full frame digital rangefinder that takes my Leica M lenses:Reason #1 is my 28mm f2.0 lens Reason #2 is my 21mm f2.8 lens I am getting by with my 15mm Voigtlander now, but I miss that extra f-stop in both of my lenses. That is a real and strong point. Same here for me. And hence using the 28 mm without external viewfinder. I now rely on the 2.8/24mm.And also miss the extra stop missing on the 21mm and the 15mm. On this gaffer small strips to hold the UV/IR filter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cordell Posted February 27, 2008 Share #56 Posted February 27, 2008 What about if Leica designed some fast, wide-angle lenses to cope with the crop factor? Lens designing is, after all, Leica's acknowledged forte. This as opposed to bowing to pressure from a few people married to the idea that 24x36mm is a standard handed down from God himself, and ending up rushing a FF M to market that has serious corner-performance issues with those very same short-exit-pupil lenses you covet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted February 27, 2008 Share #57 Posted February 27, 2008 What about if Leica designed some fast, wide-angle lenses to cope with the crop factor? Lens designing is, after all, Leica's acknowledged forte. This as opposed to bowing to pressure from a few people married to the idea that 24x36mm is a standard handed down from God himself, and ending up rushing a FF M to market that has serious corner-performance issues with those very same short-exit-pupil lenses you covet. Ye cannae fight the laws of physics... Regards, Bill Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted February 27, 2008 Share #58 Posted February 27, 2008 There is nothing to add to this thread, but in the hopes that Leica management reads these posts, here goes: The press release is confusing to me, and makes me worry about the future. It does not tell me whether an M8 will be upgraded or whether an M9 is coming... thus freezing my willingness to commit to the upgrade path. What would be the point if an M9 is only 18 months away? It does not tell me whether a digital SLR is coming - the flagship comment was confusing to me as well. I am in the market for a good dSLR. I have a number of Canon L lenses and some Leica R glass... and am waiting to buy a 1D until Photokina. If an R10 is coming, I will evaluate that. Saying the M8 will be the flagship makes me worry that no R10 is on the way any time soon, if at all. Leica's PR department needs serious help. I am German, I know everyone always goes ballistic when cultures are perceived in a generalized way, but let me tell you... German businesses are typically not good at PR, and Leica seems to be doing a crap job even by German standards. I think Kaufmann needs to hire some professionals... and then let them actually do their job! It might prove to be in the best interest for his investment... I agree with everything in your post, except to add this is more than a PR problem. It shows, IMHO, a management floudering with no business and product strategy. Yes, Koufmann should let pros run the company, but apparently he already decided not to by firing Lee. Like you, I have M and R glass plus Canon L's. Its looking more and more like continuing with Canon SLR for me . Alan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted February 27, 2008 Share #59 Posted February 27, 2008 I can't believe any copy in AP is capable of generating 3 pages of comments. Guys, we need to get a grip...... LouisB Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JumpStart Posted February 27, 2008 Share #60 Posted February 27, 2008 I don't have much to add here, but it would appear, in my opinion that any upgrade program may be in jeopardy. Until I see Leica actually selling the certificates for this first upgrade, I would make an assumption the upgrade won't happen. I know for a fact, no one at Leica has a job of monitoring the forums. Of course some people do visit here, but it is not an official job or requirement. Perhaps this means we will get little if any info for the foreseeable future. I really like me M8. I don't think I would send it in for an upgrade, or pay the cash being proposed around here. I also don't have $10K to spend on the fictitious M9 or FF M8 people are speculating about. Lately, speculation is running rampant here. Is it too late to suggest people enjoy the M8, and forget about tomorrow. What ever happens will happen, I don't think the opinions here are based on anything more than speculation. That has not proven to be correct in my experience. My 2 cents Don't forget about 1 Leica Day. It's Friday! DBK 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.