M8 in the future

[ghindle]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was just having a conversation with a couple of guys about the difference between the longevity of digital cameras as opposed to film. They are both Canon users and basically accept the built in obsolescence.

 

For Leica users this is something that we will ahve to get used to. I continue to buy lenses ( old and new) for my M4 & M6. As long as I service them i expect excellent results. For sure I am losing the choice of films, developers etc but am still happy to take the M4 out at weekends.

 

In purchasing a Digital camera - i have a DMR and have ordered and M8 - I really worry that not long after i purchase one the next model is being designed and mine will be obsolete. What would happen to the price of a M8 if a full frame sensor was announced?

 

I cant see the same secondhand market for used digital M's. The technology will have moved on and the quality will improve. I am not saying that the original camera is not good quality just that Leica will have to offer more to attract customers. I dont think i want ot spend a fortune every time a new improved sensor appears.

 

One day a manufacturer will have to provide upgrade paths or some other ingenious business model. I suppose the problem is bigger with Digital backs. They have massive proce reduction ins the s/h market

 

Any thoughts ?

[gareth_c]

I think that is true to an extent. However many digital cameras have reached a point where, for non-professional purposes at least, the achievable output is of a good enough quality.

 

My R-D1 is already a couple fo years old but I find the results to be excellent and for the sizes I may print or use digitally I am pretty happy.

 

The next digital M will, I assume, bring full frame and that might well be a reason to upgrade but I can't see that many would want to pay up again if the crop factor remains.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Well there will always be technology improvements to digital. I started with a 24 thousand dollar Kodak 420 that by todays standards was a royol piece of crap and it was . The noise was so bad on that thing. But a lot of those growing pains in digital have gone away to some extent. here is the issue now that folks simply do not understand because of marketing pressure out there with MPX on camera's. canon is a prime example of keep upping the Mpx war and that is part of the marketing . most folks think that if they keep upping the Mpx on there camera's they are gaining improvement and need to upgrade every year or 2 years . The problem with that is folks don't understand there are area's that are actually more important and for the hobbyist these folks get hit the hardest with marketing because there only looking at MPX. There is so much more involved than just this. the Dynamic Range , Tonal Range , Bit depth , AA filter, Firmare and Raw processing software all play major roles in the final image and this area gets left out of the marketing hype and mostly just aims at MPX. This is really to bad. Let's take the new M8 for example and you can add the DMR also to this. here is what it has that no other DSLR or rangefinder digital has and the is Color Bit depth of 16 bits, also No AA filter , Much better Dynamic Range. Now you don't hear about this in marketing from canon or Nikon because they hide it and are working on marketing MPX. For example i have done a lot of testing on the DMR vs the canon 1dsMKII 10 Mpx Vs 16mpx. now given the marketing hype out there one would think 16 mpx would be better than 10 mpx. well i am here to tell you wrong the 10 mpx camera DMR produced sharper looking files than the 10 mpx camera and reason is no AA filter , 16 bit , better tonal range , contrast , saturation and so on all the contributing factors that give you a nicer file. now having said that without improvements in DR and area's like that from the OEM's than really they are just releasing more bells and whistles than actually improving the image . So is your M8 going to obsoletet in a year, nor freaking way in the world. it already has all the great things going for it, 16 bit , great DR and so on. My DMR will go on another 2 years if i wanted too, but i still have my 30 k in lenses to last till i drop. don't get caught up in I need to replace your digital leica's becuase they are already ahead of many others. This line I hear is Leica is behind the curve is absolute stupidity on folks that don't understand they really are ahead of most everyone else. The only folks making camera's or digital to the same standards that leica has today are MF digital backs and what do they have 16 bit, No AA filters, Dynamic range, color, contrast , saturation and so on. so stop listening to the marketing hype, it's there to do one thing and one thing only make money.

 

now don't get me wrong Canon and Nikon make great stuff and i really liked the D200 but there is much more to this than the brain washing that goes on with regards to MPX.

[john_r_smith]

I would not assume that a full-frame M9 is at all likely. The difficulties of getting a good image on a full-frame sensor from the existing M lenses may be too great, even with a lot of post-processing in camera. Note that so far, there has been no full-frame 6x6cm digital back for Hasselblad cameras either, nor is one likely to happen any time soon.

 

So the question regarding obsolesence is a good one. Remember that an older digital camera may satisfy existing users (as doubtless the Digilux 2 does) but it will not attract new purchasers in a highly competitive marketplace. So I would expect that a five year old M8 will look rather under-specified and lacking in performance in the marketplace of 2011, and that its resale value will be correspondingly low. If you are used to the very high residuals of Leica film cameras, this may come as a shock.

 

John

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I agree looking and waiting for FF sensor will be a long long wait. Just not able to do that with CCD sensors until ther eis a way to mass produce them with with much higher production yields. that size CCD today is in Phase one backs on a limited numkber and look at those cost. you need mass production and much better yields to get these costs down to affordable levels. or Leica need to invest hundreds of millions in a CCD factory

[gareth_c]

It will be an interesting few years for the digtal M i guess. Perhaps the next version won't be full frame as I had assumed. Which makes me wonder about the selling points of future Digial M's can be. However, there are enough issues here on the forums already (before people have even used it) that couldn't all be solved with a firmware upgrade (if Leica would even do such a thing).

 

Also, we know little about the quality of the images yet (especially when used with a wide range of lenses) and we know even less about its long term usability.

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica's track record on digital longevity up to now has not been good or representative of their normal practice because with the exception of the DMR, their products have all be made in big batches by Fuji/Panaonsic and then put out to market; when the last few are sold, that's it. End of the Line.

 

With the system cameras, the investment in lenses is what has to be preserved and that's where the value retention is as the body technology moves on. It's possible we might get a firmware mid-life makeover, such as we are seeing/saw in the Nikon D2X/Epson R-D1, but at some point, there will be a replacement which will leave the M8 behind.

 

I work on the basis of a 3 year life in estimating the cost of the camera. £20/€29/$36 a week. If at the end of the 3 year period, there's nothing to replace it with, it's a bonus, but if Leica come out with something to replace it in less than 3 years, I'll be surprised.

[Bob Ross]

I work on the basis of a 3 year life in estimating the cost of the camera. £20/€29/$36 a week. If at the end of the 3 year period, there's nothing to replace it with, it's a bonus, but if Leica come out with something to replace it in less than 3 years, I'll be surprised.

Hi Mark,

That is a good approach, but for the top end models (the pros?) there is an increasing time between models, closer to four years. My E-1 will be three years old 10-10-06 and its replacement wont be out until next year. At the three year mark the whole system will have cost $36 a week, right in line with your figures. Bonus time approaches:cool:

The form factors on the top end models has become so refined that upgrades become incremental, instead of monumental. I am sure that there will be some classics born that will go on clicking beyond several generations of obsolescence. I have a few examples in my collection. The M8, as a camera and not considering sensor evolution, is a classic at birth. Sensor evolution might give us some amazing improvements or then again just incremental ones. After we all have our M8s for a few years, we can tell Leica how to improve on the classic:D

Bob

[vic vic]

hi all...

 

two points here i would like to adress....

 

1. a question??? does people, or great photographers were concerned tat much about the upgrades in film technology:-))) or lenses tecnology??? i mean, have they gave up on buying ilford hp3 because in the future there will be hp5??? did they stoped buying summicron because they thought that later there will be new summicron????do we stop buying computers becase in about two years this computer wil be almost useless????

 

mark norton made a very simple reply here - it is well known.... u buy the digi camera... u save some money on film. the more u photograph actually the more u save here.

add to it the concidiration of wether u see benefit from using digital or not...

 

the original thread would be relavant if it was asked in next two years, not now, now the camera is new, so i suppose it is close to what technology has to offer at this stage in this small package.

 

2. the upgrade options offeredd by manifacturers... well, i know that both leaf digi backs and phase one (and maybe even imacon) have it. im into the studies of it now, cause i seriously concider the move to digi for pro works and my future grow.

i have to say... the digi backs have less problem at this stage... they offer already now some stuning technology that will sutisfy for many years. if one buys their latest digi back now, i hardly imagine any justification of upgrading it in the near future. pay attention - there is some standartization now in the medium format - the sensor physical size is about the same, their resolutions and performance all in all are about the same. next step would be chalanging the large format camera performances (the 9x12 / 4x5). but this is different story. a very good additional indication is the new system offered by sinar (the sinar m). the lenses are new, the sinar/janoptics back is new, the camera new... and it is very much head by head with hasselblad new h camera. so we are in some standartization here already. means - less worries for upgrade issues, even if they do offer programs of this kind.

 

with small cameras it is more difficult. but then - think about it - small camerra always means smaller prints, less quality compared to medium. so the differance remains here too.

 

i have already expressed my love to film on this site even the color films that look different and "better" than digital (not to mention b/w which has its own place of course). but this doesnt mean that the fault is in quality of high-end digi solutions. it is just different.

[andybarton]

 

mark norton made a very simple reply here - it is well known.... u buy the digi camera... u save some money on film. the more u photograph actually the more u save here.

add to it the concidiration of wether u see benefit from using digital or not.

 

Yes, but you have to spend your money on SD cards, RAW conversion software, card readers, burnable DVDs, external hard drives blah blah, instead (Some will be relevant for a scaning film user too, of course).

 

There's no such thing as a free lunch and "Tha don't get owt for nowt" as they say in Yorkshire.

[vic vic]

Tha don't get owt for nowt" :-)))))))) ha andy - that yourkshire languege, both in its sound and the exression :-)))))

 

oh ya - u r rite andy... but how many sd cards u buy????? 4??? still ok :-) extreme3 is great. i use it on d-lux2... the camera is too slow for it, but with m8 ... is there any more to ask....

 

about hard-drives - well - dont u need it already???? la-cie makes very good ones :-)))))) 500gb, a few of them with time and u have no problems..

film needs storage as well as u know. alot of care and plenty of space if u compare with what u can put in the 500gb hard-drive:-)))))))))

 

u r rite... this is not something that will help u to make dicisison in any direction :-)))

[grober]

If you're itching to have and use the M8 you know you're going to buy it however dismal the economics of its undetermined life might be.

 

In three to five years if the M8's worth is only a fraction of its purchase value - oh well! - we can console ourselves by knowing that our Leica glass will STILL be usable on the next body in the M line.

 

Hey, after forty years of Leica work, I have only reached the full potential of some of my Leica lenses in just a smattering of photos. If we wait for the "perfect M" we'll never buy that next camera.

 

Fess up: once you've tested the potential with this brand; you're hooked for life.

[marknorton]

That's why I didn't compare running costs which are for different things whether you run digital or film but real nonetheless. I was just looking at the capital cost of buying the camera and as Bob suggests, 3 years may be a little pessimistic plus the thing will have some residual value, though if it's like my Nikon D100 bought almost exactly 4 years ago sitting on my shelf, not much.

 

Leica have made a big point in the literature of being able to fix any M camera ever made so I daresay there are contractual commitments with Kodak and other vendors to manufacture parts well in to the future and stockpile them towards the end of the product's life.

 

However, it might be like trying to get lap-tops fixed now. Even if you can get the parts (and let's assume with Leica that will be possible) the cost of fixing them in relation to the cost of a current replacement may well be prohibitive.

[SteveYork]

I was just having a conversation with a couple of guys about the difference between the longevity of digital cameras as opposed to film. They are both Canon users and basically accept the built in obsolescence.

 

For Leica users this is something that we will ahve to get used to. I continue to buy lenses ( old and new) for my M4 & M6. As long as I service them i expect excellent results. For sure I am losing the choice of films, developers etc but am still happy to take the M4 out at weekends.

 

In purchasing a Digital camera - i have a DMR and have ordered and M8 - I really worry that not long after i purchase one the next model is being designed and mine will be obsolete. What would happen to the price of a M8 if a full frame sensor was announced?

 

I cant see the same secondhand market for used digital M's. The technology will have moved on and the quality will improve. I am not saying that the original camera is not good quality just that Leica will have to offer more to attract customers. I dont think i want ot spend a fortune every time a new improved sensor appears.

 

One day a manufacturer will have to provide upgrade paths or some other ingenious business model. I suppose the problem is bigger with Digital backs. They have massive proce reduction ins the s/h market

 

Any thoughts ?

 

 

Unless they come out with a full frame sensor, I wouldn't worry about the inevitable technological advances. As a practical matter -- dealing with what you can see with your own eyes on an 8x10 print -- any advances are not going to be revolutionary. Sure, they will eventually come out with an M8 or M9 w/ more megapixels, but 10.3 is plenty, even probably for professionals. It's analogous to film in a slight way. Film gets better every couple years, but I'm not going to toss my film in the fridge just because there's a better product out there. Small incremental changes in technology will not make you feel like you need the latest and the best. Think of the final product and ask yourself is it good enough?

 

There are exceptions (e.g., 50mm Summilux ASPH). But there just that, exceptions.

 

I think if if you spend the bucks for the M8 it must be done with the intention that your going to keep the camera no matter what the advancements. If you believe that you need the latest and best digital, then that will be a losing game, because every year companies will come out with something new to stimulate the market.

[mitchell]

I could easily be wrong, but I get the feeling that Sean is quite excited by M8 images. That there may be more than a small incremental improvement over the DMR.

 

Really looking forward to the second part of his review.

 

Best,

 

Mitchell

[marknorton]

That's my hope too...

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I could easily be wrong, but I get the feeling that Sean is quite excited by M8 images. That there may be more than a small incremental improvement over the DMR.

 

Really looking forward to the second part of his review.

 

Best,

 

Mitchell

 

 

:D

 

Reason i said don't listen to the bad reviews.

[adan]

I guess I can add the following:

 

1. The moment I walk out the camera store door with a new camera - my assumption is it is immediately worthless except for the return it can give me in photographs. I never think of "resale" value.

 

2. For me, 'obsolete' means 'no longer repairable if something vital wears out' - plus however much time it takes for that something to ACTUALLY wear out. I set myself the standard of double-digit megapixels as what I would find usable for many years to come, and the M8 achieves that. I went 12 years with "8-megapixel" scans from film without feeling much pressure to get a higher-res scanner.

 

Back when the Mpixel counts were DOUBLING (from 3.2 to 6, or 4 to 8, or 6 to 12), always getting the upgrade made a certain sense. So if a 21 Mpixel Leica-M comes along...

 

3. I like having backup cameras - and backup backups. So eventually I'll want at least two digital Ms, and likely three. If an upgrade is available by the time I can afford another body, I still will not get rid of my original M8. It's my current 'backups' - Digilux 2 and Sony R-1 - that will get retired. Which is precisely why I went with the $900 Sony instead of a whole additional SLR system while waiting for the M8.

 

It WILL be a tough call 3 years from now when I'm ready for that additional M body. I'll want to know if an M9 is just around the corner, or if I should get a second M8 - perhaps used.

 

And who knows what will exist 3-5-10 years from now? A 28 Summilux? A 15mm Elmarit? A change from SDHC to GZMO cards?

[albertwang]

difference between the longevity of digital cameras as opposed to film. They are both Canon users and basically accept the built in obsolescence.

 

Not bad. Any chance that I can send the bodies to the bin for recycling soon?

 

Of course, I'm more than willing to pitch the 20D again and again into... the lil cylindrical piece of plastic tinted baby blue.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear