lesh Posted November 17, 2008 Share #21 Posted November 17, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Can I have one by Christmas? If you can have one of the tuning specialists spice up a classic BMW with the latest engine and chassis, why couldn't it be done with a Digilux 2? Nice to think that someone with space in their garage, and who's handy with a soldering iron might raid the parts bin, and rustle it up over three long weekends. It could be called the TAO version (Thawley/Audidudi/Overgaard). I wish......but very much doubt that Leica would want to encourage this kind of thinking, doesn't seem to be their approach. I'd prefer mine all in black, but it's not a deal breaker. Les Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 17, 2008 Posted November 17, 2008 Hi lesh, Take a look here Making a case for the Digilux 2 Mk. II.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
John Thawley Posted November 17, 2008 Share #22 Posted November 17, 2008 I'd prefer mine all in black, but it's not a deal breaker. Les I was thinking "Ala Carte" with maybe ostrich skin.... or alligator. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted November 17, 2008 Share #23 Posted November 17, 2008 A really interesting thread with thoughts which echo my feelings almost exactly. Leica should appreciate such insightful design and production thoughts from loyal longstanding users and supporters. What do you think Leica? Is anyone in Solms reading and listening? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
krabat Posted November 17, 2008 Share #24 Posted November 17, 2008 Hi friends, I can only agree with most of the statements in this thread! That is exactly what I have been telling since such a long time. The design of the Digilux 2 is a really unique one, it should NOT be changed (I could live with the present size of the Digilux 2 as well). And the lens is alright, too - except for a slight distortion at 28 mm, which probably could be corrected in a new version. Yes, better ISO and EVF, RAW buffer and faster writing of the data, these things should be possible nowadays. What about a chip-based image stabilisation? And - not to forget keep the straightforward concept and handling! No need for additional gimmicks, face recognition, 354735648 motif programs, GPS or shoe-shining capabilities. A HDMI connector - why not. I was always wondering how Leica came to the idea to present the customers the bulky Digilux 3 as a successor of the Digilux 2. I would not abandon my Digilux 2, and leave it only from my cold dead hands - ecxept if Leica would release a camera that really deserves to be called a successor. In that case, however, I would be the first in the line to order one... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted November 21, 2008 Share #25 Posted November 21, 2008 there are a few opportunities for such a camera The only existing 2/3" sensor fab is the Fuji, which in the form of the Fuji S100fs, can compete with the 4/3rds sensor E410 to ISO800, and whips D2 at any ISO. But this very special imager would also require Fuji circuitry, hence a Fuji alliance. This is still nonetheless an attractive option, as it requires little in external change. But its also an absurd alliance with an organisation already struggling so much they have ditched their technically spectacular S series dSLRs, possibly sold to Ricoh. On the inside of Leica, how would this pose for the fortunes for the notion of an a mini M, b/se another opportunity also exists in the form of an mFT Leica body, and mFT Leica primes. This gives access to Panasonics EVF, and the ultra fast CDAF mechanism, as well as the yet untested 12Mp sensor, but still with potential to craft some very good lenses and resulting IQ. Given the asking for the G1, this componentry wont come cheap and would chop into M8 sales. The margins here would be tight. So I cant help thinking Leica might be tempted to go another road, to acquire a heavily cropped available APSC sensor and digital framework from a development organisation such as Sanyo (in acquisition by Panasonic) who designed the E1. A simple fixed 38/1.8 with an emphasis on compactness and tradition, eliminating the need for an EVF and for CDAF, catastrophically simple and unique and with hardware well within the capacity of Leica AG. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overgaard Posted November 21, 2008 Share #26 Posted November 21, 2008 I don't understand this fixation on the sensor and existing sensors. If Leica want to do it, I'm sure they can manage to find sensors and/or work with Kodak on this, as they've done on the DMR and S2. I think it's wrong, and that how most technology is developed these days, that product is driven by possible technology and not by customer want and need. The S2 is an example of asking customers what they want, then develop the technology and solve the obstacles in making it reality. And I think the engineers at Leica prefer to solve tricky problems rather than combine existing technology ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Thawley Posted November 21, 2008 Share #27 Posted November 21, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think it's wrong, and that how most technology is developed these days, that product is driven by possible technology and not by customer want and need. Video phones is the best example. They have been trying to peddle video phones since the late 50's early 60's. People just don't want them. Video conferencing seems to have been the final frontier... and now having an impact. But for the most part, John Q. Public was never interested. You always wonder.. why didn't they just ask me? LOL Someone asked after my blog entry, about any upgrade rumors for the Digilux 2. Thinking about this thread and his (a hobbyist) question, it made me realize in the simplest terms, what is appealing about the Digilux 2 is it gives you the feel and experience of a film camera, without the (for some of us) hassle of a film. And, as we all know, the image is superb. So, it appears the question of balance is, give me the film camera feel, experience and image, with the GENUINE benefits of today's digital technology. Get me from point A to point B using the best of the old and new. I think the orginal catalyst to this thread was the fact that parts exist to make this happen... and given the potential size of the market, development cost could be kept under control. JT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilden Posted November 21, 2008 Share #28 Posted November 21, 2008 There will be no Digilux 2II on the body of Pana G-1 I'd Have been trying it for about a week and it's unuseble, but only at 100iso. Look at the picture RAW from Silkypix # F9 1/125 sek 45m.m On a cloudy day. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/68692-making-a-case-for-the-digilux-2-mk-ii/?do=findComment&comment=722892'>More sharing options...
audidudi Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share #29 Posted November 21, 2008 I think the orginal catalyst to this thread was the fact that parts exist to make this happen... and given the potential size of the market, development cost could be kept under control. This was precisely my point. While the ability to create the necessary parts from scratch certainly exists, the moment Leica has to develop any aspect of this camera from scratch, the R&D costs skyrocket and its potential profitability falls. In view of Leica's limited resources as well as the limited size of the potential market for the proposed D2 Mk. II, I believe the only way that a camera like this is feasible is if it can be developed by adapting or recycling as much existing technology and hardware as possible. And with the introduction of the G1, with its high(er) resolution EVF, the final piece of the puzzle is now here and sitting in inventory on Panasonic's shelves. Personally, I think it would be great if Leica stuffed an improved version of the G1's guts into a D2-like body with traditional-style controls. But I believe the likely cost of doing so is too great for such a project to be potentially profitable enough to ever be approved for production. Recycling the existing D2 body and lens, however, changes all that and presents Leica with an opportunity to fill a step along the upgrade path to the M8 that its product line presently lacks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted November 21, 2008 Share #30 Posted November 21, 2008 fortunately or not Thorsten, all sensor fabs are custom builds in a sense, but the more customised the sensor the more expensive the tool. We have discovered over time that Panasonic and Olympus 4/3rds sensors and AA filters differ, as well as Olympus sensors across models. Perhaps with S2 and M8 sensor pricing matters less, but a smaller camera is going to be a lot more price sensitive, and it will also need to turn more volume, you simply cant have an individual design and not sell, as opposed to a rebadged Panasonic which can hold the volume and contribute to development/manufacture/supply costs. After all, if you simply wanted an ISO200 capable camera with great IQ and analogue handling, you already have that. There is a need to improve and offer more, thats what Im saying... . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted November 21, 2008 Share #31 Posted November 21, 2008 Funny someone should mention the G1. There's a G1 up for sale in an online forum I frequent, only this is the Contax G1, a film rangefinder. It seems like an interesting camera and I've been reading up on it, to find some striking similarities between it and the Digilux 2. Almost the same design and size (in fact, the Panasonic LC5 looked almost identical to a G1, except it didn't feature removable lenses. Coincidence? Hmm). Like the Digilux 2, it too elicits a fierce devotion among its users. And looking at the specs, I can't help but wonder if the Digilux 2 couldn't have been the digital "G3" had Kyocera not decided to give up on photography and exited the market after the G2... The thing is, though, there was an equal force of people who were against the G1/G2 in concept. It was not deemed a "real" rangefinder because it had too many wires and too much electronics. Given that, one couldn't help but form the hypothesis that surely these rangefinder purists would also never in a million years contend the idea of buying a Digilux 2? But yet when I go around reading about the Digilux 2 elsewhere I see a lot of rangefinder users (including M users) who like (or have) the D2 and enjoy it for having almost exactly the same features the G1/2 had! Did Contax have the right philosophy after all for rangefinder technology with the G1 and G2, especially heading into the digital era? If they hadn't left the camera market, would we now have a Digilux-like digital rangefinder with "proper" rangefinder (auto-)focusing and removable lenses as an alternative to the Digital M direction? It would have been interesting to see which of the two systems would have made more sense, I think. (NB: some people might say here that if the G1/G2 model had succeeded then the cameras would still be available today. Ie, that the concept was a failure. But having read up on the issue, I contend that it was more a case of Kyocera making a business decision, rather than the G system failing, that led to production being stopped. Had Kyocera decided that going into digital was worth it, I'm pretty sure the G system concept would still be around today and there would be many buyers for it, too.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted November 21, 2008 Share #32 Posted November 21, 2008 I suppose the point of my long diatribe above was this: since so many people have come around to the design philosophy underpinning the Digilux 2, wouldn't it also stand to reason that these people (me included) would have also bought a G3 rangefinder if it had been available? Wouldn't you rather have a G3 rangefinder than a Digilux 2 Mk II? So isn't this, in fact, what the Digilux 4 should be? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted November 21, 2008 Share #33 Posted November 21, 2008 May I add to this thread while recognizing that the subject has appeared in several other threads. Two months ago members of The Leica Fellowship (The Leica Fellowship Index Page) were invited to suggest to the editor of the Leica Fellowship Newsletter items for his forthcoming discussion with David Bell, MD Leica Camera UK. I offered the following: "Judging by views expressed globally on the Leica Internet forum, there is a genuine desire for an updated version of the Digilux 2. Keep the same lens, increase resolution to 10Mp, provide a Raw image buffer and an improved eye level viewfinder. Keep the wonderful ergonomic and controls." In the September 2008 Fellowship Newsletter (Issue No 126) the editor reported favourably on his meeting which covered many Leica issues. However, the answer to my question was blunt and disappointing. Quote: "No Digilux 2 upgrade - you will have the R10". Unquote. I haven't had a chance to discuss this reply with the editor yet but I simply cannot believe that an R10 with interchangeable lenses can possibly be a replacement for the D2. Does anyone still retain genuine hopes for a Digilux 2 MkII? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
audidudi Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share #34 Posted November 21, 2008 I haven't had a chance to discuss this reply with the editor yet but I simply cannot believe that an R10 with interchangeable lenses can possibly be a replacement for the D2. Given that Leica seemed quite comfortable replacing the D2 with the D3, despite the fact they're completely different types of cameras, this statement certainly does appear to reflect their thinking. Does anyone still retain genuine hopes for a Digilux 2 MkII? Unfortunately, I'm not particularly optimistic about the prospects of Leica ever bringing an improved D2 to market as this doesn't seem to be the direction they're headed. That said, I am somewhat optimistic that a D2-like camera will be offered by another manufacturer someday. If Sigma, for instance, could evolve their DP-1 into a D2-like camera, then I would be over-the-moon happy! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted November 21, 2008 Share #35 Posted November 21, 2008 .... That said, I am somewhat optimistic that a D2-like camera will be offered by another manufacturer someday. If Sigma, for instance, could evolve their DP-1 into a D2-like camera, then I would be over-the-moon happy! I agree. I am impressed with Ricoh's Leica-quality build and excellent ergonomics in their premium digital compact range. It needs a bigger manufacturer to recognize the market for the discussed new camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjöbjörn Posted November 21, 2008 Share #36 Posted November 21, 2008 . Quote: "No Digilux 2 upgrade - you will have the R10". Unquote. I haven't had a chance to discuss this reply with the editor yet but I simply cannot believe that an R10 with interchangeable lenses can possibly be a replacement for the D2. Does anyone still retain genuine hopes for a Digilux 2 MkII? Well, if this is a serious answer, the R10 ought to be very compact for a DSLR and not have a lower price than most of us expect. Not sure if this is going to happen, but would of course be a surprise. For the time being, I still hope an wait for a Digilux 2MkII (i.e. a similar concept, but not the same camera with only new electronics). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted November 21, 2008 Share #37 Posted November 21, 2008 Size of the Olympus develops Micro Four Thirds camera: Digital Photography Review would beat the proposed mythical D2 whatever hands down .slam dunk kaput .... ...............my D2 only comes out of the cupboard for the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras (ps Mick's girlfriend Raelene reckons his body should look like this) But it really looks like this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Thawley Posted November 21, 2008 Share #38 Posted November 21, 2008 Size of the Olympus develops Micro Four Thirds camera: Digital Photography Review would beat the proposed mythycal D2 whatever hands down .slam dunk kaput Not with screen driven controls and menus it won't. I realize you may have parachuted in late... but the point is the positioning of the aperture rint, the shutter contorl and the simplicity of fix mount zoom lens. The Olympus is just "another" technological, miniature marvel.. and frankly, I think we've hit the point in digital point n' shoot history of "who cares?" JT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted November 21, 2008 Share #39 Posted November 21, 2008 Doesn't matter what if............. the biggest difference is that we will be taking photographs with the oly in under 12 months:D .....you guys will be dreamin' .......... "dreamin you life away" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Thawley Posted November 21, 2008 Share #40 Posted November 21, 2008 Doesn't matter what if............. the biggest difference is that we will be taking photographs with the oly in under 12 months:D .....you guys will be dreamin' .......... "dreamin you life away" You have a lot of confidence in vaporware. My Digilux 2s will do fine whether they build a new one or not. JT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.