budrichard Posted August 17, 2009 Share #21 Posted August 17, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The M7 and MP will be produced as long as its profitable. As soon as either or both of them are not profitable, they or one of them will be gone. Its impossible to fortell the future especially with no information on an M9!-Dick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 Hi budrichard, Take a look here What will happen to film M cameras? (Speculation warning!). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wizard Posted August 17, 2009 Share #22 Posted August 17, 2009 The M7 and MP will be produced as long as its profitable. As soon as either or both of them are not profitable, they or one of them will be gone. Its impossible to fortell the future especially with no information on an M9!-Dick Well put, and exactly my view on this issue as well. As an aside, when I spoke to Leica people last year, they were telling me that upon introducing the M8, sales of film M-cameras actually INCREASED by quite a bit. The very same thing may happen when the M9 finally appears, if only for the fear that film Ms will soon disappear. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgray Posted August 17, 2009 Share #23 Posted August 17, 2009 If a full frame digital M comes out at some point where I don't have to worry about IR filters, it has reasonable low light capacity, and I can use my existing lenses on it, I will start saving up for one. As long as it's not TOO expensive. It will be a serious stretch though for me to get one. That being said, I will not be giving up my M7. Shooting B&W film and enlarging it traditionally is just too much fun and I like the results too much. I don't care if the M8/M9/5DII/D700/etc. produce 'better' results. They might have more resolution, less noise, better high ISO, etc., but when it comes down to it, it's not Tri-X or Plus-X or HIE on silver paper. Even on RC paper - I'm not one of those "if you're going to do it, you must do it on FB paper and never scan" purists. Heck, digital's not even Portra 400 scanned. It's different. I enjoy shooting color neg too. So at least for me, if I ever acquire a digital M, even if it gets a decent amount of use, my M7 isn't going to be retired. I know a lot of people have said similar things and never touched film again once they got their M8, but I don't see that happening for me. Especially considering how I started out on a DSLR about 5 years ago and now I can't even remember the last time I shot a digital picture. PS - I enjoy my M7 a lot more than my M6. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PATB Posted August 17, 2009 Share #24 Posted August 17, 2009 When the M9 comes out full frame, I will get another MP or M7 just to have a second body. I love printing in the darkroom too much -- I find it relaxing after a hectic week at work. I need to get another film body because Leica may discontinue them. I have faith in being able to get BW film, paper, and chemicals for the rest of my life. There will always be a niche manufacturer out there willing to feed the need of BW photographers. However, I will also save my pennies for an M9 someday. I travel a lot and my family wants a color photo album or book. Carrying the D700 is a bit much for travel more than two weeks. I tried shooting slides and color negatives once, but the scanning turned out to be a chore. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigSplash Posted August 17, 2009 Share #25 Posted August 17, 2009 If a full frame digital M comes out at some point where I don't have to worry about IR filters, it has reasonable low light capacity, and I can use my existing lenses on it, I will start saving up for one. As long as it's not TOO expensive. It will be a serious stretch though for me to get one. That being said, I will not be giving up my M7. Shooting B&W film and enlarging it traditionally is just too much fun and I like the results too much. I don't care if the M8/M9/5DII/D700/etc. produce 'better' results. They might have more resolution, less noise, better high ISO, etc., but when it comes down to it, it's not Tri-X or Plus-X or HIE on silver paper. Even on RC paper - I'm not one of those "if you're going to do it, you must do it on FB paper and never scan" purists. Heck, digital's not even Portra 400 scanned. It's different. I enjoy shooting color neg too. So at least for me, if I ever acquire a digital M, even if it gets a decent amount of use, my M7 isn't going to be retired. I know a lot of people have said similar things and never touched film again once they got their M8, but I don't see that happening for me. Especially considering how I started out on a DSLR about 5 years ago and now I can't even remember the last time I shot a digital picture. PS - I enjoy my M7 a lot more than my M6. I too have a lot of nostalgia for my M4,5, and 6........I now use the M8 and I may put the odd film through the M6 but really digital is my future for all the obvious reasons. The reality is that the camera buying consumer and professional is now firmly with digital so for me it is obvious that Leica will drop the M7 and MP in my view in the not too distant future as the demand must be by now miniscule. They may make some custom cameras as Jaapv suggested as a gesture to the faithful but honestly does this really make business sense at a time the company needs to focus? They do not even make the enlarger anymore! People have pushed for a FF M9 with a zeal that is driven it seems exclusively by a desire to use the old lenses in the way that they were intended on the film cameras (ie no crop factor). If the M9 is FF then it will be delightful to read here how this or that aberration now occurs at full aperture with the various super wide angle lenses. I am sure that other sensor related anomalies will occupy the minds of many here also. I am also sure that there will be bitching about the price differential of a M9 v M8. I ask what is going to be possible to do with a M9 that I cannot do with the M8? I have always fitted UV filters as a protection for the lens so changing these to UVIR is an annoyance and a cost issue but not much else. I shall get a 18mm so even wide angle is not an issue. I agree that I could have labels made for each lens to remind me that a 35mm has become 50mm etc. but from a photographic viewpoint what does the M9 most likely give me that I cannot do with M8? Personally I hope that Leica introduce a M9 that addresses the small deficiencies of the M8.2 and gets the size back to that of a M7. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted August 17, 2009 Share #26 Posted August 17, 2009 "After 50 years of dedicated service this Corporation would like to present you with a near-mint, little-used Leica M7." Could I have a chrome MP instead. Am ready to pay the difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted August 17, 2009 Share #27 Posted August 17, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm an MP user, B&W film only with no interest in color film. I'm thinking about buying another MP so I hope production will continue. I too like the look of film but not digital, like the film workflow but don't need more hours in front of a computer screen since I design software for a living. I've had no interest in the M8, and quite frankly very little in the M9. I too am subject to family pressures for color snaps, and fast, so late last year I bought a DX Fujifilm dSLR and a pro Nikkor zoom lens and it was just a perfect solution. The camera/lens combo is totally reliable and the OOC JPEG files are amazing and require almost no PP. I hope for Leica's sake that the M9 is a success, but I hope even more that they don't abandon the film Ms entirely. I would think that tooling is the key to profitability and if the film M tooling is in good shape they should be able to produce at a profit since it would be a case of just materials + labor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Henri Klein Posted August 17, 2009 Share #28 Posted August 17, 2009 well, simply put, a couple of brownouts could tell a lesson. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
holmes Posted August 17, 2009 Share #29 Posted August 17, 2009 Speculation, worry and will my Tri-X fit into a digital? I think all those who are worried should look at an earlier post, in fact an even earlier post as to where the majority of 'Ms' are headed and being used. Japan. Now stop the hysteria and ask yourselves, why? Why should the country whose production output and technology in film then digital are shooting film. It has long been known that Japan manufactures a specific model for a period of time regardless of sale. Then a newer model is introduced with great fanfare. If you don't upgrade you'll be missing out and all the latest advances. Why does Fuji introduce new films every so often, with better emulsions and grain. That makes Kodak sit up and take notice. Then we get a new Kodak or two. Or, they stay with films like Tri-X, and their films for weddings, etc. I have in my freezer ten rolls of Afgfa B&W slide film with necessary mailers to Florida. I have 35mm and 120MF of various Fuji films. I personalty find little use or enjoyment in digital. I have two digital camera's. A Canon 40 and Leica (3?) pocket model. After spending considerable time shooting a film sequence, sitting at a computer trying to rectify any errors if it were digital ain't my idea of fun. I just drop my roll(s) of chromes in the mail and wait for them to come back from one of several to the top labs in the US. My Leica system consists of both "M" and "R". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgray Posted August 17, 2009 Share #30 Posted August 17, 2009 People have pushed for a FF M9 with a zeal that is driven it seems exclusively by a desire to use the old lenses in the way that they were intended on the film cameras (ie no crop factor). If the M9 is FF then it will be delightful to read here how this or that aberration now occurs at full aperture with the various super wide angle lenses. I am sure that other sensor related anomalies will occupy the minds of many here also. I am also sure that there will be bitching about the price differential of a M9 v M8. I ask what is going to be possible to do with a M9 that I cannot do with the M8? I have always fitted UV filters as a protection for the lens so changing these to UVIR is an annoyance and a cost issue but not much else. I shall get a 18mm so even wide angle is not an issue. My desire for a full frame digital M that doesn't require IR filters is simple. I have some very nice M lenses. I like their speed. I like their size. I like the field of view they offer. I don't want to spend $5k+ trying to duplicate the FOV and speed they provide for a crop camera. If I get a digital M, I want to be able to use interchangeably with film M's, which right now means swapping filters and either compromising on your lens choice, or carrying a set of lenses for digital and one for film. I'm not made out of money. My set of M cameras and lenses was carefully chosen and saved for. I can't just go blow $6k on a camera that leaves me with 3 lenses that provide the wrong FOV. I don't have the money or desire to buy 3 lenses that replicate the experience on digital. Waiting for a full frame M that doesn't need IR filters is a lot better solution for me. I'm perfectly happy with film right now, so it's not like I'm missing any experiences... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted August 17, 2009 Share #31 Posted August 17, 2009 If the M9 appears in September, and if it is all we expect it to be, what will happen to the M7 and Mp? I suspect demand for the M7 will drop near to zero, and the Mp only marginally more. We know Leica will not foresake film cameras, but will it be sustainable? Will Leica drop the standard models and offer only a-la-carte options? It might be the wisest course. Considering the projected cost of the M9, the MP/M7 plus a Nikon scanner look like a bargain. There still is a segment of the market that has interest in shooting film and regardless of the M9 will continue to buy these bodies. But the analog bodies are in a vicious cycle of price increases, which leads to decreased sales, which leads to price increases and so on. Sooner or later they will completely price themselves out of the market, like Rollei did and that will be the end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted August 17, 2009 Share #32 Posted August 17, 2009 Considering the projected cost of the M9, the MP/M7 plus a Nikon scanner look like a bargain. An interesting thought, that the cost of one M9 could balance against four near-mint M7's. I'd back the M7's for lower depreciation. There again, who needs four M7's as there are only three viewfinder variations? Two finishes of course, so maybe six are needed ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Rit Posted August 17, 2009 Share #33 Posted August 17, 2009 The M7 and MP will be produced as long as its profitable. As soon as either or both of them are not profitable, they or one of them will be gone. Its impossible to fortell the future especially with no information on an M9!-Dick I assume that the production of film Leicas isn't profitable anymore. At least, they will continue to produce film Leicas as many people would not buy these expensive lenses without the option to use them on a real camera. Best regards Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbaron Posted August 18, 2009 Share #34 Posted August 18, 2009 The reality is that the camera buying consumer and professional is now firmly with digital so for me it is obvious that Leica will drop the M7 and MP in my view in the not too distant future as the demand must be by now miniscule. "Reality", Frank? Who's reality? Maybe an armchair CEO's, but not this working photographer's. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted August 18, 2009 Share #35 Posted August 18, 2009 On the question of film sales - they have been dropping 30% a year. Zeno's Paradox says that a percentage decrease will never reach zero, but in 55 years that will reach 1 unit/roll of film per year. In the real world there will be two competing forces regarding the existence of film: 1) the 30% curve will likely flatten out some, but 2) film requires a minimum of sales and infrastructure to remain a going business. 1999: Film sales peak - 800,000,000 rolls (across all manufacturers worldwide) 2006: 204,000,000 rolls (which is 75% over 7 years - not as steep as 30% a year) ------------------------- 2016: assuming 30% decrease per year - 5,800,000 rolls 2021: 980,000 rolls 2026: 163,000 rolls ------------------------- 2013: assuming 75% decrease every 7 years - 51,000,000 rolls 2020: 12,750,000 rolls 2027: 3,178,000 rolls . . . 2062: 3,112 rolls per year I wish I knew how many rolls Kodak survived and prospered on in 1920 (?) Frankly, it would not surprise me if Leica's announcements (if any) Sept. 9 include end of production of the film cameras (I don't expect it, I'm not predicting it - but it would not surprise me). The film cameras have a certain goodwill value in addition to their actual sales contribution to Leica's bottom line, so I can see Leica continuing to offer them even at break-even so long as there is some market. But at some level of production they just will no longer be economical as a product. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/business/09film.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigSplash Posted August 18, 2009 Share #36 Posted August 18, 2009 On the question of film sales - they have been dropping 30% a year. Zeno's Paradox says that a percentage decrease will never reach zero, but in 55 years that will reach 1 unit/roll of film per year. In the real world there will be two competing forces regarding the existence of film: 1) the 30% curve will likely flatten out some, but 2) film requires a minimum of sales and infrastructure to remain a going business. 1999: Film sales peak - 800,000,000 rolls (across all manufacturers worldwide) 2006: 204,000,000 rolls (which is 75% over 7 years - not as steep as 30% a year) ------------------------- 2016: assuming 30% decrease per year - 5,800,000 rolls 2021: 980,000 rolls 2026: 163,000 rolls ------------------------- 2013: assuming 75% decrease every 7 years - 51,000,000 rolls 2020: 12,750,000 rolls 2027: 3,178,000 rolls . . . 2062: 3,112 rolls per year I wish I knew how many rolls Kodak survived and prospered on in 1920 (?) Frankly, it would not surprise me if Leica's announcements (if any) Sept. 9 include end of production of the film cameras (I don't expect it, I'm not predicting it - but it would not surprise me). The film cameras have a certain goodwill value in addition to their actual sales contribution to Leica's bottom line, so I can see Leica continuing to offer them even at break-even so long as there is some market. But at some level of production they just will no longer be economical as a product. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/business/09film.html Andy this is a great analysis and it suggests that film will be available to buy for some time (5.8Million rolls in 2016 sounds like an abundant supply for happy flashers). I actually think tat there are other dynamics involved however. First I would suppose that the bulk of the 204Miliion of 2006 would be consumers using their old 35mm cameras since they did not own a digital compact. I know many people in this category who now have a small digital compact. Is it not likely that film will suffer a decline that is more severe than the above model suggests? It seems to me that slide rules and mechanical calculators died off very very fast when the electronic calculator was widespread and affordable. The pervasion of PC's finished off typewriters at a pretty fast pace also. The VCR has given way to HDD based recorders, and the walkman has been relpaced by the iPod and MPEG 3 players in a very short time. I grant you that film (various types) for pros will be available for probably a decade or so but I would personally believe without any data to back it up (just gut feel) that the consumer volume film usage will decline much faster as digital compacts become cheaper, better and more pervasive. The cost of film will increase the rate of decline I believe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
budrichard Posted August 18, 2009 Share #37 Posted August 18, 2009 "Now stop the hysteria and ask yourselves, why? Why should the country whose production output and technology in film then digital are shooting film." The Japanese are the most demanding users of any country in the world. Whether the topic is cameras, clothes, automobiles or any type of collectable, they demand perfection and are very passionate. Thier magazines are the best done and most technical of any country and outside of the fact that they read from back to front, a wealth of information that simply does not exist anywhere else. That is why they are so passionate about film. Digital was introduced as a new technology to increase profits but its advantages economically soon became understood. Less media cost and media production, much quicker process times, archival storage easier and the list goes on. The amature market was fuled by the Internet and the want to show/distribute photographs in almost real time. And so the digital product cycles began, modeled on the Consumer Electronics Business Model. Film is rapidly dying(actually dead in many markets) and the Japanese market will keep it afloat as an amature format for a while but eventually even the Japanese will succum. As the older generation of film users passes on, I suspect that the fim cameras they leave behind will be sufficeint to supply any future needs and that film camera production will switch to film camera maintenance and restoration.-Dick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted August 18, 2009 Share #38 Posted August 18, 2009 Despite the introduction of sliced bread in 1928, bakers still sell unsliced bread and knife manufacturers still do a brisk trade in breadknives. Clearly its not only the 'best thing since sliced bread' ! More here Sliced bread - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I would be surprised if Leica ceased production altogether of the film M's. Maybe they will indeed be built to order in the future, rather like a Morgan or Bristol motorcar or bespoke tailoring, but is that a bad thing? The film M is more than just another product, it's an important part of Leica's heritage and evidence of the quality of their workmanship. To part with that would be a risky strategy IMO. I'm not surprised that most M's are sold in Japan. They love quirky or handbuilt European products. During the classic car boom in the early 90's many of the best surviving Vaden Plas 1300's were sold to buyers in Japan who paid substantial sums for them. The craze was such that some Japanese car manufacturers started making new small retro styled luxury cars. Austin Rover Online Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 18, 2009 Share #39 Posted August 18, 2009 The pervasion of PC's finished off typewriters at a pretty fast pace also... Sloppy thinking Frank, you really ought to do more research before you provide us with 'facts' such as 'typewriters have been finished off. An article on the BBC website from last year... BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | Why typewriters beat computers Amazon still sell new typewriters... Amazon.com: Typewriters - Other Office Equipment As do Staples... Staples.co.uk Your business partner for Office Supplies, furniture and technology. Which isn't to say of course that they sell in large numbers, but they are still available Maybe it will be the same with film, it will never regain the sales it once had, but that's not the same saying it will disappear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted August 18, 2009 Share #40 Posted August 18, 2009 While, as always, trying to avoid overloading the servers with useless data (perish the thought) I would like to suggest that sliced bread was (and is) one of the worst things ever invented by the food companies. Slice it yourself - the flavor is considerably better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.