Jump to content

More rumors: Apparently, M9 is not the only camera to be announced on 09/09?


efftee

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Carefull, you might start a rumor ;)

 

Too late I fear.....:)

Leica D-Lux 5 in Photokina 2010? | Leica Rumors

 

And it even has it's own clothing range too.....

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/O%82Neill-D-Lux-5%2F3-Ladies-Winter-Wetsuit-2009_W0QQitemZ250481404552QQcmdZViewItemQQimsxq20090812?IMSfp=TL090812145001r29817#ht_917wt_741

Edited by Nicoleica
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 194
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

 

FYI My view is that "z" is the really big number! , not "x" and many will buy into the concept because it is there if it is ever needed (ie some people will never buy the EVF unit but will feel they have a system camera, and not just a rangefinder)

 

You need some serious, professional therapy for this obsession, IMHO. This isn't healthy. Sorry, Frank. I truly believe that you live in a world of clouds and cuckoos.

 

Many will NOT buy into this concept because it is basically completely flawed. The Visoflex is as relevant today as glass plates. OK, some diehards use glass plates...

 

You are never going to get a typical Canon or Nikon SLR user to use an M, when a typical Canon or Nikon SLR is the much better choice of tool for that particular job.

 

The sooner that you accept this, the sooner you can appreciate the M for its considerable strengths, not try to overcome its weaknesses (as Leica HAD to, when they brought out the Visoflex in the first place). If Leica thought that the Visoflex was a viable product, whey do you think that they saw sense and stopped making them 20 years ago?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso

Sorry the R is dead in any form that would be attached to a M via a Visoflex makes absolutely no business sense for Leica . However a new body that has it's own lenses in the 35mm arena with AF lenses newly developed and the ability that a Leica built adapter for the older R lens owners makes much more sense that they can bolt on. This would add real value to the folks sitting on a closet full of R glass and also give Leica a 3rd system for there lineup

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given how little it would cost to make a new Visoflex compared to any other solution, it might still make sense to do so. For some people it would be enough, combined with an 18MP Leica M9. For others, more would be needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For some people it would be enough, combined with an 18MP Leica M9

 

For some people yes, but how many? If there weren't enough R users to support an R10, how many people are going to buy a Visioflex and a new set of lenses that would also be needed?

 

in all the time I've been using Leicas I've seen dozens, maybe even low hundreds, of people using Ms. I've never seen anyone using a Visioflex. Anecdotal evidence I concede, but how many have ever seen a Visioflex user who uses the system on a regular basis instead of an SLR?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest BigSplash
You need some serious, professional therapy for this obsession, IMHO. This isn't healthy. Sorry, Frank. I truly believe that you live in a world of clouds and cuckoos.

 

Many will NOT buy into this concept because it is basically completely flawed. The Visoflex is as relevant today as glass plates. OK, some diehards use glass plates...

 

You are never going to get a typical Canon or Nikon SLR user to use an M, when a typical Canon or Nikon SLR is the much better choice of tool for that particular job.

 

The sooner that you accept this, the sooner you can appreciate the M for its considerable strengths, not try to overcome its weaknesses (as Leica HAD to, when they brought out the Visoflex in the first place). If Leica thought that the Visoflex was a viable product, whey do you think that they saw sense and stopped making them 20 years ago?

 

Andy let's look at some facts from Leica's own Annual report:

> DSLR 2008 market is 11,200,000 units ( an increase of 26% v previous year)

> Compact 2008 market is 128,800,000 units ( and increase of 5% v previous year)

 

From memory (Jaapv input) I believe that I am right in saying that: Leica best year recently was 20,000 units of M8 when it was first introduced and 10,000 units last year. They had a huge difficulty to deliver the 20,000 as I understand it (Jaapv input)

 

If Leica achieved a mere 1% penetration of the DSLR market ( not eating away at it but licking it!) then that represents an extra 112, 000 units that Leica could not handle anyway ( at this time) as it is 10X their current build in production.

 

The qusetion for me is how do you grow the build year to year and enjoy a massive market that is 10X what they have today. My thought is to extend the M camera market attractiveness. I do not believe that is simply go FF M9 although that is certainly an attractive product for all of us in this Forum. Leica from a business perspective need to do more I think, and extending the M into being a true system camera is my suggestion.

 

 

Andy, and others ....I challenge you to say what you would suggest Leica does to enjoy 250M€uros of sales, which is what Dr Kaufmann says he needs. I am all ears!

 

Today the positioning of Leica seems to me to be not targeting a "lick" at the juicy high end DSLR opportunity, but a strategy focussed on we "M" rangefinder affectionados many of which are in love with film anyway!

 

Andy I have a good understanding of the M strengths (see my original email) ...it outperforms any SLR in focussing etc for the range of lenses from wide thorough to 135mm .

Additionally I would add that it is more compact, less bulky, less heavy, less obtrusive, does not intimate child subjects, it is faster to execute the photo, the Leica lenses are better than their competitors, it makes far less noise, the quality of build is better, it is more rugged....and bottom line it taeks superb photos. Have I missed anything?

 

Actually the one thing that is a negative I have always felt that poor photo results cannot be blamed on the Leica camera but myself as the author of the work. I honestly believe that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Leica achieved a mere 1% penetration of the DSLR market ( not eating away at it but licking it!) then that represents an extra 112, 000 units that Leica could not handle anyway ( at this time) as it is 10X their current build in production.

 

So why didn't Leica generate that level of penetration when the original Visioflex was available? Why did people instead prefer to buy an SLR at a time when M rangeinders were a lot more popular than they are now?

 

If anyone knows the actual sales figures for Visioflexes I'd be grateful to know the number.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steady on Andy, after all we've only got Frank's word that he's Frank.

 

If Frank's to be believed, there's more chance of Leica going under because Stefan Daniel's too busy answering nuisance phone calls from the South of France to do his proper job

Edited by stunsworth
Link to post
Share on other sites

Given how little it would cost to make a new Visoflex compared to any other solution, it might still make sense to do so. For some people it would be enough, combined with an 18MP Leica M9. For others, more would be needed.

 

It wouldn't cost very much to start manufacturing the old Visoflex again - but a "new" one that delivered basic current SLR features such as auto aperture, full aperture TTL metering, TTL flash control and autofocus or focus confirmation would take a lot of development, would not be compatible with the M8, could not use R lenses, and would need a whole new range of "Telyts". I somehow suspect this would not find many takers. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Visoflex in the era of electronic viewfinders?

 

The Panasonic GF1 will have an electronic viewfinder you can mount on the hot shoe. Now think on the possibilities of this solution for future M cameras. You have the rangefinder just like you know it. But you could have an electronic viewfinder for "live view" focusing and framing. This would be great for: 1) macro lenses like the Macro-Elmar 90mm; 2) R lenses (with adapter to M mount); 3) M lenses without framelines in the optical viewfinder and multi-focal lenses (zooms), like the WATE; 4) Tele lenses.

 

It is not easy to implement though. The sensor and electronics must be able to support "live view". The M9 posses enough problems to Leica right know. I guess they are dealing with a classical Kodak CCD solution. Perhaps the M10 in Photokina 2012?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Visoflex in the era of electronic viewfinders?

 

The Panasonic GF1 will have an electronic viewfinder you can mount on the hot shoe. Now think on the possibilities of this solution for future M cameras. You have the rangefinder just like you know it. But you could have an electronic viewfinder for "live view" focusing and framing. This would be great for: 1) macro lenses like the Macro-Elmar 90mm; 2) R lenses (with adapter to M mount); 3) M lenses without framelines in the optical viewfinder and multi-focal lenses (zooms), like the WATE; 4) Tele lenses.

 

It is not easy to implement though. The sensor and electronics must be able to support "live view". The M9 posses enough problems to Leica right know. I guess they are dealing with a classical Kodak CCD solution. Perhaps the M10 in Photokina 2012?

 

The problem is that the particular quality of the CDD is one of the selling points for the Leica. If Leica goes to an off-the-shelf CMOS sensor with live view, so it can mount an electronic viewfinder...why wouldn't a customer just buy a compact DSLR like the Pentax K7? There seems to be little point in making the Leica a kludged DSLR.

 

I think the solution might be an M-mount (or R-mount) G1-type camera from Panasonic, in partnership with Leica, with an APS-C or -H CMOS sensor, to be sold for $1,500 or so. I think they'd sell one to virtually every Leica owner, as backup or special-purpose cameras, and even bring some new Leica-glass customers through the door.

 

JC

Link to post
Share on other sites

For some people yes, but how many? If there weren't enough R users to support an R10, how many people are going to buy a Visioflex and a new set of lenses that would also be needed?

 

It looks like I forgot to state that the new Visoflex should handle the R lenses primarily. Almost no one would buy it to start collecting R lenses, but those who have an R system as well an an M8 or M9 might be tempted. My point was that the Visoflex would be relatively cheap to produce, and could be added to the lineup as yet another option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like I forgot to state that the new Visoflex should handle the R lenses primarily

 

How? There's only a 2cm difference in lens registers between the M and R lenses, so to use the device on an M it can only be 2 cm deep. That's not sufficient for anything that's intended to direct the light to a sensor to be used by a new Visioflex.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like I forgot to state that the new Visoflex should handle the R lenses primarily. Almost no one would buy it to start collecting R lenses, but those who have an R system as well an an M8 or M9 might be tempted. My point was that the Visoflex would be relatively cheap to produce, and could be added to the lineup as yet another option.

 

Once again: the difference between the lens registers of the M and R is about 19mm. It is not possible to build a Visoflex that thin: there'd be no room for the mirror or beam-splitter and focusing screen.

 

If the goal is to allow existing R lenses to be used to their full on an "M" body, the only way is to provide (1) live view in the body, (2) an M-R adapter that works the auto-diaphragm and transfers ROM and aperture information from the lens to the body, and (3) a really good EVF.

 

This could not work with a M8 because it doesn't have live view, and so far I've seen no hint that the M9 - if 'e come - will have live view and the electronic connections around the lens mount to communicate with and power the M-R adapter.

 

When or if someone's designing an M body with live view, it's a no-brainer to provide for an EVF. But building the EVF as a unit with the M-R adapter makes it less versatile, because it could only be used with R lenses. An EVF that attached to the body would be a lot more use - usable with any lens, microscope, telescope etc.

 

In short, there's no point asking for a Visoflex that mounts R lenses on an M body - and IMHO it doesn't help any to call a lens adapter and EVF a "Visoflex".

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need some serious, professional therapy for this obsession, IMHO. This isn't healthy. Sorry, Frank. I truly believe that you live in a world of clouds and cuckoos.

 

Many will NOT buy into this concept because it is basically completely flawed. The Visoflex is as relevant today as glass plates. OK, some diehards use glass plates...

 

You are never going to get a typical Canon or Nikon SLR user to use an M, when a typical Canon or Nikon SLR is the much better choice of tool for that particular job.

(...)

 

As much as I dislike the "cold front" that obviously hits Frank Owen after his posts, I have to agree that making such a device for a M would be a total waste of time and money. AFAIC the M series is all about quality in a small package. For everything else there are better tools, like a D3 or maybe a S2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So why not put the same effort and enthusiam into an R lens mount for Canon / Nikon which transfers lens data, aperture settings and automatic diaphram stop down? That way owners of R glass have a meaningful future for their kit since the R body line is finished.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So why not put the same effort and enthusiam into an R lens mount for Canon / Nikon which transfers lens data, aperture settings and automatic diaphram stop down? That way owners of R glass have a meaningful future for their kit since the R body line is finished.

 

Answer has been given by Stefan Daniels recently. Read the forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...