mat_mcdermott Posted September 9, 2009 Share #21 Posted September 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think you can't simply go back to M8 and judge the progress made. One has to compare with the state of the art technology found in top-of-the-line cameras - given that we are in the $7000 zone. You can't avoid M9 being compared to D3X, 5DmkIII and soon even 7D. I'm not making nor care to make direct comparisons with SLRs. Others may, but I really don't like using SLRs so they aren't even on the table for comparison, at any price point. All I'm saying is that there is enough of high ISO improvement from the M8 that it's noticeable and from the samples I've seen they look pretty nice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 Hi mat_mcdermott, Take a look here get real.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
nugat Posted September 9, 2009 Share #22 Posted September 9, 2009 That's odd, my local dealer offered me more than that for a M8 body I bought over to and a half years ago. If I were to accept his offer my M8 would have cost me a fraction of what I would have paid for film and processing in the same period were I still using my M6. I think that the fact you refer to a 'snob tax' tells us a great deal. Reality check. M8 prices from E-Bay: 2,400$.-, 2,699.- 2,399.- etc etc. Your dealer works for charity or deals in something else... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica007 Posted September 9, 2009 Share #23 Posted September 9, 2009 lI will offer you 2 counter points though: 1. relative to the recent 24mm 1.4, 50mm 0,95 and S2 pricing, the M9 pricepoint is a breath of fresh air .. of that ther can be no doubt 2. And as for my 2 M8's I sold... well one of them I sold for more than I paid for and the other only lost 700 GBP in 3 years. That's pretty good going for 3 years of photography and tens of thousands of shots. Will a D3X still be worth >4000 GBP in 3 years time ... I think not !!! 1. Agreed, yet Leica's own pricing standard does not help it to stand in the market. one has take to all the products into consideration. 2. you must have bought a second and then sold it to get more. i have never seen any s/h M8 being sold more than the original MRP [unless you got hold of a really mad guy.] will M9 hold it's price in the coming years? time will tell and depend on Leica's product cycle. take a look at M8 on various Ebays - it's now flooded with M8/8.2 - all at attractive prices compared to those a week before. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
psss Posted September 9, 2009 Share #24 Posted September 9, 2009 of course the m9 is a different camera then all the others.....and i have one on order... BUT: when i compared the m8 with the 5d...the difference was obvious....i am mostly interested in base iso and at 160 it just blew the 5D away....money, AF, handling, size,...nothing mattered....the m8 it was.... now: i have collected several raw dngs from the web....and actually none compare very favorably to the 5dII...at base iso...at higher iso it is not only the noise but also the pretty limited DR which speaks agains the m9.... i will check it out and try and dive in deeper....i really WANT the m9 to give me the better files and i will live with lower iso IF the base iso is noticeably better then the 5DII.....but so far i haven't seen anything to convince me.....not taking into consideration AF, price, handling, size..... btw: i shoot leica glass on the 5DII so please don't tell me about the drawing and glow...i know all about it.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 9, 2009 Share #25 Posted September 9, 2009 M8 prices from E-Bay: 2,400$.-, 2,699.- 2,399.- etc etc.Your dealer works for charity or deals in something else... The price he's offering is in the middle of the dollar prices you've quoted. What he said was that he's happy to sell on the M8 at a minimal profit because he's happy to make the margin on the M9 sale. I can post his telephone number if you want to tell him 'he deals in something else'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica007 Posted September 9, 2009 Share #26 Posted September 9, 2009 But at the same time, how many threads say that they are different tools for different applications ? not too many in this world use different tools [i.e. cameras] for different purposes. people tend to get all rounders. doesn't the present market share of RF vs. SLR tell you that? point is : can leica become a prominent and serious player with M9 ? I sincerely want it to be so. but I won't allow my emotional attachment to Leica to colour my rational judgement on acquiring one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica007 Posted September 9, 2009 Share #27 Posted September 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm not making nor care to make direct comparisons with SLRs. Others may, but I really don't like using SLRs so they aren't even on the table for comparison, at any price point. All I'm saying is that there is enough of high ISO improvement from the M8 that it's noticeable and from the samples I've seen they look pretty nice. well, then, in a perfect monopoly DRF market, you will have to accept whatever comes your way. you have already limited your set of choice, and ready to pay the premium for whatever changes are brought in ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted September 9, 2009 Share #28 Posted September 9, 2009 not too many in this world use different tools [i.e. cameras] for different purposes. people tend to get all rounders. doesn't the present market share of RF vs. SLR tell you that? point is : can leica become a prominent and serious player with M9 ? I sincerely want it to be so. but I won't allow my emotional attachment to colour my rational judgement on acquiring one. They clearly don't care about becoming a prominent and serious player, based on the web cast -- if by that you mean competing head to head with Canon & Nikon and the entire SLR world. They are content to being a niche player, so why try to impose goals upon them that are contrary to their expressed goal? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted September 9, 2009 Share #29 Posted September 9, 2009 well, then, in a perfect monopoly DRF market, you will have to accept whatever comes your way. you have already limited your set of choice, and ready to pay the premium for whatever changes are brought in ! True enough. Sure, a competitor in the DRF market might (thankfully) bring prices down but until one actually comes along, it's not a problem I care worrying about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 9, 2009 Share #30 Posted September 9, 2009 How many people in the streets would know what a Leica is nowadays ? About 1% ? To be a snob object, it would have to be recognized as such. This is not the case. Some can afford it, others not. Point. Your statement sounds just like class war propaganda. I you pass 10,000 people on the street 9,999 will say "oh,you borrowed your grandpa's camera?". But the one will say "gee, it's a 8000$ Leica with the 6,000$ lens!". That's the real snobbery in the best Oscar Wilde tradition. "I have simple tastes. I like the best". So do I, better yet for half price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica007 Posted September 9, 2009 Share #31 Posted September 9, 2009 They clearly don't care about becoming a prominent and serious player, based on the web cast -- if by that you mean competing head to head with Canon & Nikon and the entire SLR world. They are content to being a niche player, so why try to impose goals upon them that are contrary to their expressed goal? it's not about setting goals, but about recovering Leica's financial health. being a niche player almost killed Leica. Didn't we have a discussion on this forum about Leica's losses in the recent years? Millions of dollars spent on R&D - mentioned in the webcast - did not go to catch a few customers. What's wrong in casting a wider net? I want Leica to fly long haul. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 9, 2009 Share #32 Posted September 9, 2009 That's the real snobbery in the best Oscar Wilde tradition. "I have simple tastes. I like the best".So do I, better yet for half price. Then again old Oscar did rage about people who knew the price of everything, but the value of nothing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica007 Posted September 9, 2009 Share #33 Posted September 9, 2009 I care worrying about. One thing I care about is Leica's survival as an independent company - not getting sold or merged with other big companies. hence, it's important for it to stay put, innovate and serve us well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted September 9, 2009 Share #34 Posted September 9, 2009 Millions of dollars spent on R&D - mentioned in the webcast - did not go to catch a few customers. What's wrong in casting a wider net? I want Leica to fly long haul. Nothing at all, but the M platform will never be that wider net. That was decided before I was born (early 70s). Perhaps an R9 replacement can do that and more power to Leica to develop it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica007 Posted September 9, 2009 Share #35 Posted September 9, 2009 Then again old Oscar did rage about people who knew the price of everything, but the value of nothing. value comes not out of tools [Leica being one among many] that people use, but laden in their vision and philosophy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 9, 2009 Share #36 Posted September 9, 2009 Nothing at all, but the M platform will never be that wider net. The Leica M started to become non-mainstream when Nikon released the Nikon F. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted September 10, 2009 Share #37 Posted September 10, 2009 So even earlier than the early 70s... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 10, 2009 Share #38 Posted September 10, 2009 value comes not out of tools [Leica being one among many] that people use, but laden in their vision and philosophy. Agreed, but some of us prefer to use tools that allow us to see a vision of the real world, rather than an illusion seen through a wide open f1.4 lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica007 Posted September 10, 2009 Share #39 Posted September 10, 2009 Nothing at all, but the M platform will never be that wider net. That was decided before I was born (early 70s). Perhaps an R9 replacement can do that and more power to Leica to develop it. not only with M , but with host of products. otherwise, creating a very good tool is bound to attract many new customers - M9 has all the qualities that one expects, it's just about fine tuning those, [ and yes, we haven't heard the last thing on M9] My concern is that people tend to get too emotional when it comes to things Leica and ignore the problem areas. I want M9 to be the "perfect" tool and problem free vis-a-vis the best in the market in this price range. Hope that clears my position - I am not an M9 basher, but a well-wisher. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted September 10, 2009 Share #40 Posted September 10, 2009 Fair enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.