Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/06/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric.......why does a photojournalist NEED an SLR? What can you not accomplish (except for TTL flash) with an M camera? Francesco At 05:09 PM 6/23/98 , you wrote: >At 07:01 PM 6/23/98 +0200, you wrote: >>On Tuesday, June 23, 1998 9:03 AM, apbc [SMTP:apbc@public1.sta.net.cn] > >>I kind of disagree with this. I believe on the opposite that it is urgent >>that Leica commits itself officially to produce a digital M body as soon as >>reasonably possible. This will of course require partnerships with the > >That is something I would find highly unlikely. First of all, the M system >of lenses is too limited to create a camera that's digital. The R system >would be much better suited to digital applications. Not only because an >SLR would appeal to a whole lot more people, but because it has a 15mm >lens, whereas the M only has 21 at its wide end. All digital cameras that >are of any use need lenses of at least 14-15 mm, because the magnification >factor isn't going to improve any time soon. Nikon's solution to a >full-frame camera has a maximum aperture of f/6.7 because of the optics to >make it full frame. > >And the size of the electronics to run a digital M6 would make it so large >as to be totally out of character for the camera. > >And forget about that film insert digital thing. First of all, it doesn't >exist. Second of all, it would be so limited in function and capacity that >it would be useless for pro use, and amateurs wouldn't like it either. > >I bet Leica has a digital back for the R8 coming, or farther down the road >a digital R camera of some sort. But looking at Leica's clientele, I doubt >they feel any urgency at all to go digital. Film is still superior in the >"movable" camera world. Would Leica users stand for anything less? I don't >think so. > > >>electronic imaging world but is the only way to encourage possible buyers >>who would (and should) think twice before investing mountains of money in >>Innovation built upon the core expertise of the company is the only way >>out. Today it means a totally modernised M body, and tomorrow it entails a >>high end photojournalism oriented digital camera. On the R side, I have a >>hard time projecting any future at all for the system. The objective is to >>gain market share, not to please hard core purists. Unfortunately. > >This makes no sense at all to me. The system that is growing faster than >the M system has no future? I think your prejudice in favor of the M system >is clouding your prognostacitorial abilities. :-) > >The R system is getting more attention from photojournalists than it has in >years because of the R8, and I suspect the prices of Nikons and Canons >these days. Photojournalsits don't mind buying used, if it works, and in >that area, used Leica Rs are not that much more expensive body for body >with new cameras from other manufacturers. > >High end digital = SLR. Photojournalism requires SLRs. Rangefinders are a >good part of the photojournalist's bag, but the M system could never take >the place of an SLR system R, Canon or Nikon in today's photojournalistic >world. Even Minolta. There is no way around it. > >>On a personal level, I find my Leica M system to be the most rewarding and >>fun giving photographic hardware I have ever used. But that is not enough >>to guarantee a future to the Leica company. > >Now that I agree with, but not for the same reasons I suspect. >-- > >Eric Welch >St. Joseph, MO >http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch > >Some people say that I'm superficial, but that's just on the surface. >