Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]----- Original Message ----- From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 9:56 PM Subject: RE: Digital M/Digital Rebel was Re: [Leica] Lost Faith in Leica > It's odd, though, Jonathan, that Cosina managed to pull the whole thing > off in next to no time. > > And it's also odd that people are in one breath telling us how no one > expect to hang on to one of them silly digicams for more than about 15 > minutes before having it labled obsolete, and in the next breath they're > telling us that Leica has to charge six arms and four legs for a digital > M because, after all, it wouldn't be a Leica without that build quality. > But if the damn thing's going to be obsolete in 15 minutes, and doesn't > have to be capabable of going off to boarding school with little > Skipper, Jr's little Skipper III, then why does it have to have that > Leica build and price tag? Confused minds really do want to know. :-) > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of > Jonathan Borden > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 3:35 PM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: Digital M/Digital Rebel was Re: [Leica] Lost Faith in Leica > > > Scott McLoughlin wrote: > > > Just because it might cost Leica $3K to make a digi > > M body doesn't meant many buyers will be willing > > to pay $5K for it - or whatever the numbers might > > come out to. > > > > Right now, I don't think folks expect their digital > > cameras to last them many, many decades. It's not > > perceived as an "investment" in the same way. > > Build quality is one thing and if Leica were interested in 'getting > something out the door' at a lower price point, they might subcontract > the production to a japanese or even chinese firm -- this has been done > before with Minolta etc. and witness the current crop of Leica digital > P&S. > > For the digital M I suspect there are other technical issues -- namely > the distance between the rear element and the sensor. With wide angle > lenses designed for rangefinders i.e. the M series, the angle that which > > the light strikes the film at can be quite acute -- look at the SA 21 > for a great example. > > This doesn't work great with run of the mill digital sensors and so I > expect some real work with microlenses is being done -- but imagine > trying to design a sensor that will work well with anything from an SA > 21 to a 135 -- not an easy task. The reason this is so much easier for > SLRs is that the lens already has to clear the mirror and consequently > the wide angle lenses are designed differently. > > Perhaps Epson has solved this problem. Perhaps it is not really a > problem. Perhaps the current R-D1 is a trial balloon for something > later. Perhaps Epson is going to use all the $$$ it makes on ink to buy > Leica and come out with a 20 mp R-D2. Who knows. We can speculate on > lots of things, but it is reasonable to speculate that the reason we > don't have a digital M *today* is that there are real engineering > issues. > > Jonathan > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information