[Leica] The DM-R has landed!

[tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant)]

Hi Don,
>>Most will agree that the R8/R9
viewfinder is probably the best in business.  If your work requires a
fabulous viewfinder then the DMR is your digital option. As good as the
Canon's are, and they are quite good, their viewfinders are not up to the SL
or the R8/9 viewfinder.<<<

I'm not saying the Canon viewfinder is anywhere near my R8's finders, quite 
frankly far from it. But it's not a super big deal, I just figured the more 
I used the 20D the easier it became to use without thought. Sure on occasion 
a bit of a struggle to be right on the mark sharp, but generally it works. 
Simply because inefficiencies of this nature I don't pay any attention to 
and just get on with picture taking. And yes some days it's a bit of a 
struggle.

>>>For you, the Noctilux was the tool, it gave you signature ability and a
quite different look.  It was a competitive edge.  Many think that spending
what you spent on a Noctilux is insane.<<<

Well I've been told that on more than one occasion. I'm insane! ;-)

>>>Similarly, for some, the viewfinder of the R8/9 gives them the same 
>>>advantage as the Noct gave you.  Within some limits, arguing about the 
>>>price of a tool that will return far more than it's cost is a futile 
>>>exercise.<<<

True and I've never got into any arguments over the cost of Leica gear 
simply because cost never counted when I needed a lens for work, or bodies. 
It simply was get it! Use it. Cost? Never a thought other than, "damn now we 
gotta pay for them." :-)

I suppose I'm being a little hard nose about the DMR without having one in 
hand, but my original understanding from posts were the back wasn't much 
good beyond 400. So that seemed to me as another one of the dumb ass 
mistakes we've seen Leica do this past 10 years or so. Not that I should 
care because I don't have a dime invested in the company. In their gear? You 
bet, lots! However it'll out live me anyway even if Leica crashes and burns 
it isn't a hand wringing concern.

So we come back to, if the back cost $6000.00 but doesn't produce the 
sensitivity to light the Canon does even in their simpler models.......

Naw this isn't going anywhere, you're right about the cost/use perspective. 
I don't put a dollar value on the fact I bought 3 M7's in one shot & 3 R8's 
with motors to do my work simply because they helped me do a better job, 
besides they're merely tools of the trade anyway.

I'm sure what happens on the list is, we have people who are damn fine 
amateurs and those who earn their keep through photography, so this creates 
a completely different perspective in regard to what equipment delivers, 
cost and their competition.

ted