Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/11/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Comparison M9, R9
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 10:47:04 -0600
References: <C8FD846D.632E%mark@rabinergroup.com>

Imacon developed the DMR.
They have been at the forefront of high-end digital imaging for a very long 
time.
<http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Imacon-launch-16-million-pixel-FlexFrame-4040-digital-camera-back-481>
Leica did a very bold thing in working with them to develop the "first" 
digital back for a 35 mm camera.
<http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Imacon-to-develop-worlds-first-digital-back-for-35mm-SLR-cameras-1361>

Imacon was well respected enough in the high-end digital imaging field
to be bought by Hasselblad in order to advance their own digital technology.
It was this purchase that doomed the Imacon/Leica cooperation.
Which turned out to be most unfortunate for Leica for some time.

And continues to be unfortunate for Leica R8/9/DMR users.
However these unfortunate shifts in ownership,
which prevented further development,
does not imply that the original design and implementation,
including image quality, is not top shelf,
even by current, up to the minute, standards.

It was that 
Regards,
George Lottermoser 
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist





On Nov 8, 2010, at 9:41 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:

> I'm still assuming an M9 with its full frame sensor can shoot rings around 
> a
> DMR in most circumstances which would be of course more extenuating. As in
> maybe iso 400 and maybe not high noon on a roof.
> 
> I don't think Leica all of a sudden got stupid when it picked out the 
> sensor
> and its back up mechanisms for the Leica M9.



In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Comparison M9, R9)