Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/05/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Great writing Mark I'd just like to add that I think that as digital capture is a clear advance over film capture and I'd like to go right on and state that inkjet printing is a clear and present advance over darkroom printing as well. And I'd like to say that this is not my quirky minority opinion but I'm just stating the obvious, if not a consensus than darned close and will be clear consensus quite soon. I have zero apologies to make about shooting and printing digital. Its not a cop out. Its not a short cut. Its where photography has arrived at this time. I don't yearn for the glory days of film. I'm too excited about the pix I'm creating every day to even try to remember it. Mark -------------------- Mark William Rabiner Photography > From: Mark William Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 00:25:05 -0400 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica M9P or M9.2 or M10 > > The Hasselblad and other cube modular cameras can use differed backs. > That should have shot them right to the front of the pack when the digital > thing hit but it didn't because the backs cost 40,000 dollars. It did the > opposite. > The Camera back is 90 present of the cost of the digital package. > I don't think that makes it all that more flexible. > So when the S2 because the S2.1 or S2.b you get a new camera and a second > body if you think you have to have those cutting edge specs. It does not > make the results you've gotten from your S2 untenable or unusable. Nor the > results you'd get from it in the future though you may find yourself a tad > less "competitive". > > I'm behind the S system I think its brilliant and will prove itself over > time and be one of the many choices Leica has made in the past decade > which > will make it one of the top camera companies again. Just a few years ago > it > was being talked about on the LUG and everywhere else in the past tense. > Now > its very much a prime camera company of the future and present. Everyone > wants to see that they're up to next. Eyes on them! > > Mark > > > -------------------- > Mark William Rabiner > Photography > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > mark at rabinergroup.com > Cars: http://tinyurl.com/2f7ptxb > > > > >> From: Doug Herr <wildlightphoto at earthlink.net> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >> Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 14:38:47 -0400 >> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica M9P or M9.2 or M10 >> >> Lawrence Zeitlin wrote: >> >>>>> >> I do fault Leica for abandoning the upgrading philosophy that served >> them well in the past. Why should any photographer have to buy an entirely >> new camera to get an improved sensor or microprocessor? The really >> expensive >> parts of the camera, the body, the rangefinder, the viewfinder, and most >> of >> the internal mechanisms remain unchanged. >> <<< >> >> I suspect that for a camera produced in the thousands (vs. many tens of >> thousands) a full-frame sensor and the supporting electronics are the >> expensive parts. >> >>>>> >> I would have liked Leica to design a modular digital M camera where >> packages >> of components could have been easily replaced. Failing that, I would have >> appreciated a digital back for the M and CL cameras. It worked for the R >> series. >> <<< >> >> Unfortunately most of the market didn't see the advantages of this >> approach >> in the R series. Along with improved sensors and processors the market >> wanted ever-improved AF, storage options, frame rates and other such >> features. A few electronic upgrades may be possible without also >> upgrading >> data bus, power supply, heat dissipation, & card writers but sooner or >> later (usually sooner) the camera's technology as originally built hits >> the >> wall and the upgraded camera's performance will be throttled by a >> non-upgradeable component. >> >> During the LTM era upgrades were feasible because labor was relativley >> inexpensive and the pace of equipment technology change was much slower >> than we see now. It makes little economic sense to use expensive labor to >> upgrade an existing camera that will be limited by its older technology >> when a replacement camera not limited by older components costs less. >> >> Doug Herr >> Birdman of Sacramento >> http://www.wildlightphoto.com >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> mail2web - Check your email from the web at >> http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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