[LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)

In response to Bill's rant, Doug wrote:

>Great minds think alike.  See
>
><http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/10-2006/msg00160.html>
>
>Doug Herr


Doug, Bill, et al:

Leica's stated goal, with the R10, is to bring out a camera which 
would be, to the current dSLR market, what the M3 was to the 
rangefinder market in the 50's.  Something both revolutionary and 
stunningly good.

Amazingly the idea of improving on the DMR idea, making a changeable 
back that could be used to upgrade the sensor, etc., was not floated 
during our "R10 design discussion", so I can speak of this without 
violating my NDA.

I did, however, submit the idea to Leica (with full credit to it's 
source, Doug!) .   If you follow that idea through, while referring 
to the results of our little survey, you find that most will accept a 
camera which is the size of the present R8/9 without the motor winder 
or DMR attached.

I presented the idea that (for cost) they build on the current R9, 
because the basic body, mirror box & finder are already designed for 
full frame imaging and it's ergonomics are excellent.  They could 
install the shutter cocking motor in the space where the film went or 
where the film take-up reel is.  The battery and SD card would go 
into the remaining space, along with any needed 
electronics.  Electronics for AF, etc., could go under the top plate, 
where the film advance gears used to be. And, of course, the back 
would  be fully removable. carrying the screen, sensor etc,

Later development of newer models would be able to feature things 
like removable finders (SL quality, waist level, etc) , etc., but 
they would still use the same "docking port" for the digi-back.  In 
essence, a Hasselblad system for the 35mm sized dSLR market!

And, as Doug suggests, if the R10 were made this way, it would, 
perhaps, be feasible to then build the M9, with different focusing 
body, rangefinder focusing and thinner "M-sized" body accepting 
M-series lenses, yet still accept the same digital backs.  This would 
substantially reduce the cost of engineering future models in both 
ranges, while increasing profits.  If the identical backs are not 
possible, at least similar backs, where the form factor would fit 
each design, but the electronics would be common to both, thus still 
reducing development costs!

But the key in both systems, for both pros and amateurs alike, would 
be the preservation of investment!  Leica cameras last 30 years. 
Digital bits are outmoded in two, and horribly dated technology by 
6.  Interchangeable/upgradable backs would mean they sell us a camera 
& back for, say $5000.  The pros would buy the upgraded back every 
two years or so, while the amateurs might buy one every 4or 6 
years.  If we assume that the backs sell for $2000 each, over a 20 
year life, the pro will buy 1 camera and 9 backs, for a total sale of 
$23,000.  An amateur, who upgrades, say, every 5 years, on average, 
would still buy one camera and 3 backs, for a total of 
$11,000.    But, the cost would be spread over numerous years and not 
hurt nearly so bad.. except, perhaps, the first time!

This preservation of investment would also encourage photogs of all 
stripes to invest in lenses, as they know they will be able to use 
them on future models.  And for Leica, the money is in the lenses, 
not the cameras!

  Other than a polite 'thank you", I have heard nothing further on 
this idea.  Whether Leica go for it, or not, will be up to them.  But 
at least we've given them the idea!

  David.

PS:  Bill: I enjoyed your "rant"!
---

David Young,
Logan Lake, CANADA

Wildlife Photographs: http://www.telyt.com/
Personal Web-pages: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt




------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
    http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
    http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts: