[LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: Steve Barbour <kididdoc@xxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:24:47 -0700
> 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.
all well and good David...
for Leica at present, the future is the M8...and it seems they are
having some difficulty with that.
I sincerely doubt they are thinking much about the M9 and the R 10....
you may be thinking about it more than Leica.
Steve
> 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/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
- Follow-Ups:
- [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: David Young
- References:
- [LRflex] Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Colin Howarth
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Colin Howarth
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Colin Howarth
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Dr. Puritz
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Ted Grant
- [LRflex] ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: William Abbott
- [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: Douglas Herr
- [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: David Young
Other related posts:
- » [LRflex] ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- » [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Colin Howarth
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Colin Howarth
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Colin Howarth
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Dr. Puritz
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: Comparison of M8 Photos in Infra-Red.
- From: Ted Grant
- [LRflex] ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: William Abbott
- [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: Douglas Herr
- [LRflex] Re: ...M8 Photos & Infra-Red (for Ted)
- From: David Young