[LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- From: Gary Pinkerton <gpinkcp@xxxxxxx>
- To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:31:33 -0500
That kind of set-up would sure get my vote too !
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 07:36:06 -0700To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
dsy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx: [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras Neil Gould wrote:
A practical way to offer modularity wasdemonstrated with the DMR, yet I don't
hear as much call around here for aDMR-2 as there is for an R-10.Hi Neil!The
reason you don't hear calls for a DMR-2 is that Leica (Hr. Kaufmann, himself)
have already said that the new camera will be called the R10.As for the DMR-2,
Doug Herr came up with that idea over two years ago. The idea was a digital
only body which, including the digital back, would be R9 sized. All the basic
electronics, battery, card holder, etc. would be the body - where the film bits
used to be; while the sensor and what electronics are necessary to run it,
would be in the back. This would help Leica in several ways. The cost to
market would be lower, as the basic body, mirror mechanism, finder etc., are
already engineered and could be used with few changes. As well, it would be
possible to bring an AF-confirmation model to market first, by simply buying
the necessary sensors/chips from Japan - and these are readily available.
Later, a full AF model could arrive and both could co-exist, much as the R5 &
R6 did. Later still, various changes to the body could be offered ... such
as removable finders (like the Nikon 'F') or a brighter finder (at higher cost)
much like the SL's finder, etc. Over time, new bodies, with newer features,
could be made, so long as they all accepted the same back. Sort of a 35mm
sized, digi, Hasselblad, whose many models all accepted the same backs.But the
big key would be the sensor. Let's assume that the first one would be 14
megapixels (this is all speculation - I have no knowledge of this). Two years
later, they introduce an 18mp model. But with the "smaller" model remaining
in the line at a lower price ... so that buyers would have a choice of pixel
count and price levels. Two years later still, the 22mp sensor is
introduced... and the 18mp becomes the lower cost option, with the 14mp model
being discontinued. The advantages, to Leica, aside from lower cost/ quicker
time to market would be that they could offer pros the one thing that Leica's
competition is not offering them. Protection from obsolescence. That alone,
might be enough to make many pros move from brands N & C to brand L.If we
assume that the body sells for $3000 and the back for $2000, the price is no
worse than an M8. But if Leica can sell you a new back, every two to four
years, they've picked up a gravy train (after all, the electronics are less
expensive to build than the mechanics of the basic body) while offering a huge
financial advantage to the pro market they wish to capture. It would also
create a used market, where the cameras, because of their upgradability, would
keep much more of their value that most digitals. Another reason for Pros to
buy Leica.Such a camera would combine the legendary longevity of a Leica body
with the ability to keep it current, electronically. Let's face it, even those
Leica enthusiasts who struggle to afford their cameras and lenses could come up
with 2k$ every 4 years, for a new back. After all, that would be just $500 per
year... within the range of almost any hobbyist. The pros & advanced (read:
better heeled) amateurs would keep up with the newest, while the poorer among
us (that's me) would probably stay two years behind the curve ... for lower
cost. But we'd still by buying, to keep relatively "up to date".Will Leica
build such camera? I have absolutely no idea. But to me, it makes a lot of
sense, as a way for a "niche player" to increase the size of their niche.
---
David Young,
Logan Lake, CANADA
Limited Edition Prints at: www.furnfeather.net
Personal Web-site at: www.main.furnfeather.net
Stock Photography at: http://tinyurl.com/2amll4
- References:
- [LRflex] Modular cameras (was: a lot of other things)
- From: Neil Gould
- [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- From: David Young
Other related posts:
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- » [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- [LRflex] Modular cameras (was: a lot of other things)
- From: Neil Gould
- [LRflex] Re: Modular cameras
- From: David Young