Classic VS Disposable

[glasgowdave]

I'm a little perturbed here by the enthusiasm for what is, to all intensive purposes (and in my opinion) one of the most outrageously cynical wastes of money ever produced by any camera company. If you spend 5 grand on a camera, it either better be right at the top of the heap in every sense of the digital meaning, or something durable, long lasting, and handbuilt. The Leica M8, when it arrives, will undoubtedly produce fine images, especially with the available lenses. However, it is, essentially, a 10mp digital compact that will be totally obsolete in less than a year. That's not much for your 5 grand, and to me it makes a mockery of what has gone before.

Give me an MP and a decent slide scanner any day!

[Matthew]

Thank you for sharing, but I believe some of us would disagree with you on a number of points.

Firstly, the M8 will be at the top of its own digital heap as its only competition is the Epson RD-1 which it will clearly surpass in quality and unfortunately price. I suspect for many of us a digital SLR isn't even competition for the M8 as the working experience is so different--I presume it is for yourself as you are now using an MP.

Secondly, I believe that the M8 will be every bit as durable and long lasting as its film counterparts for normal usage--perhaps it won't function at -30° like a film M might but then again I probably won't be functioning then so why do I care if my camera is. How much of the M8 is handbuilt in the sense you're referring to: by European rather than Asian hands, remains to be seen, but ultimately I'm sure the quality will be up to Leica standards.

I disagree entirely with the notion that the M8 is essentially a 10MP digital compact. The working experience is entirely different, the lenses are clearly superior and mostly due to having a larger sensor and the increased ability to control depth of field the images will be in another league than the average digital compact.

If you truly believe the M8 will be "totally obsolete" in one year, I'm sorry but you're just wrong. Will there be a camera that has a greater MP count, sure (there is now). Will there be one with greater dynamic range, possibly (but if the DMR is any indication then the M8 will hold its own in this regard). Will there be better digital rangefinder, not likely. Will the M8 be unable to produce a good, nay, a great print a year from now, emphatically yes. Obsolete, please...

I don't mean to belittle your obvious preference for film--I currently use an M6TTL and slide scanner and the results are great--but for those of us who fancy an M8 the cost and potential disadvantages are outweighed by what we perceive as great advantages.

Ultimately, why does it disturb you if some us are excited about something you don't even want?

[jaapv]

Originally Posted by glasgowdave

I'm a little perturbed here by the enthusiasm for what is, to all intensive purposes (and in my opinion) one of the most outrageously cynical wastes of money ever produced by any camera company. If you spend 5 grand on a camera, it either better be right at the top of the heap in every sense of the digital meaning, or something durable, long lasting, and handbuilt. The Leica M8, when it arrives, will undoubtedly produce fine images, especially with the available lenses. However, it is, essentially, a 10mp digital compact that will be totally obsolete in less than a year. That's not much for your 5 grand, and to me it makes a mockery of what has gone before.

Give me an MP and a decent slide scanner any day!

Is anybody compelling you to buy one??? I only ask because you got your knickers in such a twist that you confuse a RF with detachable lenses with a point and shoot and that you forget the megapixel race is in the past. There must be a reason.....Some of us are prepared to spend that money on a body as it is not that much compared to the cost of our lenses, which work fine on the film bodies we have as well, others will not, but that is fine and we don't get all upset about that.

[matt fury]

Totally obsolte in less than a year? Damn. Somebody should have told Leica.

[harmsr]

I'll cancel my pre-order right now. Thank you for heads up and preventing me from making such a horrible mistake. I go get a pocketable Canon or Sony instead.

[kbg32]

Ok, who took the keys to my DeLorian?

[back alley]

Originally Posted by kbg32

Ok, who took the keys to my DeLorian?

fell off my chair...lol

[Gabriel M.A.]

What is with the new accounts making all these trollish Leica-related threads lately?

frankly, I wonder if there is a Hotmail-like site that is being used a lot...

[photogdave]

Just don't feed hungry trolls!

[KM-25]

Hmmm. The OP is being a bit extreme.

But......I bought into to Leica for a couple of reasons:

1. I wanted the finest optics to put in front of my Kodachrome project.

2. I want a timeless film camera system that I almost never need to upgrade, works without batteries and is all manual ( I do work at -30 ). I will not even buy an M7 for the reasons above.

The only reason I am interested in the M8 is to see it succeed enough to give Leitz an economic boost. Other than that, I have a brilliant Canon digital system.

Barring any issues, I am sure the M8 will be well received by many.

[AndyPiper]

"to all intensive purposes" - you would be meaning "to all intents and purposes", laddie?

"If you spend 5 grand on a camera, it either better be right at the top of the heap in every sense of the digital meaning" - well, the tops of the heap in digital are the MF backs which run $20,000 to $30,000. The M8 pretends to neither the top of the heap nor the top of the price scale.

"However, it....will be totally obsolete in less than a year." - define "obsolete"

"Give me an MP and a decent slide scanner any day!" - in terms of image quality, this combo became "obsolete" for me the moment I saw what 10 Mpixels can do.

However, one can always keep using "obsolete" technology for as long as it meets one's needs. Which is what you choose to do with film and what I'll choose to do with the M8. Enjoy!

[c.poulton]

The M8 won't be 'obsolete' within a year, but I do wonder if it will still be used in, say, 55 years time? (My IIIf's are that old and still going strong - to upgrade them I just put in a roll of film )

Not that my argument should stop anyone buying the M8 now, it's just that I feel that with digital, things do move fast and who knows what the next 'big thing' in sensor development will bring.

Also, what is the life span of a sensor - will it still even work after 50 years and over time will dead and noisy pixels surface? As with a shutter wearing out, you could just get a replacement, however, will the sensor be still available in the future?

I think that these are important questions, however we should buy the M8 to use now, use often and enjoy. In 50 years time lets hope that we can just upgrade to the new M14

[pvdhaar]

In a world where product life cycles are measured in months rather than years, parts supply is the main problem..

Truth of the matter is, that in 10 years time a broken M8 will be beyond repair. The electronic parts will no longer be produced, and what you have is a doorstep.

True, fully mechanical cameras also depend on parts that are out of production, but these can be custom made by anyone with a little experience on a lathe/mill. Don't expect a digital sensor or a flexibele printed circuit to be kitbashed in the same way in someones' garage..

As fine as the M8 may turn out to be, its probability of becoming a 'classic' is pretty slim in my view..

[Simon Larbalestier]

Originally Posted by harmsr

I'll cancel my pre-order right now. Thank you for heads up and preventing me from making such a horrible mistake. I go get a pocketable Canon or Sony instead.

I'm on the phone right now to cancel my order with Robert White...........

[jaapv]

I see now that I was far too friendly in my reply...

[AndyPiper]

Ah...so suddenly we've gone from 1 year to 10 years or 55 years as the life-cycle test for 'obsolescence.'

Since I've only been using film Ms for 5 years - that means I should get at least twice as much life out of my M8 as I have out of my (soon to be disposable) M4-P, right?

Yes, electronic parts are likely to disappear faster than mechanical parts (I understand some parts of the original M6 circuitry are already defunct). So my M8 will last as long as the parts supply PLUS the remaining years until it has a fatal failure. At that point - and at no point prior to that time - it will become obsolete. My guess is 15 years - which comes out to $300 per year. Maybe even better than that - in 35 years of slam-bang photojournalism I've sent in a total of 3 cameras for repair.

I happily shot film for 35 years. 10 megapixels plus Leica glass is already better than film (for that matter it's better than 16Mpixels with most (not all) Canon lenses), so I should be good for another 35 years (which gets me to age 87) - REGARDLESS of what new technical advances come along in sensor technology.

I can ignore them, especially if they are only available in SLRs. A full-frame digital M might get my attention (even if it's still only 10Mp). But that's about all.

Anyone who wants to putter around keeping a "classic" mechanical whatsis running, scrounging parts and machining gears and hoping someone still makes tires or film, would be better off with a 1928 Morris or Ford or some such. Bigger parts - and it's easier to climb under.

Cameras are for taking pictures. "A toothbrush" as Don McCullin called his. Use 'em till they drop, and then move on. Whether my camera(s) will ever become "classics" is the silliest (expletive) reason possible for making a buying decision.

[pfogle]

In agreement with Andy...

I was in the Tate a few days ago for an opening, and the only press photog present was using a 4mp EOS 1D which must be at least 4 yrs old now. His comment - 'who needs more than 4mp?' - not my sentiment, admittedly, but he was a working pro, and clearly able to sell the shots.

I can't see any reason why the current generation of digital cams should go obsolete - small format digital seems to have topped out at between 6-10mp except for a few that challenge medium format.

The history of photography is littered with obsolete film systems, and there's a chance that film itself will become obsolete before digital cameras do. So let's move on from this old chestnut?

[varjag]

You know, Leitz and Barnack didn't just sit and thought "let's make a camera that'll become classic and will defeat obsolecence for decades" back in 1920s. They made a camera with form dictated by function, it turned out beautiful and it won hearts of great photographers of the time and helped them make some of the iconic images of the century. That's what made Leica classic! Not fine chrome finish. Not durability. Not precision! There were some Swiss made gems at the time which had all that and then some, hardly remembered by anyone but collectors.

Just let's hope that M8 would prove just as great to use as its predcessors.

[glasgowdave]

I see i've lit the touch paper! I'm just a little concerned at Leica marketing what (in my opinion) is really a very, very expensive compact. Yes, the user experience will no doubt be superlative, yes the lenses are outstanding, but there's just something about the idea of it that leaves me cold...a little bit like a diesel in a Porsche 911T, with added automatic transmission. Thanks for your replies, especially the patronising use of the word "laddie"...I've fought for my country in two services as a commissioned officer, but thanks for the sentiment.

[varjag]

Dave, M8 is not any more nor less of a digital compact that MP is of a film compact. Both are fairly expensive as that.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by glasgowdave

I see i've lit the touch paper! [...] Thanks for your replies, especially the patronising use of the word "laddie"...I've fought for my country in two services as a commissioned officer, but thanks for the sentiment.

No, you've just proven that some Leica users can be rather touchy in defending their gear. In some cases not even in their gear, but in the gear that the company that made some of their gear will eventually produce but which a large share of them will not even buy. Flat-out amazing.

This discussion has been around over and over, and we'll continue to see it for a long time. Some people will defend Leica as a company and as a product maker to no end. They will claim that Leica designs its lenses for bokeh, when there is no indication that Leica has ever done so, maybe until very recently. They will defend mechanical Leicas against electronic cameras with the battery supply argument, while all they would have to do is carry two or three spare batteries along with the thirty rolls of film they are carrying anyway on any expedition beyond the edge of civilization. They defend it with the reliability argument, while sending their M6s off to mandatory factory service every couple of years (as Dante Stella has put it). They argue in favour of it with the Leica style of photography argument, then sell of their brand-new M7 Titaniums and Summiluxes after one roll of film when they discover that "the M7 is not for them". And now with the M8, we see that in the digital age we need a new argument, so similarly they will now defend the M8 against the quite evident threat of obsolescence with the as of now quite optimistic claim that "excellence" (whatever that is) somehow trumps the shortened product cycles in the digital age. (I would like to see it do so, but OTOH I see hardly anyone still using the quite excellent Kodak digital SLRs or Canon D60's.)

I think what we can see illustrated here is that some Leica aficionados are emotionally invested in their gear to an amazing extent. I don't think that's a bad thing, it's only not always entirely rational in its expression and its results.

Philipp

[jaapv]

Well, Dave, as a military man you will undoubtedly be familiar with the effect on the other side if one rushes in with guns blazing! Anyway, I'm sure we'll be in agreement on many other subjects in the future, so let's just start off the way most of us did: welcome to the forum!

[rxmd]

Hi Jaap,

Originally Posted by jaapv

and that you forget the megapixel race is in the past.

Well, you may be right about the megapixel part (and even that is debatable), but the race in sensor technology is certainly not over. There are many other fields of development here, addressing factors such as dynamic range, sensitivity, noise, light fall-off, corner sharpness with wideangles, colour reproduction and last not least size and cost, that will make today's sensors obsolete in comparison with tomorrow's. Leica will be affected by this just as any other camera maker will. If they want to remain competitive, they will have to continue putting new sensors in their cameras. The race isn't over, just the track might be different. In sports terminology, it's like triathlon; just because you're done swimming doesn't mean you've finished it.

It would be sense to have a modular design here, but then they apparently don't make this part of the camera themselves. Building modular cameras doesn't have much of a tradition at Leica; they have been becoming better at this with products such as the the DMR and the use of the R shutter in the M8, let's hope for them that they can keep this up.

Philipp

[jaapv]

I don't doubt that technical advances are taking place,you are 100% right about that, but what about practical significance? If we take Canon's D60 to 30D series as an example we have a timespan of about ten years. The major updates have been in the photographical part of the camera: ergonomics, size, handling,viewfinder, most imporantly autofocus. Yes, the megapixels have grown from 6 to 8, but that is rather insignificant, yes, colour balance has improved, but I use RAW anyway, yes, noise at high ISO is better, but it was not bad on the D60 and how often do we use 3200 ? In the end it boils down to: the camera has improved, especially if one puts the first beside the last, but not so dramatically that there is a significant difference in the printed results. I would hope the M8 will do better than that so I think a technical life span of 15 years is not unrealistic, unless current evolution is replaced by some shattering revolution in sensor or electronic design. Who knows? But then, most RF affectionados are not the type that fall for a newest and bestest hype. And in the end, what is very good today will not suddenly turn into worthless junk in the future.
To remain with your Triathlon example: swimming is a lot slower than cycling!I think we have just started the swimming part now.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by jaapv

If we take Canon's D60 to 30D series as an example we have a timespan of about ten years.

Kinda short years you have in the Netherlands - the D60 was presented in 2002, which I think relativises the rest of your argument somewhat!

If you talk ten years, you can compare today's Canon 30D to the six-megapixel, $12.000 Kodak DCS460 (link at www.mir.com.my) instead. Or the Kodak/Canon EOS DCS-1 at $30.000. I'm not saying that was a bad camera. Actually for its time it was outright amazing, with a price to match. It's not as obsolete as the eleven years since then would suggest, especially since they probably sell for about $300 now, and in the $300 league it's quite competitive. But it's obsolete anyway - eight seconds between two-image picture bursts, size, sensitivity, available storage size, ergonomics (where is that display?); it's obvious digital photography has come a long way since then, the "race" has been quite heated and intense, and no digital camera manufacturer could have afforded to rest on his laurels the way Leica did for a long time.

Philipp