Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica M8 / M8.2 / Ricoh GXR

Leica M8 / M8.2 / Ricoh GXR Smaller than full frame digital Leica M mount cameras. The Ricoh is included as a less expensive and viable digital Leica M lens platform.

View Poll Results: What are your purchase plans for the Leca digital RF?
I have my unit pre-ordered already. 123 15.17%
Need more cash 141 17.39%
Will buy it for sure sooner or later 234 28.85%
Not interested or have no plans to get one. 313 38.59%
Voters: 811. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 08-04-2006   #241
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Welcome Johnastovall. Let's hear you introduce yourself!
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-07-2006   #242
etrigan63
Rangefinder Padawan
 
etrigan63's Avatar
 
etrigan63 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Miami, FL
Age: 56
Posts: 474
I have my name on the waiting list at Cameras West. I plan on trading in my beloved Canon 1D Mk II + harem of lenses for the Leica M8 plus a 50mm f 1.4 to start. The Canon takes great pics but it is a tremendous load to have to drag around especially to trade shows.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-07-2006   #243
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
 
Stephanie Brim is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Iowa
Age: 36
Posts: 2,854
I'll be spending my $5,000 on a car, unfortunately. But the car will get me out of town to a better job, and that job will get me money for school, and school will get me a better job, and that job may get me the camera of my dreams. I don't think it'll be the M8, though. By the time I can get one, it's more likely to be the M10.
__________________

I had a baby girl on December 6, 2007. Yay motherhood!


One camera. Two lenses. Three shots per week.

2008 Street Photography Project
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-09-2006   #244
frobson
Rob Clayton
 
frobson is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wells Somerset UK
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jorge Torralba
Yes,

Another poll. With the digital world becoming the mainstream, I am curious how many woll but this new digital rangefinder camera.
It is not a question of whether to buy the new M8 but how many bodies you need to buy to ensure always having one available. My Digilux 2 was returned to Solms for warranty repair in June it will not be returned until mid September at the earliest . The problem is Solms have been waiting for new CCD boards. and they are two and a half month late! This is the worrying part of Leica developing digital cameras they will always be buying in the most important parts. If the supplier decides to stop production of certain items you could have a non-usable very expensive camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-10-2006   #245
rvaubel
Registered User
 
rvaubel is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Berkeley,Ca
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by frobson
It is not a question of whether to buy the new M8 but how many bodies you need to buy to ensure always having one available...... If the supplier decides to stop production of certain items you could have a non-usable very expensive camera.
Hopefully, the M8 will be less suseptable to this problem. A adequate supply of parts and a dedicated service staff is supposedly a given with the M8. This is not a throw away point and shoot.

BTW, it is precisely Epsons lack parts and service that drives most of us RD1 users to the Leica. There is nothing wrong with the camera, per se. Actually its a great camera, but corporate backup is sorely lacking.

I'm going to use my RD1 as a backup to the M8. In fact, if I had the M8, the Epson would be at DAG having a wonky rangefinder aligned. I'll be zone focusing till then.

Rex
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-11-2006   #246
OldNick
Registered User
 
OldNick is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Tullahoma, TN USA
Posts: 615
I voted for "not interested" because I can't justify the investment in a camera that will soon be made obsolete by new developments. I still get satisfaction from using Barnack Leicas. Is it my imagination, or do others find that the late model Leicas need a lot more service than the LTM Leicas? I can't see an advantage to making a larger investment to gain less reliability. Just my two cents!

Jim N.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2006   #247
nrb
Nuno Borges
 
nrb's Avatar
 
nrb is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: EU
Posts: 371
You're absolutely right, Jim.
The word LEICA stands for 35 mm film in simple and reliable cameras, served by the best glass money can buy.
nuno
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2006   #248
John Robertson
Registered User
 
John Robertson's Avatar
 
John Robertson is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Scotland UK
Posts: 1,554
Not remotely interested, to dear, and will be out of date in a few years!!
__________________
Purma Plus; Bessa R2; Bessa T;Fed2; Foca Standard x 2!!; Focasport 11 ;Fed Zarya ; AKW Arette 1c; Werramatic; Leica CL; ; Horizont 202; Olympus Trip35; Leica Mini3; Ilford Advocate: The Fed 2; Purma Plus and Ilford Advocate have been with me since they were new. (that makes me old )

Also other assorted junk (Digital camera )


Flikr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2006   #249
GeneW
Registered User
 
GeneW's Avatar
 
GeneW is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Port Credit, Ontario
Age: 74
Posts: 3,223
I don't know that I could ever justify the cost of one, but it certainly interests me. I'll be keenly following the reviews. One part of me worries that if this cam isn't successful, Leica, as we know it, may not survive much longer.

Gene
__________________
genewilburn.com
Gone digital: Olympus E-P7, Sony RX-100 II
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2006   #250
J. Borger
Registered User
 
J. Borger is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 942
What i find realy amusing is that people who shoot 30 year old Leicas, Canonets etc and want a digital camera to be as basic as can be .. with zero to none facilities if possible...... are the same people who are afraid the M8 will be obsolete in short time?

It will be just the same camera as an M7 with some digital facilities ... meterig will be the same in a couple of years, the histogram will look the same, the viewfinder will look the same too.
The sensor is just a filmtype ..... and 10MP will outperform scanned film in a couple of years too.

I am ready for the M8 .. sold my Canon 1Ds and assorted L glas last week ... my hands are free now!

I am sure the M8 will be a huge succes ..... i just hope Leica can fullfill demand in a reasonable time.
__________________
my website
my RFF gallery

Last edited by J. Borger : 08-12-2006 at 21:40.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #251
Mark Norton
Registered User
 
Mark Norton is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 421
Interesting point, I guess using an obsolete digital camera is not as cool as using an obsolete film camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #252
Macpod
Registered User
 
Macpod is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 149
A cropped sensor will be a tricky buy. it would loose alot of value when a full frame M9 comes out.

But people should know the megapixel war is over. so when leicas comes out with a full frame camera it will retain value, since few people will ever need more features. A full frame sensor with 20 MP will surpass film and full frame wil allow all legacy lenses to be used. I for one cant think of anymore i wish for in a RF digital.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #253
Nachkebia
Registered User
 
Nachkebia is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 36
Posts: 1,992
Quote:
I guess using an obsolete digital camera is not as cool as using an obsolete film camera.
Of course it is not, film camera has a physical cool value, digital camera does not
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nachkebia/

Zeiss Ikon, Leica M7, 21,25,35 biogon ZM, 28 elmarit ASPH, 50 planar ZM, 50 summilux asph
(hardcore nikonian)
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #254
rvaubel
Registered User
 
rvaubel is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Berkeley,Ca
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nachkebia
Of course it is not, film camera has a physical cool value, digital camera does not
That's where your wrong. Have you ever handled and RD1? Believe me, the RD1 has as much fondle value as any film camera that is constructed of metal and has an analog interface. The N90 was a film camera and had about the same fondle value as a Digital Rebel. The fact that it is film or digital doesn't have anything to do with it. It's all materials and clean, intuitive, analog interfaces. And of course craftsmanship.

Rex
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #255
Nachkebia
Registered User
 
Nachkebia is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 36
Posts: 1,992
well, can you change sensors? you can not, until you will be able to change sensors like you could change film or developing or printing chemical to suit your needs don`t talk about long lasting value
What if I don`t want to use kodak sensor, I want to use fuji sensor instead? what if I prefer, smaller megapixel count with better iso performance?
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nachkebia/

Zeiss Ikon, Leica M7, 21,25,35 biogon ZM, 28 elmarit ASPH, 50 planar ZM, 50 summilux asph
(hardcore nikonian)

Last edited by Nachkebia : 08-13-2006 at 03:37.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #256
rvaubel
Registered User
 
rvaubel is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Berkeley,Ca
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nachkebia
well, can you change sensors? you can not, until you will be able to change sensors like you could change film or developing or printing chemical to suit your needs don`t talk about long lasting value
What if I don`t want to use kodak sensor, I want to use fuji sensor instead? what if I prefer, smaller megapixel count with better iso performance?
Well the post processing stuff (developing the film, printing) we do in photoshop. As for the analogy between film and the sensor, the digital photographer can change "film" from shot to shot, at least with regards to the ISO.

In any case, if you could get only one film, say Tri-X, would that reduce the "lasting value" of your film camera?

Don't get me wrong, I love film. I love it for its tactile value, you can hold it and feel it. I also enjoy developing the film myself. Its so easy to get beautiful, scratch free negatives while watching television or typing this prattle on the internet. And, I still have a wet darkroom for making prints (aesthetics but mostly I hate scanning)

Anyway, I expect the M8 to have more fondle value than any camera I own with the exception of my mint 1926 Zeiss Ikon "Nixe" 9cm X 12cm folder. Of which I can get no film for . Talk about obsolete

Its your turn

Rex
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #257
Nachkebia
Registered User
 
Nachkebia is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 36
Posts: 1,992
You said it nothing to add, just improvising you know anyhow, just hope there will be small companys who will sell film and chemicals
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nachkebia/

Zeiss Ikon, Leica M7, 21,25,35 biogon ZM, 28 elmarit ASPH, 50 planar ZM, 50 summilux asph
(hardcore nikonian)
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #258
ghost
Registered User
 
ghost is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 703
someday, there will be a digital rangefinder from leica (kodak sensor), fuji (fuji sensor), canon (canon sensor), nikon (sony sensor)...so on and so forth.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #259
rvaubel
Registered User
 
rvaubel is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Berkeley,Ca
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nachkebia
You said it nothing to add, just improvising you know anyhow, just hope there will be small companys who will sell film and chemicals
I'm kinda worried about color film, even negative. I expect B&W will be around forever as almost anyone could manufacture it. Developing it you could do with teabags and drainc cleaner.

I'm thinking about trying to develop color negative film again. It wasn't that hard but its been since I was in high school and if nobady makes the film, whats the point? I hate scanning anyway.... and there is NO chance color paprer and chemicals will survive.

Kind of depressing

Anyway, now you know the most important reason I am getting the Digital M!!

Rex
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-13-2006   #260
Dale Cook
Registered User
 
Dale Cook is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
Age: 50
Posts: 63
It will completely depend of the specifications and price. I'm currently using an Epson R-D1 and am very pleased with it. However, I would be interested in the M8 if it comes in with more megapixels without an increase in noise, maintains Leica's legendary durability, and it's priced at a reasonable level. I will not however, convert to a Leica just for brand purposes.
__________________
DALE COOK
Epson R-D1 and assorted CV and Leica Lenses
My Gallery on RFF
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-14-2006   #261
Dougg
Seasoned Member
 
Dougg's Avatar
 
Dougg is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central Washington state
Posts: 1,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by rvaubel
.... and there is NO chance color paprer and chemicals will survive.
Oddly enough, Rex, the processing labs I'm familiar with print directly from digital files to traditional "wet" color papers for all their prints.
__________________
Doug's RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-14-2006   #262
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Im still in shock because I cannot get Daguerrotype plates anywhere anymore!!
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-14-2006   #263
rvaubel
Registered User
 
rvaubel is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Berkeley,Ca
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dougg
Oddly enough, Rex, the processing labs I'm familiar with print directly from digital files to traditional "wet" color papers for all their prints.
You are absolutely right. Paper technology(the final output) is completely independent of the method of capture of the image, whether film or digital.
Its color film that is in trouble. Not an easy product to make in your garage.

Rex
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-22-2006   #264
vol72
Registered User
 
vol72 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee USA
Posts: 62
No interest at this time. Maybe some interest eventually if a full size sensor is designed.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-22-2006   #265
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
A Leica M with a 18x24 cm sensor????
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-22-2006   #266
Mark Norton
Registered User
 
Mark Norton is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 421
It will be interesting to see how many of you film warriors change your tune when the M8 is announced and we can see what it can do. Rejecting a state of the art camera because it fails to adhere to some completely arbitrary standard established 80 or more years ago is plainly ridiculous.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-22-2006   #267
rvaubel
Registered User
 
rvaubel is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Berkeley,Ca
Posts: 787
Mark

It's interesting to see the gradual retreat of the "full frame" or nothing crowd. I think the 1.33X format is actually near the theoriretical sweet spot for a quality image consistant with the compact size required of the rangefinder format.

Rex
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-22-2006   #268
Mark Norton
Registered User
 
Mark Norton is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 421
Quote:
Originally Posted by rvaubel
Mark

It's interesting to see the gradual retreat of the "full frame" or nothing crowd. I think the 1.33X format is actually near the theoriretical sweet spot for a quality image consistant with the compact size required of the rangefinder format.

Rex
I agree and the undoubted attraction of a digital rangefinder camera - which is clear as soon as you pick up an R-D1 - will be all the more evident with the M8.

If Leica had gone for a FF camera, it would likely be too large, too heavy, too power hungry and too expensive. Most important though is that the image quality would not be good enough.

Last edited by Mark Norton : 08-22-2006 at 22:31.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #269
ian_watts
Ian Watts
 
ian_watts is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 531
Personally, I would always take a full frame camera over a 1.33x crop camera. I'm not a wide angle shooter (28 is as wide as I would ever want to go, 35 is my usual 'wide' lens of choice), I just prefer to use lenses for the field of view that they were designed for (and what I am used to). The M8 1.33x crop is a compromise which I will learn to live with for those applications where the convenience of digital wins the day.
__________________
Tumblr // Flickr // Instagram // ianwatts.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #270
ian_watts
Ian Watts
 
ian_watts is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Norton
Rejecting a state of the art camera because it fails to adhere to some completely arbitrary standard established 80 or more years ago is plainly ridiculous.
It may be an arbitrary standard (involving an ugly elongated format - though that's another story) but it's the standard to which all the M lenses have been designed and built. These lenses have a field of view and a 'look' that we are used to.

We know that the M8 will have a 1.33x crop sensor and those of us who will be buying it will have to live with that compromise. I don't see what point there is in turning this (currently unavoidable) compromise solution into a positive attribute of the M8. Given the choice between full frame and cropped frame (assuming all else is equal) I don't think many would choose the cropped version.
__________________
Tumblr // Flickr // Instagram // ianwatts.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #271
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by ian_watts
I just prefer to use lenses for the field of view that they were designed for (and what I am used to).
This is a valid point, but more for SLR use. The way of seeing the world througf a RF viewfinder is essentially different, as the framelines crop the unchanging view. The focal length that is actually on my camera, well, when shooting I tend to forget the actual number. As for design, a 18 mm radius lens for the 35 mm format will show a substantially better quality in the 12 mm circle, which is exactly the coverage of a 1.33 sensor.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #272
Mark Norton
Registered User
 
Mark Norton is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 421
I think you'll find image quality will also "win the day" more often that you are probably willing to admit. Discussions on the Leica forum suggests very few people go back to film once they have a DMR and I expect the M8 to be no different.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #273
Mark Norton
Registered User
 
Mark Norton is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 421
Jaap, your Pythagoras is a bit awry, the image circle radius for 35mm is 21.63mm across the diagonal, for 1.33 crop factor, 16.27mm but you are certainly correct the digital sensor misses out the lower quality area into the corners. Just look at the MTF figures for any lens, especially the wide-angles to see how the contrast starts falling off around 15 - 16mm.

Last edited by Mark Norton : 08-23-2006 at 05:55.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #274
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
That is correct, Mark, but the values of 12 and 18 are used in lens design as "field", as being half of the format.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #275
ian_watts
Ian Watts
 
ian_watts is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 531
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv
This is a valid point, but more for SLR use. The way of seeing the world througf a RF viewfinder is essentially different, as the framelines crop the unchanging view. The focal length that is actually on my camera, well, when shooting I tend to forget the actual number. As for design, a 18 mm radius lens for the 35 mm format will show a substantially better quality in the 12 mm circle, which is exactly the coverage of a 1.33 sensor.
The difference between RF and SLR viewing is a good point but it misses really what I mean by being used to the field of view of certain lenses. When I use a 50mm lens (which I use probably 75% of the time) I roughly know what I am trying to achieve with it long before I put the camera to my eye. My objections to the digital crop are that I need to think of the lens in 67mm focal length terms. Not an insurmountable difference but a different one nonetheless. There is also the issue that cropped fields of view mess around somewhat with our expectations regarding depth of field - an issue that is more pertinant to RF use where we don't have a WYSIWYG view.
__________________
Tumblr // Flickr // Instagram // ianwatts.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #276
ian_watts
Ian Watts
 
ian_watts is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Norton
I think you'll find image quality will also "win the day" more often that you are probably willing to admit. Discussions on the Leica forum suggests very few people go back to film once they have a DMR and I expect the M8 to be no different.

Image quality is not an entirely objective thing. I don't understand why I should be thought to be unwilling to admit to a view that I don't hold? I have used all manner of decent digital cameras for the last five years. There are a number of applications where digital is clearly the superior (and almost always usually the more convenient) option and on those occasions I happily shoot digital. However, for less commercial (and certainly personal) work I usually prefer the look I get from film. Why would I continue to shoot film (when I have the option of high quality 'full frame' digital) if I didn't like it?

(Why do those obsessed with digital capture find it so difficult to accept that some of us simply prefer the different look you get from film?)
__________________
Tumblr // Flickr // Instagram // ianwatts.co.uk

Last edited by ian_watts : 08-23-2006 at 08:30.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #277
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by ian_watts
(Why do those obsessed with digital capture find it so difficult to accept that some of us simply prefer the different look you get from film?)
I'm not quite sure in to which category you would try and force me to be. I shoot both film and digital in about 50-50 proportions...I'm sure there is nothing wrong with pointing out advantages or preferences of one system of recording light or the other. I see the difference as on the same level as discussing different types of film, less essential than colour versus black and white.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography

Last edited by jaapv : 08-23-2006 at 06:22.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #278
ian_watts
Ian Watts
 
ian_watts is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 531
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv
I'm not quite sure in to which category you would try and force me to be. I shoot both film and digital in about 50-50 proportions...I'm sure there is nothing wrong with pointing out advantages or preferences of one system of recording light or the other. I see the difference as on the same level as discussing different types of film, less essential than colour versus black and white.
I agree with you Jaap (though I personally see a difference in the 'look' between film and digital capture that goes slightly beyond the differences between various film types). Why would I want to force you into a category? My earlier response was to Mark.
__________________
Tumblr // Flickr // Instagram // ianwatts.co.uk

Last edited by ian_watts : 08-23-2006 at 06:48.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #279
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
I know what you mean by the "look" but I tend to feel that to be at leastly partly due to the Canon technology. I can photoshop a scan to look pretty digital and my Digilux2 produces pretty much film-like results. But then beauty is in the eye of the beholder
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-23-2006   #280
Nachkebia
Registered User
 
Nachkebia is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 36
Posts: 1,992
jaapv : proove
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nachkebia/

Zeiss Ikon, Leica M7, 21,25,35 biogon ZM, 28 elmarit ASPH, 50 planar ZM, 50 summilux asph
(hardcore nikonian)
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A digital dude's first experience of film rangefinders hinius Rangefinder Photography Discussion 30 05-18-2006 06:08
News: Film dinosaurs still roam in digital world bmattock Rangefinder Photography Discussion 0 01-23-2006 06:39
Another RF star goes to digital... peter_n Leica M Film Cameras 44 09-07-2005 00:06
leaving digital and going back to film wblanchard Rangefinder Photography Discussion 32 11-02-2004 19:48
Leica SLR digital camera MP Guy Rangefinder Photography Discussion 0 10-02-2003 14:26



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:08.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.