Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica M10, 240 family, M-P, M60

View Poll Results: Which sensor would you like to see in the M10?
Kodak CCD 159 37.32%
Japanese CMOS (canon/sony) 142 33.33%
Foveon X3 (sigma/kodak) 109 25.59%
Japanese Nikon/Sony 16 3.76%
Voters: 426. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 09-09-2011   #41
hxpham
Registered User
 
hxpham is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Klein View Post
The sensor in the D7000/K5, made full frame and adapted for RF, would be pretty amazing. Better high ISO and dynamic range.

Meanwhile, I will shoot with my M8.

--Peter
Yeah. Hopefully the next Leica M is more of a workhorse/practical camera with a Sony CMOS sensor. From what I've seen the D7000/K5 sensors are amazing.
__________________
tumblr | flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-09-2011   #42
user237428934
User deletion pending
 
user237428934 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanmich View Post

Maybe an M11 revealed on the 11/11/2011 at 11:11:11 by 11 members of Leica direction?
The only thing that will happen beyond doubt at that date/time is the beginning of the fifth season (Karneval) where I live.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-09-2011   #43
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
I think it definitely needs a sensor change to allow it to have live view for critical focusing without relying on a mechanism that was developed in 1954 and is prone to innacuracy if abused!

That said ... would I really want to read/suffer the endless lens tests that would obviously result from such an upgrade!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-09-2011   #44
hxpham
Registered User
 
hxpham is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
I think it definitely needs a sensor change to allow it to have live view for critical focusing without relying on a mechanism that was developed in 1954 and is prone to innacuracy if abused!

That said ... would I really want to read/suffer the endless lens tests that would obviously result from such an upgrade!
I would be more interested in lens tests that sought to objectively compare the different bokeh characteristics of lenses, especially with regards to busy backgrounds and specular highlights. All these sharpness tests bore me too, Keith! Almost any modern lens is "sharp enough."
__________________
tumblr | flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-09-2011   #45
axiom
Non-Registered User
 
axiom's Avatar
 
axiom is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 637
so the new Kodak interline isn't an option?
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-09-2011   #46
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by axiom View Post
so the new Kodak interline isn't an option?
Could you elaborate on this interline thing? Never heard of it!

So as it stands the Kodak CCD is the most popular option! From this small online community, it appears leica is doing the right thing with their sensor tech...
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-09-2011   #47
Harry Lime
Practitioner
 
Harry Lime's Avatar
 
Harry Lime is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,675
All I want is a fully useable 14 stops in 16bit....

Leica should talk to Arri or whoever designed the sensor that is in the Alexa.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-10-2011   #48
FrozenInTime
Registered User
 
FrozenInTime's Avatar
 
FrozenInTime is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by axiom View Post
so the new Kodak interline isn't an option?
That would do the trick

Even sacrificing up to 50% of the pixels - to make space for the extra capacitors/transistors needed for interline transfer CCD/CMOS global shutter, would be fine.

Result 100% silence as the is no longer a need for a mechanical shutter.
No mechanical shutter = slimmer M2..M7 thickness body.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-10-2011   #49
bfffer
Registered User
 
bfffer is offline
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 112
Foveon X3 for sure.
__________________
Buy less, shoot more.

My blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-11-2011   #50
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by axiom View Post
so the new Kodak interline isn't an option?
Not really- it is an industrial sensor that is not designed for use in consumer imaging applictions.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-11-2011   #51
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfffer View Post
Foveon X3 for sure.
For sure- until one has a look at at the limited acceptance angle which makes it useless for short regisyer cameras like rangefinders....
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-11-2011   #52
kbg32
neo-romanticist
 
kbg32's Avatar
 
kbg32 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 5,592
One has to remember that the GXR and the NEX do not contain full frame sensors. The problems inherent with a full frame sensor rangefinder, do not exist for "cropped sensor" cameras, with, or without micro lenses.
__________________
Keith

http://keithgoldstein.me/
Keith’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2011   #53
animefx
Registered User
 
animefx is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 77
I would like to see a Kodak CCD once in the Leica M10. I think they are more than capable of giving us a solid 2 stop improvement in ISO noise while giving us even more megapixels to take advantage of our wonderful glass, or some cropping power to make up for the minimum focusing distance in the Leica rangefinders.

I'm mostly in support of CCD over CMOS mostly because I've been spoiled by the dynamic range in my M8, especially shadow details. Forget all the of tests, in real world use I get better usable dynamic range than my 5D2 does. I know the M9 is slightly better, so hopefully the M10 takes this a step further, maybe a small improvement in the shadows and the highlights over the M9 would be nice.

Anyway, If we could get a 2 stop improvement in ISO noise vs. the M9, then I think Leica should limit the M10's maximum to ISO 5000, which would hopefully look like iso 1250 on the M9.

The Sony NEX focus peak option looks nice, but I'm not sure I want that in my rangefinder cameras, especially if it means sacarficing CCD for CMOS. The better option is the simply buy a Nex 7 or 5n as a secondary camera.

Last edited by animefx : 09-12-2011 at 07:58.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2011   #54
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
If the Kodak CCD could do that, the M9 would have it, as it has a Kodak CCD... More megapixels=more noise so this is rather contradictory. And what would you need more pixels for? According to Zeiss, leica and Erwin Puts, anything over 40 Lp/mm is meaningless for image quality, so 18 Mp on a 24x36 sensor is the sweet spot.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2011   #55
animefx
Registered User
 
animefx is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 77
The Kodak CCD in the M9 is the best they could do at the time, the sensor is now over 2 years old. Advancements in sensor technology make it credible that the M10's sensor could be an improvement in several areas including ISO noise, dynamic range, and even megapixels.

More megapixels does not always mean more noise... For example, look at the original Canon 5D vs. Canon 5D mk II... The mk II has 9 more megapixels and 2 stops better ISO noise. Another example is the Canon 1D mk4 vs. mk3, same story, the mk4 has more megapixels and lower noise.

I'm not saying 18 mp is bad, I'm just saying there is nothing wrong with having more if anything for cropping power. With prime lenses the extra megapixels are often a god send. Heck I prefer using my M8 over my 5D2, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be useful having extra megapixels to play with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
If the Kodak CCD could do that, the M9 would have it, as it has a Kodak CCD... More megapixels=more noise so this is rather contradictory. And what would you need more pixels for? According to Zeiss, leica and Erwin Puts, anything over 40 Lp/mm is meaningless for image quality, so 18 Mp on a 24x36 sensor is the sweet spot.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2011   #56
hxpham
Registered User
 
hxpham is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by animefx View Post
I'm mostly in support of CCD over CMOS mostly because I've been spoiled by the dynamic range in my M8, especially shadow details. Forget all the of tests, in real world use I get better usable dynamic range than my 5D2 does. I know the M9 is slightly better, so hopefully the M10 takes this a step further, maybe a small improvement in the shadows and the highlights over the M9 would be nice.
Have you seen the DR of the new Sony sensor used in the K5/D7000? Better than the M9
__________________
tumblr | flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2011   #57
rogerzilla
Registered User
 
rogerzilla is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 753
The software is getting better at reducing noise, however horrid such an idea seems to we film users. The M9 software is often reported as being poor when it comes to making JPG files and there is huge scope for improvement there.

Then they need to put in a manual shutter cocking mechanism (for quiet operation) and offer some VF magnification choices. They could even (sacrilege!) offer a zoom viewfinder for the different focal lengths and banish all those difficult .85, .72 or .58 choices completely.
__________________
Look at the lens, not through it.

My gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2011   #58
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by animefx View Post
The Kodak CCD in the M9 is the best they could do at the time, the sensor is now over 2 years old. Advancements in sensor technology make it credible that the M10's sensor could be an improvement in several areas including ISO noise, dynamic range, and even megapixels.

More megapixels does not always mean more noise... For example, look at the original Canon 5D vs. Canon 5D mk II... The mk II has 9 more megapixels and 2 stops better ISO noise. Another example is the Canon 1D mk4 vs. mk3, same story, the mk4 has more megapixels and lower noise.

I'm not saying 18 mp is bad, I'm just saying there is nothing wrong with having more if anything for cropping power. With prime lenses the extra megapixels are often a god send. Heck I prefer using my M8 over my 5D2, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be useful having extra megapixels to play with.
Even cropping won't change things like the Nyquist frequency and the relationship between lens resolution and sensor resolution. I think that in the M9 and S2 sensor the CCD technology has reached its pinnacle. CMos is moving quite slowly nowadays as well, the 5Dii sensor is not that different from the 10D. The main progress is in the incamera processing, Nikon especially has it down to a fine art. The world is waiting for new technology. Both CCD and CMos have reached the stage of diminishing returns. And technology runs up against the biological barrier. The human eye has it limitations too, and though imaging may have the potential to become much better with new technology - if you cannot see it it makes no sense to implement.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2011   #59
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerzilla View Post
The software is getting better at reducing noise, however horrid such an idea seems to we film users. The M9 software is often reported as being poor when it comes to making JPG files and there is huge scope for improvement there.

Then they need to put in a manual shutter cocking mechanism (for quiet operation) and offer some VF magnification choices. They could even (sacrilege!) offer a zoom viewfinder for the different focal lengths and banish all those difficult .85, .72 or .58 choices completely.
Please no. I really miss the mechanical advance when using film Ms... And JPG? Real men shoot raw...
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2011   #60
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by hxpham View Post
Have you seen the DR of the new Sony sensor used in the K5/D7000? Better than the M9
Numbers? What is your source?
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-13-2011   #61
FrozenInTime
Registered User
 
FrozenInTime's Avatar
 
FrozenInTime is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
Numbers? What is your source?
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...(brand3)/Leica

Then hit measurements|Dynamic Range

Has anyone done real world side by side comparisons to back this up ?
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-13-2011   #62
animefx
Registered User
 
animefx is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 77
hxpham make a good point... take a look at the insane amount of dynamic range on the k5 here...

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=955995

if you did this kind of thing with the sensor in the 5d2 the resulting photo would look awful beyond reason.

this just goes to show you that we aren't even close to the end of sensor technology advancements. in addition, I just learned kodak has a 29 megapixel ccd as well in the works.

nikon certainly massages the raw files with in camera software and maybe canon does as well, but there is a significant difference between the canon 10d sensor and 5d2 sensor, and this is over the span of what 5 or 6 years in technology?

one last thing to look at quickly if you have the time... is the dxo test on the k5 sensor, which is a crop sensor by the way. it has more dynamic range than nikon's $9,000 flagship camera. as a side note I hate dxo test and the like because they are often deceiving especially for any kind of "real world use" the leica m8 has a more usable range than the 5d2 in my opinion, but by only looking at their tests many people wouldn't know that.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Pub...Range-K5-rules!

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
Numbers? What is your source?

Last edited by animefx : 09-13-2011 at 08:12.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-13-2011   #63
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,104
DXO is rubbish. I wouldn't trust 1 line from DXO's website.

Have a look at the lens reviews. They rate the Zeiss 21mm distagon for EOS the lowest resolving lens they tested for canon DSLRs (it's actually one of the very best lenses available). They also rate the other Zeiss for canon lenses badly. Now I've personally owned the Zeiss ZE lenses and they're superb - you can cross check that with other review sites across the web.

There's so many things that they list that are false the whole dxomark thing is just ridiculous. I wouldn't be basing my opinions on cameras off their data.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2011   #64
Eddie90723
Registered User
 
Eddie90723's Avatar
 
Eddie90723 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Paramount, Ca
Age: 39
Posts: 65
I vote Foveon on this one. Can you imagine the elitism and sheer snobbery that would come along with that combo? "oh, you use cameras whose images can be processed by standard photo programs? That's nice, mine can only be processed by a single program and the colors are better than your colors and the pictures can't be anything but amazing because it's a Leica." lol. It would be a fun if not incredibly frustrating experience from time to time. I actually had purchased the SD1 with the idea on popping a Leica R adapter onto it and using R glass in hopes of the glass being able to keep up with the sensor, but I sent it back in less than a week because it just did not get the job done at all. Oh Lordy I wanted to cry, it was just frustrating! So I got an M9 instead. Worked out so much better. I think once Sigma works out its issues with Foveon sensors, it would match M glass really happily.
__________________
Polaroid 600SE / Voigt Bessa III / Fuji GW 690 II / Fuji Klasse W / Sigma DP2 / Sigma SD15 / Zeiss Ikon / Leica M9
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2011   #65
Brian Sweeney
Registered User
 
Brian Sweeney's Avatar
 
Brian Sweeney is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,907
I doubt that a Foveon style sensor could be made to work with a rangefinder camera because of the short "film to flange" distance. And- there is no full-frame version of the Foveon sensor.

I'd rather see a Monochrome sensor offered as an option.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2011   #66
Eddie90723
Registered User
 
Eddie90723's Avatar
 
Eddie90723 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Paramount, Ca
Age: 39
Posts: 65
A full frame Foveon would be awesome, but how expensive would that be? 7k for the ApsC size isn't very friendly. Monochrome sensor would be nice. I shoot my M in Raw + Jpg b&w and convert all my pics to mono. I get a little disturbed when I see my images in color honestly, makes me think I didn't get the settings right.
__________________
Polaroid 600SE / Voigt Bessa III / Fuji GW 690 II / Fuji Klasse W / Sigma DP2 / Sigma SD15 / Zeiss Ikon / Leica M9
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2011   #67
Brian Sweeney
Registered User
 
Brian Sweeney's Avatar
 
Brian Sweeney is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,907
A Monochrome sensor picks up twice as much light as any color sensor. And no dye layer to worry about.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2011   #68
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
DXO is rubbish. I wouldn't trust 1 line from DXO's website.

Have a look at the lens reviews. They rate the Zeiss 21mm distagon for EOS the lowest resolving lens they tested for canon DSLRs (it's actually one of the very best lenses available). They also rate the other Zeiss for canon lenses badly. Now I've personally owned the Zeiss ZE lenses and they're superb - you can cross check that with other review sites across the web.

There's so many things that they list that are false the whole dxomark thing is just ridiculous. I wouldn't be basing my opinions on cameras off their data.
And they do not test sensor output as they claim, they test camera output, including all firmware corrections to the file....
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-16-2011   #69
_mark__
Registered User
 
_mark__ is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 281
They call it the MD, it has the cloth m shutter, an upgraded kodak sensor with better iso and dr, can't see it happening for a few years yet though; M9's good enough. Look forward more to the X2.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-17-2011   #70
bwcolor
Registered User
 
bwcolor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 2,359
For those suggesting an updated Kodak CCD, how is Kodak's financial health? There were rumors that Leica might look for a new sensor partner due to concerns over Kodak's ability to deliver into the future.

Last edited by bwcolor : 09-17-2011 at 15:18.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-17-2011   #71
hxpham
Registered User
 
hxpham is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 109
Okay, fdigital ,how about this? http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guillermoluijk.com%2F article%2Fsnr%2Findex.htm&langpair=es|en&hl=EN&ie= UTF-8
Too long; didn't read -- The K5/D7000 sensor is practically ISO-less. You get almost the same results shooting a severely underexposed ISO 100 image and brightening it in RAW processing as you do shooting a well exposed ISO 1600 image.
__________________
tumblr | flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-17-2011   #72
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by hxpham View Post
Okay, fdigital ,how about this? http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guillermoluijk.com%2F article%2Fsnr%2Findex.htm&langpair=es|en&hl=EN&ie= UTF-8
Too long; didn't read -- The K5/D7000 sensor is practically ISO-less. You get almost the same results shooting a severely underexposed ISO 100 image and brightening it in RAW processing as you do shooting a well exposed ISO 1600 image.
Yeah damn cool, pity Pentax K5 colors are wack... I'd like to see what they can do with a new full frame sensor.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-19-2011   #73
htimsdj
Registered User
 
htimsdj is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 79
I'll take the M10 with something similar to the Nikon D3 sensor, with no Bayer filter. I just want black and white with high iso capability.

I tried the M9, and its not for me. I'll take film grain and high contrast for my low light shots at this point.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-20-2011   #74
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
 
rxmd is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kyrgyzstan
Posts: 5,806
__________________
Bing! You're hypnotized!
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-20-2011   #75
Faintandfuzzy
Registered User
 
Faintandfuzzy's Avatar
 
Faintandfuzzy is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 406
I'd say either a Kodak sensor or Canikon. There really is no better color fidelity obtained when using a CCD. As to the Foveon, I still chuckle when I hear about color fidelity from Sigmas. Let's get one thing clear....the Foveon has the WORST color going. Period. Check an iso 800 or 1600 image from the SD1 and come back and tell us about color. It's a joke. If Leica went Foveon (and I don't think they're that stupid), I wouldn't touch anything from Leica again.

And Animefx, the M8 does not have great dynamic range. In fact, it's rather mediocre. Today's CMOS sensor wipe the floor with these old CCD chips that are ridulled with noise and weak DR. Cameras like the Pentax K5, Nikon D700, Nikon D7000, Nikon D3x, etc, etc, leave the M8 way behind in noise and DR.

We don't need CCD. We definitely don't need the poor color and horrendous aliasing and oversharpend look of Foveon.

Last edited by Faintandfuzzy : 09-20-2011 at 14:29.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-21-2011   #76
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,104
Quote:
Have a look at some of these sd1 photographs in the links below (full size images so are BIG) and try to tell me the foveon has the worst color...

1

2

3

4

5

6

Hmmm no one has anything to say about these? Current technical issues aside, I'd love to see this sort of low ISO IQ from a leica digital body!
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange

Last edited by gavinlg : 09-26-2011 at 03:52.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-27-2011   #77
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
I'm sorry, but to my eyes the color of these examples is not even close to the colors obtainable with a good CCD sensor. Quite apart from the fact that a Foveon has too small an acceptance angle, this would not be what I am looking for in my M.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2011   #78
Pablito
coco frνo
 
Pablito's Avatar
 
Pablito is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Salsipuedes
Posts: 3,479
Anything that would give decent image quality but allow them to sell the camera for $3-4K.

It's so ironic that wealthy amateurs can afford the current M9 but very few professionals can.

I said it was ironic, not making any judgment beyond that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-02-2011   #79
Shade
Registered User
 
Shade is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 438
Kodak definitely - I need a film maker company to make a film maker sensor at best.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-04-2011   #80
ramosa
B&W
 
ramosa is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablito View Post

It's so ironic that wealthy amateurs can afford the current M9 but very few professionals can.

I said it was ironic, not making any judgment beyond that.
The wealthy can always afford what they want. Others (e.g., me) need to affix prices on need and want. Even so, lots of pros would not want to use an M9 even if it were cheaper.
__________________
——————————————————————————
Leica MM1, Cron 35, Cron 50mm
  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



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:20.


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.