Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity!

"Chris Loffredo" <me DeleteThis @privacy.net> wrote in message
news:4i4l7vF228vkU1@individual.net...
> jeremy wrote:
>> I noticed a few changes on the Leica web site yesterday. They are now
>> touting their digital module for the R9 reflex camera.
>>
>> The thing looks like a monstrosity!
>>
>> The digital module is 10 MP--hardly anything to write home about. I can
>> certainly understand using Leica lenses on fine-grained film in order to
>> achieve superior resolution. But I am not convinced that Leica R lenses
>> used in conjunction with a 10 MP sensor supplied by Kodak is going to
>> result in a significant margin of image superiority over, say, Nikon or
>> Canon DSLRS. I like the full-frame design of the sensor, but I can only
>> imagine how much it will cost . . .
>
> Full frame? More like 1.37.
>
> That said, price aside, I'd rather have it than some Canon or Nikon
> "technowonder"...

I must have missed the frame size. I assumed, from the brochure, that the
existing Leica lenses could continue to be used without change.

That adds even another reason not to buy it--your lenses have one focal
length when used with film, and other effective focal lengths when used with
the digital insert. It's like having two completely different camera
systems.

Are you absolutely certain about this not being full-frame? Who would buy
such a camera system?
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

In article <xwavg.9247$Oj.6659@trnddc05>, jeremy <jeremy RemoveThis @nospam.com> wrote:
>
>Are you absolutely certain about this not being full-frame? Who would buy
>such a camera system?

Ask the Nikon (or Pentax, or Minolta) DSLR owners. Ask almost all the Canon
owners, except for the very few who bought the Canon full-frame offering.
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

"John Francis" <johnf RemoveThis @panix.com> wrote in message
news:e9jelt$18q$1@reader2.panix.com...
> In article <xwavg.9247$Oj.6659@trnddc05>, jeremy <jeremy RemoveThis @nospam.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>Are you absolutely certain about this not being full-frame? Who would buy
>>such a camera system?
>
> Ask the Nikon (or Pentax, or Minolta) DSLR owners. Ask almost all the
> Canon
> owners, except for the very few who bought the Canon full-frame offering.
>

But who will pay those extremely high prices for Leica optics, only to end
up with what is essentially two different systems?
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

"jeremy" <jeremy RemoveThis @nospam.com> wrote in message
news:nbbvg.9261$Oj.5453@trnddc05...
>
> "John Francis" <johnf RemoveThis @panix.com> wrote in message
> news:e9jelt$18q$1@reader2.panix.com...
>> In article <xwavg.9247$Oj.6659@trnddc05>, jeremy <jeremy RemoveThis @nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>Are you absolutely certain about this not being full-frame? Who would
>>>buy
>>>such a camera system?
>>
>> Ask the Nikon (or Pentax, or Minolta) DSLR owners. Ask almost all the
>> Canon
>> owners, except for the very few who bought the Canon full-frame offering.
>>
>
> But who will pay those extremely high prices for Leica optics, only to end
> up with what is essentially two different systems?
>
>
>
Well, it does double the effective focal length of your lens set....The idea
that you can shoot either digital or film with the same camera is also
intriguing......
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

"jeremy" <jeremy DeleteThis @nospam.com> skrev i en meddelelse news:EJ8vg.5668$Ss2.2629@trnddc01...
> I noticed a few changes on the Leica web site yesterday. They are now
> touting their digital module for the R9 reflex camera.
>
> The thing looks like a monstrosity!
>
> The digital module is 10 MP--hardly anything to write home about. I can
> certainly understand using Leica lenses on fine-grained film in order to
> achieve superior resolution. But I am not convinced that Leica R lenses
> used in conjunction with a 10 MP sensor supplied by Kodak is going to result
> in a significant margin of image superiority over, say, Nikon or Canon
> DSLRS. I like the full-frame design of the sensor, but I can only imagine
> how much it will cost . . .
>
> The proof of the pudding is in the images the camera creates. I have the
> suspicion that the results will not justify the presumed astronomical price
> for this camera.
>
> http://www.leicacamera.com/assets/file/download.php?filename=file_578.pdf

Thanks for link - I was hoping for more from Leica, but lets see performance,
some good companies behind - Kodak, Imacon - but specs are not impressive,
nothing innovative, it will be a tough fight to enter the market, bad odds on this one.
;o)-max-
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

jeremy wrote:
> "Chris Loffredo" <me.DeleteThis@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:4i4l7vF228vkU1@individual.net...
>> jeremy wrote:
>>> I noticed a few changes on the Leica web site yesterday. They are now
>>> touting their digital module for the R9 reflex camera.
>>>
>>> The thing looks like a monstrosity!
>>>
>>> The digital module is 10 MP--hardly anything to write home about. I can
>>> certainly understand using Leica lenses on fine-grained film in order to
>>> achieve superior resolution. But I am not convinced that Leica R lenses
>>> used in conjunction with a 10 MP sensor supplied by Kodak is going to
>>> result in a significant margin of image superiority over, say, Nikon or
>>> Canon DSLRS. I like the full-frame design of the sensor, but I can only
>>> imagine how much it will cost . . .
>> Full frame? More like 1.37.
>>
>> That said, price aside, I'd rather have it than some Canon or Nikon
>> "technowonder"...
>
> I must have missed the frame size. I assumed, from the brochure, that the
> existing Leica lenses could continue to be used without change.
>
> That adds even another reason not to buy it--your lenses have one focal
> length when used with film, and other effective focal lengths when used with
> the digital insert. It's like having two completely different camera
> systems.
>
> Are you absolutely certain about this not being full-frame? Who would buy
> such a camera system?
>
>

1.37: Yes, I looked it up in the link you gave (I almost hoped Leica
*had* used a full-frame sensor).

I'm still watching and waiting. Canon and Nikon *don't* make the
wide-angle lenses I like.
I a lens like the Leica 19mm will give an effective 26mm with the
digital back; nothing outstanding, but probably the best digital 26mm on
the market. But personally I'm not convinced by any existing digital
solution (as a replacement for my "serious" cameras")
The digital M sounds interesting (also because of the relatively cheap
Cosina/Voigtländer 12mm), but I doubt I'll be able to afford it new.

So while "free film" has its charm, I don't see myself adopting digital
for serous work anytime soon...
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

In article <EJ8vg.5668$Ss2.2629@trnddc01>, jeremy says...

> http://www.leicacamera.com/assets/file/download.php?filename=file_578.pdf

A couple of interesting things:

- no AA filter (they talk about software antimoire filtering which
sounds like nonsense, because you have to bandwidth-limit the signal
before the sampling)
- shifted microlenses at the edges of the frame, to make sure that the
light rays hit well the CCD cell
- they use the DNG file format in-camera
- SD cards instead of CF
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E300, E330 and E500 forum at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
Olympus E330 resource - http://myolympus.org/E330/
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

"Alfred Molon" <DELETEalfred_molon DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
> A couple of interesting things:
>
> - no AA filter (they talk about software antimoire filtering which
> sounds like nonsense, because you have to bandwidth-limit the signal
> before the sampling)
> - shifted microlenses at the edges of the frame, to make sure that the
> light rays hit well the CCD cell
> - they use the DNG file format in-camera
> - SD cards instead of CF
>

I'd be interested to see what kind of images the camera creates. I know
virtually nothing about the merits of Leica's decision to substitute
software antimoire filtering instead of an AA filter, but Leica makes the
claim that it yields a better result.

I'm afraid to ask just how much this thing costs . . . But it has got to be
a small fortune.

So, what do we get in exchange for all that money? Even if there IS some
discernable margin of quality over Nikon or Canon, how much extra must be
paid for that extra margin?

Leica is cornered. They require maintaining their reputation for producing
superior cameras and optics in order to justify the price they charge, but
how sturdy can anyone make a digital module? And why pay Leica prices for
something developed and manufactured by Kodak?

When one can buy a Nikon DSLR for $750, and can probably replace it in 2
years with something twice as feature-laden at 2/3 of the current price, why
would anyone be eager to throw their money into the black hole that is
Leica?

The only way Leica can compete is to go mass-market, and that might well be
their end.

I think that digital imaging is turning out to be a "killer technology" for
the likes of Leica, just as fiber optics were a killer technology for analog
long distance circuits, and broadband is a killer technology for dial-up.
Leicas may become collectors' items, but who is going to actually use them
for everyday shooting? It's sad to see them in this vice.
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

On 2006-07-18 15:21:01 -0400, "jeremy" <jeremy DeleteThis @nospam.com> said:

>
> "Chris Loffredo" <me DeleteThis @privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:4i4l7vF228vkU1@individual.net...
>> jeremy wrote:
> Are you absolutely certain about this not being full-frame? Who would
> buy such a camera system?

The same (but with more cash and who appreciate absolute precision)
who buy less than full frame Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Minolta Hassey, etc.
There is absolutely nothing sacred about the 35mm frame. In fact, it
was always a hinderance unless you wnated a small compact camera or
used reversal film. All during the years I owned my Nikon F, used
Dad's Leica IIIf, and my Nikon N90s, I have dreamed of owning a medium
format camera... the price was always a little out there for me. I
still might bite the bullet.... and get a 2 1/4 or 6.4.5.

I have seen plenty of great photos taken with less than full 35mm frame
cameras and I have seen plenty of pathetic photos taken with full fram
digital cameras and vicversa. Its the human on the other side of the
view finder that maters and if that human wants a Leica., then more
power to them. I know I apprecated the absolute precision and
smoothness of the IIIf. Changing the film with the removable base
plate was a pain in the you know where.. but other than that, is a
fine piece of equipment.

--
Jim <jen....not....home..remvdots...@....yahoo
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 21:59:06 -0400, Jim wrote:


>The same (but with more cash and who appreciate absolute precision)
>who buy less than full frame Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Minolta Hassey, etc.
> There is absolutely nothing sacred about the 35mm frame. In fact, it
>was always a hinderance unless you wnated a small compact camera or
>used reversal film. All during the years I owned my Nikon F, used
>Dad's Leica IIIf, and my Nikon N90s, I have dreamed of owning a medium
>format camera... the price was always a little out there for me. I
>still might bite the bullet.... and get a 2 1/4 or 6.4.5.


Go for it. There's never been a better time.

A decent 645 kit can be had for under $400 on eBay,
and for a scanner you could do well with an Epson 4990
($400 or less, new) or a used Nikon LS-8000 (say, $800 or so.)

You'll get results on par with (or exceeding) a Canon 5D,
though with somewhat greater effort per frame.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

"jeremy" <jeremy.TakeThisOut@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:nbbvg.9261$Oj.5453@trnddc05...
>
> "John Francis" <johnf.TakeThisOut@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:e9jelt$18q$1@reader2.panix.com...
>> In article <xwavg.9247$Oj.6659@trnddc05>, jeremy <jeremy.TakeThisOut@nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>Are you absolutely certain about this not being full-frame? Who would
>>>buy
>>>such a camera system?
>>
>> Ask the Nikon (or Pentax, or Minolta) DSLR owners. Ask almost all the
>> Canon
>> owners, except for the very few who bought the Canon full-frame offering.
>>
>
> But who will pay those extremely high prices for Leica optics, only to end
> up with what is essentially two different systems?
>
>
>
Clueless ones.
Jim
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

jeremy wrote:

> I noticed a few changes on the Leica web site yesterday.

> The proof of the pudding is in the images the camera creates. I have the
> suspicion that the results will not justify the presumed astronomical price
> for this camera.

Since when has cost effectiveness been a consideration in buying
anything Leica?
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! 

jeremy wrote:


> But who will pay those extremely high prices for Leica optics, only to end
> up with what is essentially two different systems?
>

The same "cost is no object" people who already pay those extremely high
prices for Leica optics.
 >> Stay informed about: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity!