Leica News

Great article on Leica company in today's Wall Street Journal, describing
their current problems and challenges.

Hope they stay in business.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:03:21 -0500, "Viperdoc"
wrote:

Great article on Leica company in today's Wall Street Journal, describing
their current problems and challenges.

Hope they stay in business.

Why should I?

Viperdoc wrote:
Great article on Leica company in today's Wall Street Journal, describing
their current problems and challenges.

Hope they stay in business.

That would require profits. They've had a good last year and this year
will be close to break even, but 2009 and 10 look lossy (IIRC correctly
from their last annual report which I skimmed a couple months ago).

They've just announced 4 new lenses, 3 of which are in reach of the
merely well heeled. The 4th is like the yacht, if you have to ask the
price, you cannot afford it.

With the worldwide economy about to suffer 10 years of stagnation due to
US financial stupidity (which I wrote about here a couple years ago) I'm
not sure that many people will be buying these lenses. And as the M8
camera has been a bit, sorry, much, of a technical flop, I don't see
very much enthusiasm will brew... (I do not know if the M8.2 covers the
horrible deficiencies of the M8 as experienced by a combat photographer
in a recent web posting about "real" use of the M8 v. the M6 which used
to be a darling of such photographers. Amongst other things, they claim:

- A new snapshot mode – useful in tight reportage conditions
- Operational changes following user feedback)

I'm not sure what Leica should have done, but the M8 as delivered is not
it. Hopefully the M8.2 will address those issues.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Alan Browne wrote:

I'm not sure what Leica should have done, but the M8 as delivered is not
it. Hopefully the M8.2 will address those issues.

A digital M6 is basically my "dream camera", so I'm biased toward looking
for excuses to justify the M8.2. But, the M8 wasn't that camera, and the
M8.2 looks to be barely any improvement at all. It doesn't even attempt
to address the infrared issue.

What I really want is for Nikon to take an M6, shove the D3 sensor in it,
and give me my camera. I wouldn't bet on Leica doing it anytime soon.

--
Jeremy Nixon | address in header is valid
(formerly )
http://www.flickr.com/photos/100mph/

Jeremy Nixon wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

I'm not sure what Leica should have done, but the M8 as delivered is not
it. Hopefully the M8.2 will address those issues.

A digital M6 is basically my "dream camera", so I'm biased toward looking
for excuses to justify the M8.2. But, the M8 wasn't that camera, and the
M8.2 looks to be barely any improvement at all. It doesn't even attempt
to address the infrared issue.

That's the least of your worries. Not sure if you have seen this:

http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_...aq/Page_1.html

What I really want is for Nikon to take an M6, shove the D3 sensor in it,
and give me my camera. I wouldn't bet on Leica doing it anytime soon.

Keep breathing.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

"Alan Browne" wrote:
Jeremy Nixon wrote:

What I really want is for Nikon to take an M6, shove the D3 sensor in it,
and give me my camera. I wouldn't bet on Leica doing it anytime soon.

Keep breathing.

Good advice.

Zeiss putting the Sony sensor into a digital Zeiss Ikon would be more
likely, I'd think. But the M8 disaster was, I think, due to a company with
no experience in digital trying to make a digital camera, and Zeiss might be
subject to similar concerns. Sigh. And then there's the problem that the
Sony sensor is probably a lot worse than the 5DII sensor.

And as a practical matter, one is going to be a lot better off putting
retrofocus Zeiss ZF or ZE lenses on a 5DII than putting non-retrofocus M
mount lenses in front of a digital sensor.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

David J. Littleboy wrote:

And as a practical matter, one is going to be a lot better off putting
retrofocus Zeiss ZF or ZE lenses on a 5DII than putting non-retrofocus M
mount lenses in front of a digital sensor.

Yeah, but I already *have* a big, fancy camera with bells and whistles.
And I don't have to wish for more of them; there is no end in sight for
new models from your manufacturer of choice. But a 5DII or a D700 or
whatever is pretty much exactly the opposite of what I'm wishing for,
which is a small, non-fancy camera with no bells and no whistles, with
a pre-existing line of good lenses.

--
Jeremy Nixon | address in header is valid
(formerly )
http://www.flickr.com/photos/100mph/

In article ,
"Richard" wrote:

"Jeremy Nixon" ~$!~( )@( )u.defocus.net wrote in message
...
David J. Littleboy wrote:

And as a practical matter, one is going to be a lot better off putting
retrofocus Zeiss ZF or ZE lenses on a 5DII than putting non-retrofocus M
mount lenses in front of a digital sensor.

Yeah, but I already *have* a big, fancy camera with bells and whistles.
And I don't have to wish for more of them; there is no end in sight for
new models from your manufacturer of choice. But a 5DII or a D700 or
whatever is pretty much exactly the opposite of what I'm wishing for,
which is a small, non-fancy camera with no bells and no whistles, with
a pre-existing line of good lenses.

I'd like an OM-1n with a back that had a 10 meg sensor attached to it.
Imagine how easy to clean if they kept the swing-out option.

Me too.

I held off going digital for years because I was waiting for Olympus to
come out with a digital back for my OM-2. It seemed like such an obvious
move.

On the other hand, I lost the little cover to the winder port eons ago.
I'm pretty sure there's a light leak if you don't have either the cover or
a winder attached, so I can't take the winder off. And I'd look pretty
stupid walking around with a digital camera with a power winder attached to
it, wouldn't I?

Alan Browne wrote:
[]
That's the least of your worries. Not sure if you have seen this:

http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_...aq/Page_1.html

Quite damning, isn't it?

David

David J Taylor wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
[]
That's the least of your worries. Not sure if you have seen this:

http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_...aq/Page_1.html

Quite damning, isn't it?

Quite. Appalling. I'm appalled. Aren't you?

(Sorry, been overdosing on "Yes, Minister" recently).

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.