May 18th, 2012, 02:08 PM
wonderful photos - beautiful camera - not worth the price !!!
May 18th, 2012, 03:33 PM
Fine photos, but I still don't get it. I've seen equally good B&W shot with Leica digitals and converted from raw files - I think an awful lot of that "Leica Magic" is the lenses and, of course, the photographers who are willing to spend so much on a camera - there's at least some reasonable assumption that the percentage with a fairly high seriousness of purpose will be higher than with, say, an S100. I don't believe that you could really tell the difference between a shot from that camera vs a shot with an M9 shot with the same lens and same basic exposure parameters and processed similarly for B&W. And to the extent there are differences (other than at higher ISO's where the monochrome sensor might buy you something over the M9, which isn't good above, what, 400???), they're only visible at an optical pay-grade well above mine. Certainly at a level where the differences would be abso-damn-lutely overWHELMED by the difference between a great image and a merely very good one.
And then there's the whole business of being able to control the color channels in processing which this camera gives up completely...
I've said it before, I'll say it again - I don't get it. If you gave me one, I might shoot with it, but I'd more likely sell it and get an m9 or whatever they come out with next that one assumes will begin to incorporate some of the improvements in digital high ISO sensitivity.
Until writing this post, it never occurred to me that the Rolling Stones were singing about B&W photo processing when they sang, "Drop your reds, drop your greens and blues"....
Last edited by Ray Sachs; May 18th, 2012 at 03:35 PM.
May 18th, 2012, 03:45 PM
I'm not quite clear yet Ray - do you get it or not?
My photostream at Flickr.com is here
"We can not shake the illusion of the truthfulness of photography" - William Gedney
May 18th, 2012, 03:48 PM
if you can afford it buy it, it's a Leica
If you can justify the price and have the money, buy it, it's Leica
don't compare with others, it's a Leica
If you have never had a Leica, buy an M8 for £1,500, (max), and "give it a go" - you can always sell it for what you paid if it's not for you
BUT you need a lens - used or CV - again - if money is a worry - you will always get your money back if you buy "right' - can that be said of any other camera/lens
If you live in Greece - buy a Leica quick!!!
(PS - the images do look great - but as others may say - that's nothing to do with the camera!!!!)
Last edited by BillN; May 18th, 2012 at 04:00 PM.
May 19th, 2012, 07:16 AM
According to most sources the camera will kick-off with an RRP of a few dollars short of $8000.
Originally Posted by Andrewteee
Leica M6 - $1500 (you could save more by opting for an M2/3/4/5, etc.)
M9M - M6: $8000 - $1500 = $6500
TMax400 100ft/30m bulk roll = $65
100 rolls for $6500
750 frames from a bulk roll
75,000 frames for $6500
OK even if you work out the cost for developer, etc., we might pull this down to about 60,000 frames. But I have figured in the Rolls Royce of emulsions into this equation
So not sure how many shutters you'd get from the M9M, but if you do the math I'd be happier with the thing that most approximates the rendering, noise, and tonality of film...umm...namely film!
Not saying I wouldn't take the M9M if it were on the offing, but put in perspective the real thing is not that expensive really.
May 19th, 2012, 07:56 AM
It's the immediacy of digital versus the "film quality" of film
Originally Posted by stillshunter
and you do need a good scanner, or factor in the cost of scanning
factor in the cost of "time"
take your pick!
I would never go back to film ........ but I don't want to put anyone off as I have an M6 and two M3 and quite a few others, (fancy a LNIB Pentax "Leica" - the ME Super - only had one roll of film thru it - or a ME Super that was used to "death") to sell one day!
May 19th, 2012, 08:43 AM
I'll never understand the criticism of the M9 at ISO 2500.
Maybe too many years of me shooting with color film at 400 and 800, where I know first hand the ISO 2500 shots are much cleaner than any 800 speed color film that I ever used.
On the M9 Monochrome- It's true black and white. After using a monochrome Digital camera for a long time, I've always wanted to see them make a comeback. I went as far as calling Kodak 18 months ago and asking if they could do a monochrome version of the KAF-18500. 20 years ago I called them to make this infrared DCS200.
Looks like I am two for two calling Kodak and getting what I wanted.
As far as the cost of a Leica- they are expensive. Looking at the machining that goes into a Rangefinder camera, labor-intensive construction, expensive. The last hand-assembled camera made by Nikon was the Nikon SP-2005. It was over $5000, and Nikon built it out of pride- lost money on the sell of each camera. The Nikon S3-2000 almost $4000 when it came out 10 years ago.
June 8th, 2012, 02:03 PM
I was going through some old files looking for an assembly language routine. Found a download of my RFF PM box from 2010.
Including a PM to a Leica User in regard to a Monochrome M9. Almost 2.5 years ago.
Date : 2010-01-28 16:06
Title : Monochrome Version of KAF-18500
I had a very nice conversation with a technical marketing agent in Kodak's sensor group this afternoon. I also made one of their senior engineer's quite happy that a DCS-200ir was still in operation, he remembered the camera. If there is any interest with your friend at Leica, I will be happy to provide the contact information.
The bottom line: if Leica asked Kodak for an order of Monochrome CCD's, Kodak would produce it. If I wanted to purchase 25 CCD's and have Leica retrofit it into a camera, that would also be possible. Ordering fewer than 25 would not be possible, as a change in the production of the CCD is required.
This idea has been discussed before at Kodak, and the feeling was that if any manufacturer should do it, it should be Leica. I was asked how I came up with the KAF-18500 for a request, and I replied I have an M8 at home, and a Monochrome Visible+IR M9 would be a nice replacement for my DCS200ir. We had a nice laugh. One of our engineers that builds and tests high-resolution sensors would also be interested in one for field-tests. I suspect we would buy 3 cameras between the two of us, if the cost were ~$10,000 each.
The Kodak representative also gave me a list of companies purchasing the Kodak Monochrome arrays. There is a 39MPixel back for the Hasselblad in production, and I was told the IR cut filter could be left off. I will look into it. I'd rather have an M9, of course.
Given my experience of 17 years ago, I would expect a limited production of 100 cameras to carry a $3,000~$4,000 premium over a standard M9. This would still be cheaper than the 39MPixel Hasselblad. It would also be much more "user friendly" for field tests and lab use.
I do not plan on posting any of this information on the thread, and prefer to keep it all private between a few people expressing real interest.
I do not know if Leica will carry through on this, but know that "Kodak does not say no to it".
Well, the turn-around on the DCS200ir was a few months from when I called them in the 90s. But hey! I'm happy.
This site uses affiliate programs and referral links for monetization.