[Leica] Re Modular Leica - an indignant reply

[rgacpa at yahoo.com (Bob Adler)]

It is modular. The batteries for the M8 and?9 are the same.?So you can 
upgrade by plugging your M9 into the same battery...
?Bob Adler
Palo Alto, CA
http://www.raflexions.com 




________________________________
From: Lawrence Zeitlin <lrzeitlin at gmail.com>
To: Leica LUG <lug at leica-users.org>
Sent: Fri, October 30, 2009 8:06:23 AM
Subject: [Leica] Re Modular Leica - an indignant reply

Perhaps I didn't make my point clear enough about a modular Leica. The Leica
SYSTEM has been modular almost since its inception. The lens mount is
standardized and Leica mount lenses can be fitted at will to change the
characteristics of the camera. The shoe mount takes viewfinders of various
types. All sorts of things can be fastened to the tripod socket. For film
cameras, base plates can be interchanged to fit motors and rapid winders.
Even a few internal components such as the view/rangefinder can be
interchanged. But the camera body itself is basically a casting into which
parts are relatively permanently fastened. Alteration and change is
difficult. Significant repair of the camera requires major disassembly. Even
such a trivial task as cleaning the optics in the viewfinder requires a
return to the shop. In the modern world, this type of assembly is antique.
There is some excuse in doing this for the film cameras. After all the basic
mechanicals of the camera were designed three quarters of a century ago. But
in modern camera and optical instrument design, functions are grouped in
units which can be removed and replaced as needed for upgrade and repair.
The Olympus OM cameras were designed that way in the '70s. The Hubble space
telescope has been virtually rebuilt in orbit by replacing blocks of
components. B52 bombers are still in service 50 years after they were first
made by retrofitting modern equipment in the field. Yet changing the sensor,
replacing a failed electronic part, adjusting a lens, putting on those code
dots, or performing an upgrade from M8 to M8.2, requires a Leica to return
to Solms. This is clearly a marketing decision. Leica has adopted the car
dealership method of making a profit. Sell the car for what the market will
bear and make the real money on service.


In today's world, mechanical and optical parts cost more than electrical
parts. If you plot the cost of the mechanical components of a device over
the years, you will see an ever increasing rise as materials and labor
become ever more expensive. On the other hand there is an ever decreasing
cost of electronics. The laptop I am writing this on cost about 1000 USD yet
has hundreds of times more calculating capability than the computers
installed on the NASA Moon Mission. My first scientific calculator, an HP
35, cost me five hundred dollars. I picked up a handful of much more capable
scientific calculators at a Dollar store recently for, you guessed it, one
dollar apiece. It is much, much cheaper and far more efficient to do things
with electrons than with gears, springs, and lens elements. That's why even
Leica uses software for shutter timing, lens falloff correction, exposure
counting, exposure measurement and many of those other things that cameras
do.


The things that make a Leica a Leica, viewfinder/rangefinder, lens mount,
and body feel and configuration are expensive but have not changed
substantially since 1954. My old M3, using a modern lens and today's film,
matches the picture taking capability of an M7, a camera released 50 years
later. That's because most film camera photographic capability resides in
the film itself. With a better film, you have a better photographic machine.
But Leica's digital M cameras appear to be monolithic. There is no way of
enhancing the photographic capability except by major rebuild or altering
the software. It is hard to imagine that sensor and electronic design will
not evolve over time even faster than film improved. Sensors will become
more capable with higher ISOs, even exceeding the ISO 100,000 level, with
lower noise, fewer artifacts, self cleaning surfaces, better color rendition
(the Bayer filter is already considered obsolete). Most of these features
are available on other cameras. But to have the features in a digital M
Leica requires either an expensive rebuild or purchase of an entirely new
camera. True, the lenses don't wear out but then neither does the
viewfinder/rangefinder or lens mount or body. Why should I have to replace
what I have to take advantage of new developments? The camera should have
been re-imagined in a way that would permit new electronics to be
retrofitted as easily as my M3 can use a new type of film. I suggested a
modular approach but there are other ways to achieve a similar result. But
apparently not for Leica.


So I think that it was short sighted of Leica to imply that the M8 and now
the M9 was the end of the road in RF camera development. True, the cameras
will appeal to die hard Leica fans and a few pros. But the cameras (and most
of us Luggers, as seen in the photos on the LUG) are antiques. The cameras
are in danger of becoming the Fabrege eggs of photography, beautiful to look
at and fondle but not the best for making an omelet.

Larry Z

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information