Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/11/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]feli wrote: > > It proabaly was a lot easier and cheaper for them > to develop the R-Back first. That way all they had > to concentrate on was the sensor, electronics > and software. For Leica a good way to get their > feet wet in > anticipation of doing the real thing. Maybe Leica > will come up with somekind of modular digital > only camera. > It would make sense for them. That way they > wouldn't have to retool (expensive!) everytime > they come out with a new camera. > I'm only guessing -- not relying on inside info -- but I suspect that a great deal of the R&D costs and the very high selling price of the DMR has to do with the fact that this is a component that had to be designed to interact and meld with a pre-existing 35mm film camera. I confess to not understanding/accepting this concept. I believe it would have made much more sense, ultimately, to design a digital R from the ground up, even if it took a little more time and R&D money. They will have to do that soon enough, anyway. I also suspect that Solms decided to go the way they have because of some sense of building within a tradition, on an existing product, which was always the old Leica way -- evolutionary development that doesn't alienate customers. However, for me, the R8/R9 represent absolutely nothing within the Leica tradition. I imagine our Frank Dernie could engineer the stuffing of an F1 engine into a Mazda Miata. I'm sure we'd all be happier with a stock Porsche 911. Emanuel Lowi Montreal ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca