[Leica] Re: Video of M8 (Meaningless comparisons)

[imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George)]

On Sep 13, 2006, at 3:28 PM, Gary Todoroff wrote:

> Your argument implies that the comparison is between two non- 
> evolving kinds of equipment, just like mainframers argued that  
> those little toy computers would never amount to anything.

Not really trying to argue Gary. I recognize, indeed am part of the  
(r)evolution. I'm a user and constantly upgrading hardware and  
software and often an early adopter.

> The P&S cameras are breaking creative ground at a clip that makes  
> the pro digital cameras appear to be standing still - just like  
> PC's did to mainframes. SImple P&S cameras today are miles beyond  
> the pro digital cameras of only a few years ago.

Of course they're ahead of the old. But they're not ahead of the pro- 
stuff today. The huge consumer market allows for the pro r&d and vice  
versa.

> Ignoring the comparison of a broad range of  digital cameras today   
> will be like thinking that COBOL will forever be the computer  
> language of the future. I try to predict some of the future of  
> digital cameras at
>  http://northcoastphotos.com/Lympa-2006-04-30.htm

Here again I'm not ignoring comparison of digital cameras. I read  
everything available on each "interesting" development. I'm very  
interested in the technology. However wiz-bang the P&S become there  
will, I believe, always be professional requirements which the P&S  
will not meet. That is why there's still $30,000 digital backs (no  
doubt they're using technology developed in the P&S r&d) The big  
megapixel leaps of the quasi 35mm bodies have put a dent into that  
market - but the medium format folks continue to invest heavily in  
larger bit depth, etc. Perhaps in ten years the best P&S will provide  
22megapixels and 64 or 128 bit depth - I don't deny that possibility  
- and it may only cost $999. And perhaps consumers will have  
computers powerful enough to process those files. But I would expect  
that the "pros" will be using equipment which is significantly more  
powerful and considerably better built as well.

> I believe that many P&S innovations will make their way into the  
> pro cameras; indeed some  P&S style cameras may overtake the pro  
> cameras, just as networks of little PC's took over mainframe  
> computer rooms. So now is a great time to do some serious  
> comparisons, especially since so many current pro cameras appear to  
> be made as though they still should hold film and are like the  
> mainframe dinosaurs that mostly disappeared.

I appreciate what you're saying and agree with much of it. However,  
each tool, in my opinion, needs to be compared to a comparable tool  
to be meaningful. The only meaningful comparison that I can imagine  
making with the M8 would be the Epson RD1 - which to my knowledge are  
the only two precision RF digital cameras currently available.  
Comparing either one of them to the best P&S, or even a DSLR, or  
medium format back, simply won't help me in any meaningful way;  
because I'm extremely interested in a manual RF digital with  
dependable build quality which will take fine optics. I don't care  
who makes it. It appears that for the foreseeable future we have two  
choices to compare; with Zeiss, as we learned this morning,  
apparently waiting for some technological leap before leaping in.

Regards,
George Lottermoser
george@imagist.com