Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/10/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It's either that or I totally disagree with your assessment of it Hoppy. But I sit at your feet tell me where I went so horribly wrong. I kind of somehow think that any R solution depends on the perceived market for it. And 4 very focal guys on the lug is not going to cut it. But maybe there are all kinds of people hiding in the woodwork who will pledge to get the New Leica R to put to use the glass they sold five years ago? -------------------- Mark William Rabiner Photography http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ mark at rabinergroup.com > From: Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 13:42:32 +1000 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] "R" lenses on digital bodies > > Oh dear, I think that you missed the last couple of years of discussion on > this subject, Mark! > > Cheers > Geoff > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman > NO ARCHIVE > > > On 7 October 2010 12:45, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > >> This is interesting and good news Bill I hope someone can keep track of >> this >> and compile it and send it to Leica as it might give them a more positive >> idea of what the potential market would be of a non AF DSLR system. >> >> -------------------- >> Mark William Rabiner >> Photography >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ >> mark at rabinergroup.com >> >> >>> From: "William B. Abbott" <wbabbott3 at comcast.net> >>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >>> Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 19:16:06 -0700 >>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >>> Subject: Re: [Leica] "R" lenses on digital bodies >>> >>> Mark, >>> >>> I'd be willing to part with a few thousand USD for an update of my DMR to >> full >>> frame and get my lenses back to no-crop status and keep the existing >> R/DMR >>> feature set (P, A, T, M, etc.) and manual focus. >>> >>> While we're at it, a faster microprocessor would be welcome and I cannot >>> imagine that it would be very expensive as it does not need to be the >> latest >>> and greatest, just significantly better than the old one it replaces. I >> would >>> welcome that. Sort of a boutique update, what we used to call a >> "min-mod," the >>> minimum modification needed to meet emerging needs and standards. An M9 >>> battery would be icing on the cake. >>> >>> The next bigger step would be a DMR with an M9 sensor and processor and >> its >>> application (development costs are sunk costs, no new cash needed) even >> if >>> parts of the M9 computer program were neutered. >>> >>> Alas, there are only about 3000 DMRs (I am told) that could be updated >> and >>> Leica's costs might make it unprofitable, except in the good will sense. >> Leica >>> have catered to specialists in the past, as in the Leica SM (I think) >> that >>> they made for medical work that had no rangefinder, as I recall. Please >>> correct me if I am in error. >>> >>> But none of this is about to happen unless a third party takes on the >> task. >>> Nonetheless, think small is my watchword. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> On Oct 6, 2010, at 6:27 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote: >>> >>>> The most pertinent and to the point info I'd not leave off a new poll >> and >>>> I'd have it be the first question would be: >>>> >>>> A. Would you be willing to shell out the ten grand $ if the R body is >> some >>>> how actually released now for the holidays? >>>> >>>> The amount of people who would be buying a new manual focus R body >> costing a >>>> few grand more than the Leica M9 is what Leica would be interested in >>>> seeing. And is very much to the point. >>>> Regardless to if they actually have R glass now or not. >>>> I'd be interested too as would of course much of the LUG. >>>> >>>> But I'm afraid there are plenty of existing in use options for getting >> good >>>> to great use of R glass digitally for those who got 'em. The number one >>>> being the Leitax on a Nikon full frame or Canon. >>>> And that will make all the difference. And already does. >>>> >>>> -------------------- >>>> Mark William Rabiner >>>> Photography >>>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ >>>> mark at rabinergroup.com >>>> >>>> >>>>> From: Wayne Serrano <wayneserrano at earthlink.net> >>>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >>>>> Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 09:53:38 -0700 (GMT-07:00) >>>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >>>>> Subject: [Leica] "R" lenses on digital bodies >>>>> >>>>> All, >>>>> >>>>> I was thinking that maybe we should begin a poll to find how others are >>>>> using >>>>> their "R" lenses on various digital bodies: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Which camera body? >>>>> 2. Which focusing screen? >>>>> 3. Modifications necessary if any? >>>>> 4. Miscellaneous and pertinent info? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information