man & nature # 232 ~ the next big thing?
Road repair equipment in AM fog • click to embiggenToday was the day for Leica to announce / reveal their newest digital cameras, to include their new flagship rangefinder M9 (18mp full frame sensor). And so it has come to pass and it can be yours for $9,000 US.
On a certain photo blog/site there has been much to do about how this camera, although expensive, actually represents good dollar value because Leicas go for big bucks on the used market. Assuming that you can come up with the price of entry (which does not include a lens like, say, the Leica 24mm f/1.4 Summilux-M Aspherical Manual Focus Lens, which will set you back a cool $5,995 US), this may indeed be true.
On the other hand, in the digital camera world this may indeed NOT be true.
A quick check for a used Leica M8 body - Leica's most recent digital rangefinder flagship - on ebay revealed that they can be had for up to 40% less than they sell for new. Considering that the M8 hasn't been around for very long, that's a very hefty depreciation for a Leica camera. That may be due, in part, to the fact the M8 had some ... ahhh ... "problems" which hopefully got fixed this time around, but ....
There is absolutely no guarantee that a Leica digital camera will hold its value better - as a % of original purchase price - than any other manufacturer's digital cameras will. As we all know, "flagship" digital cameras come and go seemingly with the wind, at least with the winds of digital change, that is.
All that said, here's what I'm waiting for - I'm dreading the day, and it's probably coming soon, that Olympus will be introducing their next "flagship". Even though they have declared that 12mp is enough, they have stated that their intent is to concentrate upon improving things like dynamic range, noise, resolution and the like - things that matter much more than more mp when it comes to IQ. Good for them. These are things that with noticeable improvement would motivate me to "upgrade" to a new flagship model, but ...
These improvements are obtained by improving a camera's sensor and internal processing software, not the camera body. Sooooo .... when is a camera maker going to design a body with an interchangeable sensor capability?
Now, I'm not asking for a user-changeable sensor - I'd be more than happy to separate myself from a camera body for long enough to have the sensor changed by an authorized repair facility. No problem. My Olympus E-3 has superb build quality - it can probably last a "lifetime" like, say, the 2 Nikon film camera bodies sitting on a shelf (right within arm's reach of where I am sitting), but, unlike the Nikons, which can keep on making pictures until all the film runs out, my E-3 is destined to become a superbly built paperweight in fairly short order (by film camera standards).
Operating under the assumption that the current sensor in my camera can be replaced if it were to be damaged or become defective in some manner, how difficult can it be to design the body so that the next generation sensor - along with a software upgrade - can be inserted?
Seriously, how hard can that be?
gravitas et nugalis
in man and nature
|
6 Comments
Reader Comments (6)
Not very hard, but maybe bad for business, or at least, bad for business in some businessmen's imagination.
Actually, there's a pretty simple reason. Your sensor isn't the only thing in there between the lens and your memory card - there's also a lot of processing hardware that is designed for your sensor specifically. This hardware tends to change quite a bit between cameras - for instance, Canon's new 7D has two processing chips where previous crop digital cameras had only one. This allows for a faster shutter speed, but also (likely) changes the interconnect between the sensor and the board.
be reassured it is not only in your wild dreams: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2009/august31/levoy-opensource-camera-090109.html At first it may seem only software related but that is the key in reprogramming the sensor's interface, hence making it something useful when changed.
Ben's hit on the main issue: these are really small computers with an interface to the glass in front. That is why you are (should be?) investing in lenses, not a body. It is a SYSTEM, and as long as the system standard is supported (lens mount, etc.) your investment is solid. Think of the bodies as computers that you will be upgrading every few years to get the new goodness.
Truth be told, even the system standards change. I know that you are old enough to remember when canon went with an entirely new lens mount with ultrasonic motor AF. While not completely voiding the old FD line (they are still useful on m4/3!), they rapidly dropped in value as the new system was adopted.
The other bugaboo is that as we adopt more advanced sensors we are showing the weaknesses of the old lens designs. New designs are necessary to get the most out of the resolution that some of these sensors are capable of.
Interesting times, but not necessarily good for your pocketbook.
That sort of camera exists, but costs a lot more than a Leica (at least until the S2 arrives). Most MF digital uses interchangeable backs for exactly this reason.
There's multiple problems with doing this with smaller format stuff.
1. Shutter Life. Unlike in the film era, many customers are actually wearing out their shutters now. With design lifetimes from 50,000 to 300,000 cycles, you wouldn't think this is an issue, but 100,000 shots is not that much to many pro shooters, especially wedding shooters who might do 5-10,000 shots per weekend.
2. As noted above, there's a lot more to the IQ equation than just the sensor. You'd have to replace the processing board(s) as well. A lot of the upgrades around have come from better optimised board layouts (reduces noise from signal crosstalk or heat) and new processing engines such as the TruPic V in the E-P1 compared to the TruPic III+ in the other 12MP Olympus bodies.
3. With all of that being an issue, the rest of the camera is little more than a shell. You'd already be paying more than 50% of the price of the camera for the upgrade, why not just buy the new camera if needed and demote the older body to backup.
I'm with you all the way there.
Leica have certainly been making noises about long-term support. Seeing the way they construct the M9, it would suggest that a sensor & board replacement would be do-able, in a similar way to internal repairs on their film cameras.
Their construction method seems a lot less integrated than other manufacturers - e.g. the rangefinder is a standard unit bolted to the top of the main chassis.
And they're not in the business of adding a bunch of extra functions requiring loads more buttons.