Today on the 9th, Leica released their newest M body, the M9. The camera is full frame 18 megapixel camera. Looks promising but the asking price is starting at $6,995. Might be cheaper at discounters like bhphoto.com but is roughly $7K.
Thats a lot of dough for a camera that might be somewhat limiting in compared to today's baddest cameras. Canon's newest release is the Canon 7D, an 18 megapixel HD video camera for less than $2,000. The Canon does have a smaller APS-C sensor, meaning its much smaller than the full frame camera bodies (the Leica is full frame) so that accounts for its much cheaper price.
The Canon, sadly will end up on the junk heap after a few years as it doesn't seem to be a highly machined tool unable to stand up to the rigors of professional use (dropping, rain, dust, rolling around the front seat of a car, etc...) I don't mean to imply its not a good or even great camera but it probably isn't made tough. The camera is not professional grade. Would I purchase it? Well...depends on how much money I have to spend. I might not use it for my bigger jobs but other easy simple jobs, for sure. Would I use it for HD video...surely. Would I use it in the rain at a football game? Probably will conk out. Would I use that new M9 in the rain? What are you crazy? Get a $7,000 camera wet?
The Leica would be a dream to own but its a bit impractical. My good friend David (who is a bit of a cameraphile) told me that his European father held "Leica with great reverence. "The Leica, now that's a camera."" Leica is and it still is a great camera. Its machined well and made to last. The lenses are top notch and 50 year old lenses still hold a premium. However, their latest price point and their newest lenses are well out of most pros and middle class hands. Lens prices start at $1,800 and move close to $6000. Now we are talking about a 24mm F1.4 lens for six grand! Canon's equivalent lens is $1700 and its autofocus. Now I am not one to compare lenses and you readers and can say what you want about the quality of German engineering and
bokeh blah blah, however, at least for me, a client doesn't care if the lens is $6,000 or $1,700. Just get the shot and the job done.
Assuming you already own Leica lenses, for the price of $7,000 for the M9, you would have to shoot close to 700 rolls of film (assuming film is $10/roll) to break even with the new digital body. That is roughly 252,000 frames or pictures. I have surely shot that with my Canons over the months or years I've owned my three camera bodies. I make 99.9% of my money off those three cameras. I am not saying that I couldn't make that kinda of dough off an M9 or two but the diversification of lenses, accessories, etc...is cheaper, easier to use, and again cheaper.
World War II, Korea, and Vietnam introduced the middle class to the Japanese cameras. GIs stationed in Asia could purchase a Leica knock off for next to nothing. After the war, Japan created really great imitation German cameras. Although Leica was far superior, the Japanese cameras were cheaper. GIs saw these imitations at the PX and took them back to America. The Japanese learned how to make cheaper and consequently better cameras over time and basically took over the middle class camera sales in the West. And obviously, the single lens reflex camera became far superior than the rangefinder. Yet, Leica was still highly regarded due to their superior quality but also for the fact their prices were much higher than a Kodak or Canon camera, then and even now. Leica became the doctor's camera, Nikon/Canon/Kodak became the working man's camera. Leica is elite. Canon is common.
Funny I get stopped all the time by strangers to ask me about my Leica when I'm on the street. Its amazing how people react. Its as if I have a Ferrari strapped around my neck. In reality, I am a poseur with a used camera and lens so I am not really a rich guy pretending to be one.
Again, Leica has made a great tool. Word is not out on the quality of the Kodak sensor inside the M9 but the quality of cameras at this level should all be great...and if it not, what a waist!
I won't run out and buy one just yet. I will wait till the M10 or M11 is released and pick up a used body for a quarter of the price. Readers, at this point, you must know that all digital cameras are all computers which at some point will all need to be upgraded. My Canon Mark IIs are doing a fine job right now. There is no reason to replace them with anything just yet but that time is coming. I will have to shell out $5-8,000 for a new body with x amount of megapixels and HD capability and whatnot. I will need new accessories and new gadgets as well as new flash cards to manage those new huge files. Along with that, my current Intel Mac won't be able to handle that new huge file and I will be forced to cough up another couple of thousand dollars for a new machine, new hard drive, storage, etc...
I will never catch up as technology just keeps going and we camera fools are eagerly waiting to dump our dollars at newest and best bit out there. I myself will wait. I will wait till my clients say its time. I don't really care to play the game but when I do...well...hello Mastercard.
My friend David also said to me today he remembers his brother bringing home a new Nikkormat camera back in the 70s or so. That camera is still great. It might not have all those new bells and whistles the marketers want us to purchase but put a roll of film in it, snap a few images, take the roll to Costco, get it scanned and wham! you got an image. That camera probably cost his brother a few hundred bucks. Take a few bucks for a roll of film, etc.. and you are still on top. Take a new Leica M9, shoot 36 frames, uploaded onto your new Intel Mac, and remember, you have 6999 rolls of film to go.
Posts
