DMR sits idle - reluctant to let it go

[LCT]

...They could put a tiny display in the viewfinder...

You mean an EVF?

 

[Jack]

But you don't need a mirror or even a mirror box if you have live view. They could put a tiny display in the viewfinder and a big one on the back. Actually such a display could be as big and as bright as you want it.

Good point --- and it would be fine with me as long as it is significantly higher resolution than any EVF I have seen to date.

 

[EH21]

I know stuff is out there that would be beautiful, but just don't know if it would work from an economics point of view. Let's say that if Canon charges $300 to replace the mirror in a 5D, then the cost of the mirror in production is under $100 to use a round number. I think even if a display could be bought for the same price, the true cost would be double that if you include the R&D costs.

I'd pay $500 more for live view even on the back of the camera, and not having to worry about mirror induced camera shake would be an added plus. Then consider trying to MF in a dark room or building....live view from a display would also be significantly brighter allowing for better control of focus as well.

 

[DougDolde]

I remember the long running thread on Fred Miranda on the DMR. It was praised as the ultimate 35mm based DSLR solution. I can't help but wonder why it was dropped by so many in favor of the M8 with its IR filter problems and it's obviously poorer focusing system.

 

[EH21]

I remember the long running thread on Fred Miranda on the DMR. It was praised as the ultimate 35mm based DSLR solution. I can't help but wonder why it was dropped by so many in favor of the M8 with its IR filter problems and it's obviously poorer focusing system.

Probably because the M lenses and body are enough smaller and lighter that it makes it a much easier kit to carry around?

I love my DMR files and glass and don't mind the weight at all.

 

[DougDolde]

I am sure the lighter weight is a real advantage. However it seems strange that a pro could pick the M8 rangefinder as his primary system. Or am I wrong that the M8 is Guy's main system?

 

[woodyspedden]

Probably because the M lenses and body are enough smaller and lighter that it makes it a much easier kit to carry around?

I love my DMR files and glass and don't mind the weight at all.

I think more so because Imacon did not want to build any more DMR's for Leica so one production run was all they had. When that sold out interest waned. But I think that many many of us kept our DMRs for a long time. I sold mine last month but kept the R glass for use on the 5D until the R10 (or whatever) comes out. I have really high hopes for the future of R. In the meantime it is the M8 and M glass or R + Canon. I have the D300 for autofocus and high speed grandkids!

Woody

 

[MarkSaperstein]

Update to my original post:
I decided to keep the DMR, and I'm glad I did because I have been using it quite a bit more than I anticipated. I was shooting an event at a local elementary school on Friday, and i wound up with both the M8 and R9/DMR around my neck. M8 with the 21 Elmarit Asph and DMR with the 28-90 Vario-Elmarit 2.8-4.5. Here is a shot with the DMR:

 

[fotografz]

Update to my original post:
I decided to keep the DMR, and I'm glad I did because I have been using it quite a bit more than I anticipated. I was shooting an event at a local elementary school on Friday, and i wound up with both the M8 and R9/DMR around my neck. M8 with the 21 Elmarit Asph and DMR with the 28-90 Vario-Elmarit 2.8-4.5. Here is a shot with the DMR:

What flash set-up are you using with the DMR Mark?

 

[MarkSaperstein]

I'm using a Metz 54MZ-4. One thing about shooting the DMR and M8 at the same time is that you get a deeper appreciation of how good the metering and white balance are with the DMR.

 

[DonWeston]

Having used a Blad for years, I would be on the other side of the square issue I guess. If you have enough resolution, i.e. pixels to start, then it really does not matter how you crop, you will still have enough rez for a large print, saying that if I can extrapolate up from say an M8 sensor[as a minimum]. For the few or many times square does work, then you have even more pixels to use and the maximum amount possible of pixel landscape as a basis for a given image circle[corners notwithstanding]. Lastly, not tilting camera, no matter how easy it is to tilt a small 35mm based system, is still easier then tilting.....thus the mantra of the ultimate couch potato philosophy....
JMHO....

 

[ptomsu]

I sold my DMR after weighing all pros and cons back in October last year. The main reason was of course not quality issues I had, but I heard all these rumors about the R10 and actually it does not matter if it will be FF or even larger, one thing is pretty clear, that it will be AF. Now to what extent one will be able to use existing R glass is not clear, I am sure it will be possible, but of course only MF.

Now I was thinking, if a new R10 comes, being FF and having AF, then I would definitely buy it only in combination with at least 1 or 2 AF Zooms, and so I decided to sell my DMR and R9 as long as I could get some reasonable money out of it. And also my R zooms (21-35 and 28-90). I kept my 19, 100APO and 180 APO for manual operation on the future R10 And I sold my R9, since I did not do a single analog photo since the last 5 years or so. And if I want to do I still have a M6 and M7.

I also was pretty relaxed in selling this, since I am using my M8 with several M glass coded and I am loving this system more and more. So I have time to see what the R10 will become, how prices will come up and then I still can decide if I want to jump on this.

So of course everybody may have different motivations for keeping/selling the DMR. But I am confident a future R10 will outperform the DMR/R9 combo by far

 

[woodyspedden]

Actually, I think 4:3 makes the most sense for a DSLR --- rectangular enough to show a significant difference between vertical and horizontal frames and the DSLR is easy to orient vertically or horizontally. Square makes some sense for MF as it is less convenient to lay them over on their sides, but it is so easy to do with a DSLR that the square would translate to wasted or unused sensor area for most shots with them.

My .02...

Hey Jack and Guy

The new Nikon D3 has a 5x4 options which is great if you want to print 16x20 or 24x30 without cropping. So I think a 5x4 ratio may have some advantages. Love to hear your thoughts on this

by the way I followed the workshop photos from Moab with great anticipation each day. I live only six hours from Moab and try to get there at least twice a year. You guys provided some absolutely spectacular shots. Very talented bunch of folks to be sure and sounds like you all had a great time. Wish I could have been there but when looking at the snow and hearing about the cold kind of made me glad i was here in South Florida on a six week vacation with my grandchildren

Best

Woody

 

[fotografz]

"But I am confident a future R10 will outperform the DMR/R9 combo by far."

I'm not so sure about that. Many digital capture cameras produce a unique signature and subsequent "improvements" don't always maintain those qualities. This is frequently the case when certain lenses are coupled with a specific DSLR. I took note of this when using Zeiss 500 series MF lenses with a 645 22 meg sensor ... which looked better than the same lens used with an "improved" 39 meg sensor.

Here's my twisted logic for keeping the DMR:

If the new R10 presents a new mount and set of AF lenses, the DMR will be the only access to lenses like the 35/1.4 and 80/1.4. to name a few. I doubt Leica will offer these optics in a new mount (they have discontinued the M75/1.4 as an indication).

If the R-10 is AF but also offers focus confirmation for existing lenses, then the DMR will be a less expensive back-up to what promises to be a a wallet ravaging R10 ... and provides access to film capture for those so inclined (me being one of those so inclined).

The value of the DMR is in the using. if you have lenses why let them sit idle for over a year while waiting for a R10?

 

[EH21]

When my R8 mirror developed problems I was sure that I'd get it repaired and continue to use my DMR and fine Leica optics forever. Of course now that its been about 7wks since I took my camera to Fred and he sent it off to Leica, and I still don't have a firm answer on what it needs or will cost to fix let alone when I will have it back for use. I may have even posted earlier in this thread waxing about how great the DMR is, etc. Anyhow during this break, I have found many ways to use my MF gear where I would have used my DMR. The 6008 AF and my Rollei/Schneider lenses really make a nice file when I get it right. I still love my DMR but do I really need it? In the early part of this break, I almost bought an R9 but held off. Now I'm vacillating. Hmmm... Maybe I should sell it all and buy a better back for my Rollei? Got quite a collection of lenses including the 35-70 elmarit, 21-35mm, 50 & 80 lux, 50 cron, 100 apo, 70-200, 35 curtagon, 28mm all ROM. What do you all say? Keep the faith? Or sell the DMR, keep the lenses for R10? Sell everything?

 

[ptomsu]

When my R8 mirror developed problems I was sure that I'd get it repaired and continue to use my DMR and fine Leica optics forever. Of course now that its been about 7wks since I took my camera to Fred and he sent it off to Leica, and I still don't have a firm answer on what it needs or will cost to fix let alone when I will have it back for use. I may have even posted earlier in this thread waxing about how great the DMR is, etc. Anyhow during this break, I have found many ways to use my MF gear where I would have used my DMR. The 6008 AF and my Rollei/Schneider lenses really make a nice file when I get it right. I still love my DMR but do I really need it? In the early part of this break, I almost bought an R9 but held off. Now I'm vacillating. Hmmm... Maybe I should sell it all and buy a better back for my Rollei? Got quite a collection of lenses including the 35-70 elmarit, 21-35mm, 50 & 80 lux, 50 cron, 100 apo, 70-200, 35 curtagon, 28mm all ROM. What do you all say? Keep the faith? Or sell the DMR, keep the lenses for R10? Sell everything?

Keeping R glass for R10? Hmmmm

Not sure what glass to keep makes some sense. I sold all my R Zooms, because if I ever would buy a R10 I would also buy the new AF zooms. I kept only a few primes - ike the 100APO.

Different considerations might be true for others of course. But main thing is that one should understand that R glass will only have very limited useability on an AF body and maybe larger sensor size :thumbup:

 

[EH21]

Yes, you could be right - if its full frame which I doubt mainly because there are no sensors that would fit that description on the Kodak KAF product list or on the Dalsa product list. I'm betting on full frame only not more. I'm also betting that Leica's first venture into AF is not going to be better than say Canon or Nikon with very mature systems with 45 or 50 points that still don't always work the way you want them to. In other words, I'll bet in the hands of an experienced shooter it won't matter much. For those people the high cost of the newer lenses relative to used lenses will be hard to justify, based on AF alone. Of course we do know that Leica draws a lot of customers from people that rarely shoot, almost pure collectors, and for that reason I'm sure the AF lenses will sell. I'm prepared to eat my words if it turns out that Leica hits a home run with the new system - actually I hope they do.

 

[fotografz]

For those people the high cost of the newer lenses relative to used lenses will be hard to justify, based on AF alone. Of course we do know that Leica draws a lot of customers from people that rarely shoot, almost pure collectors, and for that reason I'm sure the AF lenses will sell. I'm prepared to eat my words if it turns out that Leica hits a home run with the new system - actually I hope they do.

I disagree that AF will be hard to justify or sell. It would revolutionize their customer base, and the "collectors" you mention can fight over the existing "collector" lenses : -) A few "Leica" Quality AF lenses will go a long way toward expanding the appeal of the R system to a number of discerning shooters in need of the AF feature in their work.

Personally, give me a R10 with a full frame 24X36 16 meg sensor (so the photo-sites don't get to crammed in and ISO 1600 looks good) and an AF 24-85/3.5 constant aperture ASPH Zoom to start with ... while providing focus confirmation in viewfinder for my legacy optics ... and I'm there with my wallet at the ready. Bye, bye Canon, Nikon and all the other 35mm type DSLRs. Deliver an AF 35/1.4, 80/1.4 and a new 180/2.8 APO and I'd be there in a NY nano second.

In the words of the Everly Brothers ... "all I want to do is dream, dream, dream ..."

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Yes please!
EH21 -- as a user of both the DMR and the 6008AF (on film), I would suggest waiting on the R10 and keep shooting film on the 6008AF. Medium format film, particularly in black and white gives a look that is difficult to reproduce on digital, even with something like the DMR. That said, I think a fully featured, full framed R10 would be more useful than a digital back on the 6008AF. Unless you are using something like an eMotion back, the reduced frame size and fairly limited high ISO make it difficult to use it as a truly universal camera. An R10 on the other hand will likely provide superb image quality and still be fairly universal in its application, particularly if they are smart about it by making it full frame, AF and with reasonably large photosites. The camera that Mark is suggesting would be a stunner. You can do a whole heck of a lot with an AA filter free 16mp camera and Leica lenses...

 

[EH21]

Those mock ups are fun.

RE: AF - sure it will sell cameras no disagreement. My point was rather that I will find AF much less useful than other features such as ISO 3200, a good viewfinder, or other things related to image quality such as high dynamic range. Said it before, but personally I'd rather see a big bright viewfinder and/or live view, than AF. The biggest reasons I pick my 5D for a shoot instead of my DMR are in order as follows: 1) R8 in service (coming up on 2 months now) 2) need ISO 800 or higher 3) need flash eTTL wireless or multiple flashes 4) shooting underwater 5) need AF for fast moving subjects 6) traveling to areas where I feel my camera might be stolen