Classics
Deep discussions
A classic is defined as:
Something that is judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind : a classic novel | a classic car.
Today, Leica made and announcement of 3 new cameras. You can find out about them in numerous places on the web. DP Review even has a review of the brand new M9 digital rangefinder. You can have one of your very own for $6,995 USD. I’ve only had this M6 for about 2 weeks. I’ve shot and developed 2 rolls of film and I like what I see. I don’t know that it has any magical properties, but I like the simplicity of it and am beginning to like the feel of it.
Leica cameras, all hand-made, are classics. The lenses for them are classics. It’s hard to dispute this, or if you don’t want to call them classics, you could call them top-notch performers. The build quality, fit and finish, is superb. It’s no wonder that nearly all of the M series have become classics. However, when Leica introduced the M8 they made a few technical errors that hurt them, mainly having to do with white balance and not having an infrared filter on the sensor! Doh! So much for classic status!
My friend Tom, of The Photo Father, told me that he had the opportunity to use an M8 and the experience was ‘horrible’, I believe, or perhaps terrible. Nonetheless, let us say that he would not add the M8 into the realm of classic. Now, with the release of the M9, I wonder. I know that Leica has to produce digital cameras to stay in business. Also, I think that it is good staying with what you know, rangefinders. They couldn’t compete with the likes of Nikon or Canon in the DSLR market. As for digital rangefinders, they are the only game in town, not only in town, but in the world! So, they can command a high price and get it. But, does that high price make it a classic. Will it stand the test of time? Will you be able to buy batteries for it 10 years from now, 20, 30?
Can a digital camera ever become a classic? Is the notion of ‘classic’ simply a romantic idea? I suppose that it is just that. We attach some emotion to a thing and give it great value because of what we feel about it. I have no answers, only questions. Perhaps you could provide some answers.
Well, all I know for sure is that the world of photography is better off for having Leica as a vibrant competitor in the marketplace. Don’t get me wrong, I’d love an M9, but I’ll take an X1.
[Reply]
There is another digital range finder manufacturer, Epson. It’s however a rather ‘old’ product they have, and the recent refurb the made on it mostly was increasing the price. I think I read a rumour some were that Zeis might have one on their way. Their business with Sony could go in that direction, if they wanted to.
But, I am drooling over the M9….
[Reply]
I think that the concept of a “classic” has a very different meaning for digital cameras that is measured in months, not years.
You are buying into the lens system, not the body. Hopefully the lens system is robust/advanced enough to survive a few body upgrades. But even now we are seeing that the sensors have become so good in some cases that new lenses are required to take advantage of the resolution offered.
Personally, I can’t see investing in any of this new technology too heavily, it’s just changing too fast.
YMMV.
[Reply]
I almost bought a used Epson rangefinder; the only thing that prevented me was the 1.5 crop factor.
[Reply]
@Ove: The reason that I didn’t mention the R-D1, by Epson, is because it has been discontinued for some time now, making Leica the sole provider of digital rangefinders in the market. Of course, you can still find an R-D1 in the used market.
@Eric: Yes. Investing in technology is a loosing game. As soon as you put your money on the counter, or virtual counter, the product that you just bought is outdated, or will soon be. I think that in order to be a true classic, the item has to stand the test of time and become timeless. Classic movies, classic radio, classic cars, etc. All had value then but because they became classics, they have more value now. Again, I think it is a romantic notion, but why not.
Romance is good!
@Chris: Regarding crop factor, what makes you interested in the X1? It has a crop factor of 1.46, has a fixed lens, and no finder, unless you want to pony up another $350. I don’t see the attraction. Do tell, my friend. Do tell!
[Reply]
Paul: The short answer is simple, actually. It’s a full-blooded Leica digital I might be able to afford in the near future.
The full answer is this: It is a 35mm equivalent. I love prime lenses. To get a 35mm equivalent on my 10D in a prime, I have to get a 35/1.6 = 22mm lens. Heck, to emulate a 28 I need a 17mm. Fast 21′s or 22′s are expensive and not very common. I own a 17-40 L zoom, which is a very lovely lens for landscape, but it’s f/4, and I prefer my street lenses to be f/2 or faster.
So, on my SLRs, I really want full frame to limit the DOF and get me a 35mm or 28 or 24mm. I love wide angles.
The X1 is kinda like a TLR; since I can’t change the lens, the FOV is what it is and I have to adjust. With the M9, my Biogon gives me the same FOV whether I shoot film or not.
That’s kind of a stream-of-consciousness answer, but there you have it.
[Reply]
Oh, and yes, I WOULD buy the finder.
[Reply]
This image; is it old or new? Oh, and did you ever borrow the Photo Father’s Leica and did that influence your decision to buy one?
[Reply]
This image was taken yesterday and developed last night. I went over to the river near my apartment, saw these guys fishing and talking about boats, so I took their picture. They never heard a thing. That baby is quiet!
I never did get to test his Leica. He ended up selling it and I bought it.
[Reply]
I don’t think you ever (or seldom, anyway) know if something is a classic when it comes out. An awful lot of stuff from the 70s we thought had a classic design now looks pretty bad (furniture, clothes, etc).
I have an M6 and M8. I don’t think I have ever seen the M8 infrared problem but the white balance has bitten me on the behind more than once, sometimes producing garish colors (ugh what an image). I personally think the user experience is great and love going through the act of manual control – focus, set the aperture, adjust the shutter based on the little red triangles. I can now sort of guess how to compensate the exposure by how much the red glows.
I have been going through a process of downsizing. I seldom use the big Canon stuff any more and stay with the M8 or the LX3 point-shoot. And I seldom print any more. Most of the images end up on the web or viewed in some way on the computer so having more megapixels is not an issue.
I think I will stay with the cameras I have. Still would love to play with the M9 though. I think the M9 probably has a higher probability of being a classic than the M8 but who really knows.
Neil M.
[Reply]
eventually the digital technology will be good enough. I don’t personally believe it is quite there – getting there though.
Maybe then there will be a slowdown – the cutting edge will still evolve but the upgrade treadmill might slow.
Mind you, my last digital camera I bought was about 5 years ago, so what do I know.
[Reply]
@Gordon: Five years ago?!!! That’s ancient. You need to upgrade! How are you still making photos?
Simply incomprehensible!
[Reply]
Well, from what I read in the early reviews, the M9 seems to be it, they seem to finally have got it right. Their luck is, that they produce a mythical piece of technology that somehow magically turns your name into Henri and makes you a Magnum photographer. Thus I believe they will sell it as fast as they can produce it, regardless of the outrageous price.
Can a digital camera be a classic? Sure, the Canon 5D is one, The Nikon D300 is one. They only won’t be in use any more some years ahead, which is quite different from film classics.
What I really mean is this: For me, “classic” means foremost a design quality. A classic camera is a camera that in its time does almost everything right (like the D300), or in its time does one thing with absolute perfection (image quality on the 5D). It will be superseded, but in its time it rules supreme.
Given my definition, the M9 seems to be a classic, no question. It may even hold its monetary value longer than other digital cameras, but I suppose we will see a time when cameras at ISO 25600 or 50120 will show only moderate noise, and then we will expect that sensitivity. Why not? The 18mpx may last long, but from what I have seen of ISO 1600 shots with the M9, the noise will soon begin to make it look very, very old. At least for the price.
[Reply]