Yes there are new cameras coming out all of the time. Does this make your old camera obsolete? Well, not really. It still takes the same images it did the day you purchased it. New cameras simply improve functionality, image size and quality. That said, if these are important to you you may wish to upgrade – just as you may have wanted to upgrade from an R4 to an R8 in the days of film.

Digital adds opportunities, it doesn’t subtract them. Buy a camera that you are happy with the quality of and then use it for as long as you like.

Cheers,

Antony

Now days, film does not change (in digital photography) but the sensors do! Almost every few months, a new sensor is coming out, 10 mega pixels, 12, 18, 24 (and now 37.5(!)). APS and also Full Frame… Now, the problem is, its not so easy as pulling out your old film and putting in the new version…your sensor is stuck in your camera and is not coming out! Solution if you want the new sensor (read film)…Sell/bin the camera, keep your old lens and buy the new camera. One heck of a lot more expensive that upgrading in the old days.

What is the solution then? I say… Digital Backs or some sort of interchangeable sensor technology so when a new sensor comes out that one day will be say Full Frame, 35 mega pixels and have the high iso performance of say the Nikon D3…I want to be able to take that sensor and put it in my workhorse leica and go on my way.

All that is happening is they building cameras that are super expensive but are obsolete very quickly not because of their lenses or the body…but because of the sensors they are stuck with. Come on guys… Build me a leica that I never have to bin to get the latest sensor.

That is my two pence.

I just went to my favorite photography shop in Brussels.
Leica M9 will be presented 18th of september in that shop (by Leica officials).
Full Frame 18 mpix / 5490 euros

PS : I don’t undestand why people fight about the pictures above. Fake or not who cares ? Rumors are part of the game nowadays. Leica M9 is coming people, isn’t that a great news… let’s talk photography )

Sensor size: 36 × 24mm
Megapixels: 18mp
Dimensions: 139 x 37 x 80 mm
IR / UV filter is not necessary
2.5-inch LCD monitor
new ISO sensitivity button
Leica M9 in, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom is shipped with a license

The M9 ’specs’ sound remarkably like the last 10,000 speculations we have all seen everywhere.
Aren’t rumours wonderful?

we might be able to use our M lenses on both cams :d

TEBnewyork wrote:

- Looks fake:

Not for me. More like a mock up, but still could be the real thing.

- Grip doesn’t match the base

It does. Below the lens, to the left, you can see the… how is that in english… knob? Well, the ‘wheel’ you’d use to ’screw’ or fix the grip to the base. Looks like the tripod mount is not lined up with the lens…

- Says flash built in – Where

See next.

- What is the round thing on the right? Looks like a photoshopped film rewind

May be the (pop-up) flash. Nice design then.

- What is the second dial for?

Aperture. From f/2.8 to f/16 plus A (red) for aperture priority. This tell us it is a fixed (non removable) lens.

- Nice serial number on the lens
- Can’t imagine it coming with a 48mm (equiv) lens

In the text it says 24mm… equivalent, so it must be 16mm (if a 1.5x sensor). But it’s strange that this is not reflected in the lens.

BTW, because of the aperture dial on top, the (maybe) offset tripod mount and its desing (no protusions) the lens looks like… it is retractable?

Well, at least I hope they are fake, specially the X1. Oh boy, what an ugly camera! What the hell is that second dial on the top? For EV comp? Awful! The M9 is just a photoshopped version of the M8 that person also has on flickr. Sorry folks, not this time! Plus, I expect a bit more from Leica, specially after making such a splash with video and live broadcast for the 9th!

Last… the discussion about copyright? Give me a break. The material posted here are most of the time grabbed from the net (therefore its a rumor site). It was never claimed to be shots form the editor! The watermark is okay, so if someone else use the photos used here, credit will be made that the pictures were grabbed form this site (advertisement, not claiming the editor took them!). I think that if the person that originally placed the pictures on the web wanted to have some credits for the pictures, would have placed the watermark themselves (naomi white).

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

Don’t like that? Then you have 3 options:

1- Sue the owner of this blog (but… are you the copyright holders?).
2- Go cry with others (music labels are a good companion).
3- Shut up.

Regards.