Digital BW, The Print

Well, there's always the Epson RD-1, which is an M mount digital 
rangefinder.

-Adam




Kip Babington wrote:
> I too would have liked a digital M, but gave up hope several years ago
> and bought into the digital Nikon SLR world (to keep using my
> accumulation of Nikon lenses.)  There was considerable discussion on
> some of the Leica forums I used to visit (before I sold all my Leica,
> Nikon, Minox and Rollei film gear) that covered the technological in
> feasibility of successfully (i.e., usefully) mounting a digital sensor
> in a Leica-dimensioned body, given the current state of the art.  Epson
> made (still makes?) a digital rangefinder with a Leica mount but with a
> reduced-size sensor (smaller than 24x36mm) and so the delightful size of
> an M6 with a 35mm Summicron doesn't get you the same wide angle of view
> in the Epson that your get with film Leica.  The consensus of the
> technically knowledgeable  at the time was that the laws of physics
> simply precluded the production of digital sensors in 24x36 size that
> would work with existing Leica lenses at the lens-to-film distances used
> in the Leica rangefinders.  Sigh.
> 
> As for the obsolescence point, remember that a camera that takes fine
> pix today will take just as fine pix next year, even if there's a
> "better" model available next year.  Better models are announced
> continually in the digital world (who knows when, if ever, that will
> end) and by the time they're actually available in stores there
> frequently are at least rumors of even better models right around the
> corner.  Again, if it would be a good tool today, it will be a good tool
> tomorrow.  I paid full list for my Nikon D100 when it came out, and now
> I could buy it for half (if it's even still available) but I've had
> several years of wonderful use from it so far, and have no intentions of
> replacing it in the near future as it does what I need it to do.
> 
> I kept all of my film gear for more than a year after I got my D100, and
> after not taking a single frame of film in that time decided to let it
> go.  I was surprised that it didn't bother me in the least to let it go
> (I had had one of them, a Leica IIIc, since the 1950s) and I have not
> missed it in the years since.  I had a fair bit of Leica gear, including
> an M6 with 7 lenses (2 of them for the Visoflex - hard core!) and loved
> both having and using it, but the ease of MY getting better results with
> digital made it easy to let go.  I used to go through about 250 rolls of
> B&W film a year (and about 1 roll of color every 2 years) and did all my
> own developing and printing.  I now take MORE images digitally each
> year, "process" them much more quickly (a dozen or more contact sheets
> of a weekend's shooting hung up to dry within an hour or two of sitting
> down at the computer, and most of that time the software is compiling
> the contacts while I'm reading email) and create better looking (to ME)
> prints faster and easier than I ever did in a wet darkroom.
> 
> Of course, YMMV.
> 
> Cheers,
> Kip
> 
> garethjolly wrote, in part:
> 
>  >Thanks everyone
>  >
>  >A couple of things
>  >
>  >- like a few others on the list, obsolescence is an issue for me.  I'd
>  >like the technology to stabilise before investing.  Top end digital is
>  >also very expensive compared to top end 35mm
>  >
>  >- I use a Leica M7 (and recently also an Xpan).  I'd like to get a
>  >digilux, but at the moment, it's spec.s are well off the pace (5
>  >megapixel).  Actually, ideally, I'd like a digital M where I could use
>  >my existing lens.  To be honest, I wouldn't go back to an SLR.  The
>  >Leica Ms are beautiful camera's to use and suit my style of photography
>  >
>  >- I love darkroom printing - both from an aesthetic point of view and
>  >simply as a relaxant.  Scanning film gives me the best of both worlds
>  >for the moment.
>  ><snip>
>  >