I recently bought an R9 with a DMR back for several reasons: the cost was acceptable, I have a bevy of R-lenses, I love the R8/R9 features and quality, and so far the images are great. And Leica lenses are really exceptional (no myth here!). The DMR uses a CCD sensor and not a CMOS one, it does not use an anti-aliasing filter over the sensor, and Imacon and Kodak teamed up to supply an exceptional image capture device. An interesting read by Mark Dubuvoy comparing the DMR with the Canon EOS 1Ds MkII at 16 megapixels can be found in the March/April, 2006, issue of "Photo Techniques". He sums up the case for the DMR well and also describes what wonderful things happen when a Leica lens is attached to the Canon.
I do think Leica made a terrible mistake when they abandoned the R-users. For crying out loud, we're a dedicated bunch and a sure market for the R10. And Leica has never been a mass marketer of cameras and never will be, and their assertion that they would always be behind Canon and Nikon makes no sense - they always have been in terms of multiple features (many virtually useless). They have never been behind in terms of quality and optical performance and pleasure of use.
I'll just keep puttering away happily with my DMR and my great Leica glass (and many of the R-lenses are really bargains now and even the older ones are top quality).
Chasander
I know a professional photographer here that was in R9 and passed to Canon because of no Leica successor (I agree with you that was a terrible and silly mistake). Bought high-end Canon lenses and in the end uses his Leica lenses on the Canon.
He showed me the differences, on screen you see it clearly. Leica glass are in another league. The only Canon lens he uses is the tilt-shift.
Lens talking, Leica is not a myth but really true.
