Keit ll wrote:
The short answer is YES but at a considerable cost. If B&W is your prefered medium then the new monochrone Leica is the ultimate in portable cameras. It has a special sensor optimised for B&W which gives sharper images , better gradation & micro contrast.
The cost in body & lenses is considerable although if you shoot manly landscapes you may get away with just one lens suited to your style. The other point to consideris that although the initial cost is high Leica equipment is well supported & keeps its value well in the long term.
IF cost is a deterent then have a look at MR`s evaluation of the fixed lens half frame Sigma compacts on LuminousLandscape.com. The combination of the new sensor & matched lenses produce very good B&W images. There are some revealing comparisons with other cameras.
Even my question was in a way hypothetical, i was to be able to guess what kind of answer i could get. Frankly i was affreid of it. Because i expected it. I tried many cameras and different PP in order to achieve the look i want, but i always ended with suggestion to buy Leica, if i want "that Leica look".
So, my question is that really would be $6000 different, or put it this way, are the pictures from Leica will be 600% better when pictures from Sony or any other good camera, beside the pleasure of shooting with Leica to justify the cost?