So no 'real' mirrorless from Leica...

Started May 10, 2012 | Discussions
szlevi
Contributing MemberPosts: 932Gear list
Like?
Re: The faRt is ...
In reply to Jorginho, May 11, 2012

OTOH thanks for your valuable contribution here...

Jorginho wrote:

You might feel lucky someone even bothers to reply to your message. You come across as rude to me, you have nothing to add about (the) Leica I have not heard quite a number of times already (talking about cliches). You also have noted the Leica is not a mirrorless cam, not a m43 cam. So what is your message adding to this part of the forum? In my view very little.

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

 szlevi's gear list:szlevi's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
szlevi
Contributing MemberPosts: 932Gear list
Like?
Re: I agree with your Leica sentiments, Levi, but wonder about your...
In reply to Hen3ry, May 11, 2012

Hen3ry wrote:

…head. Just where is it at? Someone posts, discussing your point intelligently, and you lash out at them because of grammar?

Ehh, you're right and now it is becoming a much bigger issue than I wanted - sorry about that.

True, their punctuation and their grammar wasn't so hot, but your original post wasn't either. It is riddled with errors.

You are correct (no pun intended ;)), it's just very hard to read stuff on the go when someone does not use sentences.

szlevi wrote:

...just several pathetically outdated and laughably overpriced hardware - Monochrome as niche, seriously? 320k LCD in 2012? APS-C as "premium large sensor"? A 50/2 for $7k+?
And this is following years of development, with EVF borrowed from Olympus...?

Seriously, I do not understand how will Leica survive with these failed attempts.

I thought they will release something competitive, modern system around $2k-$3k that might actually make people think about it, just to disrupt the mirrorless market.

...I guess the future of Fuji, Olympus etc remain more than safe because apparently Leica have completely lost the connection with the real world.

But who cares about that? This is a camera/photo forum conducted in English but for people of all language backgrounds, so let’s just lighten up and stick to the point.

Amen to that.

I agree with you that Leica 's B&W foray is ridiculous -- I actually laughed out loud when I read it. I was amused and saddened by Olympus returning to the OM shape (in reality, a generic SLR shape -- the OM-1/2 hump was notably low, one of that wonderful camera's distinguishing features); Leica turning out a B&W camera reflects the same thinking carried to its absolute extreme. And like all extremes, it tends towards the idiotic. I hope Leicaphiles treat it accordingly.

To tell you the truth I like the look of the OM-D but I have never owned any OM so it might be just that it's fresh for me .
And your point about the extremes is sooo true ...

As for the assertion that Leica has not gone into the mirrorless format -- that's silly. Leica has always had mirrorless cameras, started with mirrorless cameras. That's the point about rangefinder, direct OVF cameras. What is surprising is that they have left it to Fuji to develop today's version of that camera.

I am constantly irritated by people who talk about EVF-less cameras as "rangefinder" type. No they are not. They are not even "rangefinder" shape. The vast majority of cameras with the oblong shape or similar had a simple OVF and no rangefinder. They were the equivalent of today's P&S.

I'm not sure - what do you mean by different shape? When I was a small kid (70s) we already had one (a Zorki which was a Leica-styled Soviet-made rangefinder family) and it indeed looked very similar to the Leicas, something like this (+ we had a full leather case)

I think what you meant to say that that Leica had not entered the compact system camera (CSC) field, the m43 or the near m43 field, with a new direct competitor -- albeit at the stratospheric end of the market.

Sure, that's correct albeit my point when I said 'real' mirrorless was rather something along the line of 'mirror-less with through-the-lens live view' as Joe Pineapples put it eloquently a little bit earlier...

I agree with that -- it is surprising. I would have thought Leica could ask $4k-$5k for a camera like the Fuji (or the OM-D if it comes to that -- Leica has its own history of SLRs) and enjoy very good sales.

Yes, that's my point: they could enter anywhere between $2-5k on the market and still be disruptive and enjoy brisk volume sales from day 1, finally reaching proper financial status (they almost went bankrupt in 2005 if I remember correctly?)

Best part would be their increased lens sales - that's their main revenue source after all...

Someone mentioned Leica's lack of connection with m43. That's ridiculous. Hasn’t anyone looked at the names of some Panasonic lenses? In fact, Leica is part of the consortium.

Cheers, geoff

Good point though I doubt they will ever release one - APS-C is apparently more fitting for them (remember, they don't make bulky AF zoom lenses.)

As someone pointed out above they are readying something for September, we shall see...

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

 szlevi's gear list:szlevi's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
szlevi
Contributing MemberPosts: 932Gear list
Like?
Haha, VERY good one! :D (nt)
In reply to cameron2, May 11, 2012

cameron2 wrote:

Joe Pineapples wrote:

Yes - I think it was "high-fives all round" at Fujifilm today...

Yes, but because it was Fuji, they couldn't actually connect on the high fives, but compensated by telling themselves how brilliant they are
--
Sent from my iPhone 5

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

 szlevi's gear list:szlevi's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jorginho
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,970Gear list
Like?
Re: The faRt is ...
In reply to szlevi, May 11, 2012

Your welcome! May be you did intend to be rude sometimes people get carried away a little. Happens to me to sometimes. Glad I could be of help!

 Jorginho's gear list:Jorginho's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
deleted_081301
Senior MemberPosts: 1,862Gear list
Like?
Re: You sound like a fan-boy...
In reply to szlevi, May 11, 2012

szlevi wrote:
Well put, thanks.

Joe Pineapples wrote:

I know that the terminology of modern digital cameras is still evolving, but I think the accepted meaning of "mirrorless" is that live view is used to give a TTL view without a reflex mirror in the optical path; so the Leica digital Ms are not "mirrorless" cameras...

Joe

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

WOW you are rewriting the English language ..."Mirrorless" means doesnt have a mirror Usually meaning a Reflex veiwing morror as in "SLR"

Rangfinders dont have veiwing mirrors .....therefore "Mirrorless"

 deleted_081301's gear list:deleted_081301's gear list
Olympus C-4000 Zoom Olympus E-300 Olympus PEN E-PL1s Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Samyang 8mm F3.5 Aspherical IF MC Fisheye +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
deleted_081301
Senior MemberPosts: 1,862Gear list
Like?
Re: You simply don't understand the economics of luxury goods
In reply to szlevi, May 11, 2012

"A Lamborghini or Rolls are technically superior to your puny Honda" now thats a laugh ....Lamboghina were tractor manufacturers Rolls are limo cars for comfort and luxury not "Technology" honda on the other side have been technology leaders First in Motor cycles (Five cylinder 125cc four valves per cylinder in 1962) and then in Cars (Racing cars esp)Variable valve s etc ..... Lamboghina have not and never will be Ferrari ....

szlevi wrote:

A Lamborghini or Rolls are technically superior to your puny Honda, a Leica is not or at least so far no one was able to tell me how it is.

Also as I noted I have no problem with Leica ripping off rich people with less brain than money, that's fin

Bob Meyer wrote:

Yeah, right. I guess Rolls Royce, Ferrari, Lamborghini, and Bently are all in the dumps because they don't have volume sales . By any objective measure, those cars are all rip offs, too, but they continue to sell at prices and quantities that make their manufacturers significant amounts of money.

Mortons will never sell as many steaks as McDonalds sells hamburgers. Prada will never sell as many of it's several thousand dollar purses as JC Penny sells cheap bags. And Fossil will continue to sell more $100 watches than Jaeger-LeCoultre will sell $6,000 ones. But none of those luxury brands have anything to fear from their less expensive brethren.

I think you don't understand the economics of luxury goods.

szlevi wrote:

I mean you can keep ripping off people with more money than brain, that's fine but you need stable revenue from volume sales to cover your rising R&D costs - and within the rich it's an even smaller subset of loonies who can be ripped off TWICE or 3X raped from behind by selling them another outdated Monochrome crap for more than the already overpriced color one...

...just how big is this market? Last year they enjoyed a nice bump but they had the V-Lux and the M-9P wasn't 3 years old technology minus color filter... the V-Lux 3 is a decent compact superzoom but that's becoming another niche nowadays especially for almost $1k.

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

-- hide signature --

Bokeh is the aesthetic quality of the blur in out-of-focus areas of an image, or the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light. Bokeh is not the same as depth of field (DOF).

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

 deleted_081301's gear list:deleted_081301's gear list
Olympus C-4000 Zoom Olympus E-300 Olympus PEN E-PL1s Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Samyang 8mm F3.5 Aspherical IF MC Fisheye +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lights
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,270Gear list
Like?
Re: Back When
In reply to szlevi, May 11, 2012

Back when photographers such as Bresson (and many others) used them, they were somewhat expensive for their day..but photographers could actually afford them, and they were built like tanks with great lenses. But because of many great Magnum photographers using them they became legend. So rich people started to buy them, and only now a few very, very successful photographers can afford them.

I myself like simplicity, I turn nearly everything off when I get a new camera. As far as I'm concerned, if it's got aperture priority, shutter priority, and manual = enough for me. No geotags, no Bluetooth, video I could care less about (realizing that these things don't cost much to include)..Sometimes even going out with a few filters and shooting OOC black and white for fun - and it works, just like it did in film, but most times I convert from Raw.

Well the Leica Monochrom startled me. Is this (although I do admire simplicity to the crux of the matter) I thought is this a "real" camera or a collectors item such as some of their editions of later M series have blatantly been? I do realize the gains from being B&W only, in resolution and in noise control. I had thought someone like Fuji, Sigma, maybe even Olympus might come out someday with a dedicated B&W such as Kodak did in the early 2000's and sell it for 1000 or less...but 8000 USD is a lot of money. It's a pretty thin niche.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
deleted_081301
Senior MemberPosts: 1,862Gear list
Like?
Re: Just look through the view finder of an M9
In reply to szlevi, May 12, 2012

szlevi wrote:

No offense but this is the "magic dust" argument again, I'm too old and way too technical/practical for this. Also I am not a photographer, never wanted to be (nothing wrong with it but it's too slow for me.)

My initial question was that how Leica gets away with these outdated hardware - I know the economics very well, lens business etc - but so far nobody was anle to tell me a single meaningful fact eg it's noiseless or extreme DR or anything.

It is just this "feeling"-based nonsense - which, of course, just reassures the sneaking suspicion of Leica riding the back of rich people with not much clue...

PS: I could buy any camera incl. any Leica, even a MF (likely I will never do either :)) so I have no problem with people spending money on it, don't get me wrong, I just think they are a total ripoff at these prices.

echelon2004 wrote:

and you will understand what they are about, even for those who need to settle for Zeiss, Voigtländer and other slightly lesser lenses.

And if you really want to mess up your current perception of good enough, try it with a 35mm 1.4 sumilux.

The day I stop working as a photographer and reclaim photography as a hobby, I'll probably get a Leica M something.
--
Anders

'It is nice to be important but it is more important to be nice'

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

"Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing."

 deleted_081301's gear list:deleted_081301's gear list
Olympus C-4000 Zoom Olympus E-300 Olympus PEN E-PL1s Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Samyang 8mm F3.5 Aspherical IF MC Fisheye +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
szlevi
Contributing MemberPosts: 932Gear list
Like?
Re: You sound like a fan-boy...
In reply to deleted_081301, May 12, 2012

Err, no, the whole point in a terminus technicus is exactly the opposite, that it is not about its default meaning.

DickyUK wrote:

szlevi wrote:
Well put, thanks.

Joe Pineapples wrote:

I know that the terminology of modern digital cameras is still evolving, but I think the accepted meaning of "mirrorless" is that live view is used to give a TTL view without a reflex mirror in the optical path; so the Leica digital Ms are not "mirrorless" cameras...

Joe

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

WOW you are rewriting the English language ..."Mirrorless" means doesnt have a mirror Usually meaning a Reflex veiwing morror as in "SLR"

Rangfinders dont have veiwing mirrors .....therefore "Mirrorless"

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

 szlevi's gear list:szlevi's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
szlevi
Contributing MemberPosts: 932Gear list
Like?
Re: Just look through the view finder of an M9
In reply to deleted_081301, May 12, 2012

There's some truth to it but I am simply asking a question about the supposed 'superiority' of a $7-8k outdated, B&W camera... so far handling was the closest I could consider as an attempt at giving a fair answer...:)

DickyUK wrote:

szlevi wrote:

No offense but this is the "magic dust" argument again, I'm too old and way too technical/practical for this. Also I am not a photographer, never wanted to be (nothing wrong with it but it's too slow for me.)

My initial question was that how Leica gets away with these outdated hardware - I know the economics very well, lens business etc - but so far nobody was anle to tell me a single meaningful fact eg it's noiseless or extreme DR or anything.

It is just this "feeling"-based nonsense - which, of course, just reassures the sneaking suspicion of Leica riding the back of rich people with not much clue...

PS: I could buy any camera incl. any Leica, even a MF (likely I will never do either :)) so I have no problem with people spending money on it, don't get me wrong, I just think they are a total ripoff at these prices.

echelon2004 wrote:

and you will understand what they are about, even for those who need to settle for Zeiss, Voigtländer and other slightly lesser lenses.

And if you really want to mess up your current perception of good enough, try it with a 35mm 1.4 sumilux.

The day I stop working as a photographer and reclaim photography as a hobby, I'll probably get a Leica M something.
--
Anders

'It is nice to be important but it is more important to be nice'

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

"Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing."

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

 szlevi's gear list:szlevi's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lights
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,270Gear list
Like?
Re: Just look through the view finder of an M9
In reply to szlevi, May 12, 2012

Granted the Leica is appealing to a small band of photographers (and probably some rich people who fancy themselves as such) and it ain't cheap. But. Much fine art photography is done in B&W, whether a person likes it, or doesn't. The Leica...with it's effective resolution,using every pixel for gray scale output, it's low noise...will be the camera to have for that niche of photographers. It has a superb choice of lenses. It has simplicity. Lots of people who have money will buy it because it's one of a kind, but there will be a core of high end photographers who will find it meaningful.

Yes I agree that it's very expensive...and really most of the people in this forum might find disposable camera income lacking, for it's purchase. But it does have a very selective use in a meaningful way to "some" people.

I had read rumours to the effect that they might do this, but when they actually did, it kind of surprised me, to put it mildly.
--

http://www.pbase.com/madlights
http://barriolson.aminus3.com/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Meyer
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,336Gear list
Like?
Who is stupid?
In reply to szlevi, May 12, 2012

I shouldn't bother, as you're hopeless, but I'd suggest the stupid one is the person who's already made up his mind, in spite of the fact that he has no first hand knowledge of the subject under discussion.

Go use a Leica for a while, then tell us your opinion of it. If you still feel the same way, fine. At least you'll have an informed opinion. Until then, your uninformed opinions are a waste of the air you breath while formulating them.

Note uninformed ~= stupid
--

Bokeh is the aesthetic quality of the blur in out-of-focus areas of an image, or the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light. Bokeh is not the same as depth of field (DOF).

 Bob Meyer's gear list:Bob Meyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Meyer
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,336Gear list
Like?
Re: You simply don't understand the economics of luxury goods
In reply to szlevi, May 12, 2012

I don't have a Honda, and never mentioned a Honda, so I guess you don't read too well, either. But there you go, more ignorance on display.

Technically superior? Depends on how you define it. A Honda is more reliable, gets better gas mileage, is roomier than the Lambo and easier to park than the Rolls. "Better" depends on the criteria used to judge. For the vast majority of car owners, a Honda is "better" than the other cars mentioned. Just are for the vast majority of camera buyers, an Olympus (or an iPhone) is better than a Leica. But not for everyone, brainiac.

A Leica is undeniably better in some respects than it's cheaper brethren. But, again, you'll never understand that, because you're too secure in your own ignorance to realize there are multiple ways to judge things, and that not everyone shares your values.

szlevi wrote:

A Lamborghini or Rolls are technically superior to your puny Honda, a Leica is not or at least so far no one was able to tell me how it is.

-- hide signature --

Bokeh is the aesthetic quality of the blur in out-of-focus areas of an image, or the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light. Bokeh is not the same as depth of field (DOF).

 Bob Meyer's gear list:Bob Meyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Meyer
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,336Gear list
Like?
Re: You simply don't understand the economics of luxury goods
In reply to szlevi, May 12, 2012

I think that's a question you should answer. Based on your posts, we've estimated between 16 and 22, and still living in your mom's house.

szlevi wrote:

How old are you, seriously?

 Bob Meyer's gear list:Bob Meyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Meyer
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,336Gear list
Like?
Re: Just look through the view finder of an M9
In reply to szlevi, May 12, 2012

Umm, no. Lot's of people have made meaningful points. You simply refuse to acknowledge them because they conflict with your pre-determined position.

Ignorance is bliss, they say, so you must be deliriously happy.

szlevi wrote:

And apparently nobody else here as nobody was able to make one meaningful point whatsoever including supposed Leica owners.

 Bob Meyer's gear list:Bob Meyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MadsR
Senior MemberPosts: 2,235Gear list
Like?
Re: So no 'real' mirrorless from Leica...
In reply to szlevi, May 12, 2012

szlevi wrote:

...just several pathetically outdated and laughably overpriced hardware - Monochrome as niche, seriously? 320k LCD in 2012? APS-C as "premium large sensor"? A 50/2 for $7k+?

The M9 is a 35mm sensor, not an APS-C...
And the 50mm Summicron is probably the sharpest lens out there...

Still, it is hopelessly overpriced and underspecc'ed...

I don't get why they have not gotten a cmos sensor developed so they could utilize LV for more precise focus, along with good screen to actually see the picture.

 MadsR's gear list:MadsR's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lights
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,270Gear list
Like?
Re: If it wasn't for the cost...yep.....
In reply to palker, May 12, 2012

Me too if it wasn't for that.
I remember seeing a sign on the back of a truck that said:
"Low price inspires no loyalty"
How true in the case of Leica....
--

http://www.pbase.com/madlights
http://barriolson.aminus3.com/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Crimguy
Contributing MemberPosts: 503Gear list
Like?
Re: If it wasn't for the cost...yep.....
In reply to Lights, May 12, 2012

I think from now on we need to begin posts with our age.

ME: Hi I'm Matt and I'm 41 years old

AUDIENCE: "HI MATT!"

I have 2 M6's and some really nice lenses. Their only big flaw is you can't upload the photos into the computer for some reason ;-D As a result they've been in the bag for most of the past year.

I was a doubter of Leica as well, or at least never really cared one way or another about them, until I got the above cameras in my hands a couple years ago. They are built better than anything out there, at least on the outside. They truly can stop a bullet.

http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00HnrI

The M6's shutter is a bit cheap in my opinion, and have been known to need frequent servicing.

The M's take fantastic photos and a lot of good photographers like them, even if they wouldn't use them for their daytime photography jobs. And there is a different work pattern with a manual focus rangefinder that forces you to be a bit more deliberate and thoughtful with your shot. This does contribute to the nice photos people have taken with them, even if it's a slight contribution. And the lenses are really works of art. Hold the 35mm/1.4 and then grab your 25/1.4 panasonic and you'll see for yourself. I also love the integrated lens hoods on the 50 and 90 lenses I have. The focusing dial on the 24 and 35 is incredibly smooth, and having the thumb notch on the dial is a great touch.

That being said, I do think Leica has lost the plot a bit. Their prices are really borderline madness these days. I don't think it's forced on them as much as it's a function of what the market will bear, which is quite a lot. Someone at Leica figured out that they can get away with charging $8000 for a camera, so that's what they charge.

I wholeheartedly agree, though, that an $8000 camera should have a better LCD. For that money, I would expect more. 230k dots doesn't exactly ooze quality in my book. It shows a bit of arrogance on their part - its not integral to the shooting process traditionally, so why would a "real" Leica photographer care about the LCD? They are definitely portraying themselves as "purists" by not paying attention to those secondary luxuries. In other words, the lack of improvement in that area is quite deliberate in my opinion.

Let's also not kid ourselves about the Leica viewfinders. Anyone with dodgy eyes (like myself) is likely to find focusing to be a challenge, despite the wide field of view the .58 viewfinder can bring. I've attached my 90mm Summicron and it's all but impossible to frame in that little box. The 24mm, 35mm and 50mm are really nice, if you can ignore the fact that the lens and/or hood block part of the view

I used to use a nikon F3 - I'd take that viewfinder any day over the Leica rangefinder.

Their "special edition" cameras are kinda pathetic, be it Hermés, platinum or otherwise. I realize they're collector's items, but in some ways I think they cheapen their image a bit as a photographic tool.

 Crimguy's gear list:Crimguy's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Olympus OM-D E-M5 Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Fazal Majid
Contributing MemberPosts: 852Gear list
Like?
Re: So no 'real' mirrorless from Leica...
In reply to szlevi, May 13, 2012

szlevi wrote:

...just several pathetically outdated and laughably overpriced hardware - Monochrome as niche, seriously?

A monochrome sensor without Bayer color filters or interpolation is going to be superior in sharpness to a non-Foveon color sensor for B&W work, and have better sensitivity. It's an impressively gutsy move. Not very many other manufacturers would have dared to do something breaking the mold like this. Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Pentax and Samsung are still mired in the same-old-same-old. Only Fuji, Sigma and Ricoh come to mind. After all who else would have the guts to introduce a medium format film rangefinder folder camera like the GF670, or a quirky system like the GXR, and of course Sigma was the first to release a large-sensor compact.

320k LCD in 2012?

The Leica M series is on a 2-year update cycle, the M9-P and M Monochrom are specialized point releases, like the Canon 60Da for astrophotography work. The M10 will only be announced at Photokina, and presumably will have an upgraded LCD.

APS-C as "premium large sensor"?

The X1 was the first APS-C compact, and still delivers better image quality than anything in the m43 space, albeit with slowish AF, if not quite as bad as the Sigma DP1 that really started the premium compact market. Sure, the Fuji X100 killed the market for the X1, and presumably for the X2 as well, but there is still a small market of people who buy it for the design and minimalist user interface, just like some people paid upwards of $100 for old-new-stock Braun alarm clocks. I doubt the m43 audience has any overlap with the potential market for the X1/X2.

A 50/2 for $7k+?

Yes, and it will sell out for the price. The only lens that can compete is the $4650 Coastal Optics 60mm f/4, which is 2 stops slower (but has a wider apo range). Nothing made by Canon, Nikon or even Zeiss is in the same class as the current 50mm Summicron, let alone the new one. Keep in mind the dollar is not worth what it used to, and there are plenty of people in Asia who can afford it, even if the dissolute and broke West no longer can. It will also keep its value and in fact appreciate. I bought my old Noctilux-M 50mm f/1.0 for $2000 in 2004, and resold it for $6000 in 2008. I doubt your Olympus lenses will fare as well. From a purely financial point of view, Leica lenses (as opposed to bodies) are actually a sound investment.

And this is following years of development

The years were spent on the X1.

with EVF borrowed from Olympus...?

Leica is a boutique firm that doesn't have the R&D capacity to do everything in-house, which is why they have sensors from Kodak, electronics from Jenoptik. The lens is all Leica, however. Even in the film era they had collaborations with Minolta (as did Hasselblad). After all, Nikon sources its sensors from Sony and Olympus from Panasonic, and no one thinks the less of them for it (compare with Canon which is sticking with its own sensors and taking a beating for it). The "Olympus" EVF is actually made by Seiko Epson, by the way (another truly innovative company with their ground-breaking R-D1), Olympus is just an OEM.

Seriously, I do not understand how will Leica survive with these failed attempts.

Leica had a brush with bankruptcy in 2004-2005, but since they came out with the M8, they are selling as fast as they can produce, and are very profitable.

Contrast this with Sony, Panasonic and Olympus, who are bleeding red ink in their camera divisions, and may consider ditching or selling them as Konica or Pentax did, even those not as tainted with scandal and fraud as Olympus.

I thought they will release something competitive, modern system around $2k-$3k

Why would they slum it in the $2K-$3K market? They sell their $5K-$8K products as fast as they can produce them. If you look at their lenses, it is the expensive ones like the new Noctilux or the 35mm and 50mm Summilux that are constantly sold out, not the "cheap" Summarits that are available, i.e. less desirable. If anything, the rational thing for them to do would be to ditch the rebadged Panasonics that detract from their indie image.

that might actually make people think about it, just to disrupt the mirrorless market.

Independently of the merits of their products, they are a luxury brand, and making cheap products would go against the aura of exclusivity. Your argument is like saying BMW is going to go bust because they did not release a $15,000 M3 to disrupt the compact car market and compete with GM. Leica is in business to make a profit, and wishing for champagne at beer prices is just that, wishful thinking.

...I guess the future of Fuji, Olympus etc remain more than safe because apparently Leica have completely lost the connection with the real world.

The financials say otherwise:

http://leicarumors.com/2011/08/12/leica-camera-ag-q1-financial-results-for-20112012-fiscal-year-are-out.aspx/
http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/its-financial-report-time.html

I'd say Leica has a very shrewd view of who their market is, and is doing very well despite their stumbles dealing with the shift to digital in the mid-2000s. Fuji is breaking even now and is going to do well because they are targeting the mid-upper end market, and improving their margins correspondingly?

Olympus, on the other hand, is in deep trouble. Their constant churn of mostly forgettable compacts and m43 cameras (forcing them to deep-discount previous models, like $299 for the E-PL1) has hit margins and profitability. They are also deeply dependent on Panasonic, their main competitor for m43. The financial shenanigans at Olympus have destroyed their credibility and patience with investors. I wouldn't be surprised if they ditched their camera business altogether to focus on their profitable microscope/endoscope and voice recorder businesses.

-- hide signature --
 Fazal Majid's gear list:Fazal Majid's gear list
Sony RX1 Fujifilm X100S Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Leica M Typ 240 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kb2zuz
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,196Gear list
Like?
My take on Leica
In reply to szlevi, May 14, 2012

Couple things. First, nearly all of Leica's current cameras, except the S2, are mirrorless. Yes the new X2 is not an interchangeable lens mirrorless, but it IS mirrorless (all point-and-shoots are). Secondly they do offer an interchangeable lens mirrorless, the M9. Leica doesn't go for the main stream, they shoot for the niche markets, unfortunately the amount of people who need niche products are small, which raises the price... they keep afloat by using that higher price to their advantage and sell the mystique of a luxury product to wealth people.

I'll give you an example. A relative of mine sells very high end acoustic guitars, many cost as much as $25,000. He has basically said he has 3 types of clients:

  1. The very talented musician who needs a very specific sound from a guitar that accompanies their particular style.

  2. The collector who maybe plays a bit but just likes to collect and/or preserve guitars that they feel have a special intrinsic quality.

  3. Wealthy people (often retiring doctors, lawyers, stock brokers) who want to learn guitar.

Now we'd all hope (and I'm certain he does to some extent) that the first group represent most of the sales, but sadly that's not the case. The latter two groups (and there is some over-lap between the two, someone may start playing but never really become a serious player, but then get into collecting) represent the vast majority of his sales. But you know what, all those collectors and wealthy beginners keep him business so that he can be their for the times when a grammy award winning guitarist needs a guitar with just the perfect action and resonance to fit their new album.

I view Leica as exactly the same. How many camera manufacturers are making a true B&W camera? The new Monochrom M9 is the only one I know. If you want maxiumum sharpness in B&W, you have 2 other options... get a Monochrome PhaseOne back and use a medium format camera, or use the Sigma SD-1 (of course Sigma lenses don't have the same reputation for sharpness as Leica Lenses). How many pocket sized cameras have the same sensor as highly praised the D7000 and K-5? Now are these cameras for everyone? Absolutely not. But there are a handful of serious photographers who would go... "wow, there's a lot I could do if I could have something with the image quality of the D7000 but in a much smaller package" or "I only shoot B&W, why can't it be like when I used to shoot Plus-X?"

I know a guy who sells Leicas and I can't count how many pictures I've seen of him sitting in a Ferrari, Lamborghini, or whatever insanely expensive car a client owns... yes those are a lot of their clients, but there are also a number of serious photographers who need something that the other manufacturers don't offer.

I've actually shot with a couple M series camera over the years M4, M6, M8, M9. I have to say that shooting with the M8 and M9, it was one of the most enjoyable times I've had shooting with a camera. You're in control of everything, the camera is insanely responsive, there's no black-out when you press the shutter, you can shoot with both eyes open so you're more aware of what's going on around you and you feel more connected with the scene. Were my pictures much better? Not really... I'm not that great a journalistic-style photographer to begin with, but it was fun and yes if I won the lotto, I'd probably buy an M9 before I bought a Porche.

I work with Hasselblad cameras on a daily basis. We need a 50MP 4-shot camera to produce uninterpolated images of paintings and objects for a museum. Now I the number of people who need this kind of camera are small. But there are a number of lawyers who want to shoot landscapes. I've been to a couple of Hasselblad events/seminars and run into such people and I've gotten frustrated once or twice when I'm trying to find answers to more complex color management and flat-fielding issues and the technical Q&A session got bogged down in questions about aperture and focal length. I would get frustrated for a bit, but then I realized that without these people, Hasselblad wouldn't be around to sell a rather unique type of camera that is idea for my kind of work.

-- hide signature --

~K

 kb2zuz's gear list:kb2zuz's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Nikon D800 Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads