For the money, I just don't see the big deal. Most of the cameras seem to have problems with the AF; many of the reviews (the Leica, especially) seem to mention low image quality at some point.
Given the limitations --one single lens-- they look to be more like whims that you buy because you want to buy it, than real, hard working professional cameras.
avicenanw: I find it hard to imagine a Hasselblad without a wooden hand grip.
Nope. The Pentax 67 looked like a regular SLR only bigger.
You are probably a baby!!!! Those of us older than the mountains remember a sturdy box, with a crank on the side, a top viewfinder and a weird knob on the side of the lens for focusing
I don't know that this article is useful at all. The cameras are all so different that one could argue that they should not be in the same review. Having a Lumix with a little 24-70 zoom next to a monster 28-gazillion zoom is pointless. The focus of the article should have been tightened much more and the cameras compared be much more homogeneous
MarcMedios: I fail to see the allure. Buying a quality point and shoot is still buying a point & shoot. Bottom line, you have a lens that some anonymous engineer decided for you, can't change it, can't zoom in, change your framing... seems like a self-defeating thing to do.
My objection is that they are fixed lenses, prime or non-prime.
I fail to see the allure. Buying a quality point and shoot is still buying a point & shoot. Bottom line, you have a lens that some anonymous engineer decided for you, can't change it, can't zoom in, change your framing... seems like a self-defeating thing to do.
bmoag: From the Wall Street Journal. " Leica’s sales have risen around 35%, to €337 million in its most recent fiscal year ended March 31, 2014." There is no breakdown for unit sales (German laws and a nearly 50% ownership by a private investment firm) but although that total does not indicate large sales volumes apparently it is enough to keep Leica going. Honestly, if Leica gifted anyone on this forum with one of these things who wouldn't want one to keep and use?
If Leica gave one to everyone? But that wouldn't prove anything. What proves something is when someone puts his/her hard-earned cash on the line.
I don't see the point of building such a beautiful camera, comfortable to use (it looks very similar to the M2) and leaving out the viewfinder. Especially with creative solutions like the little pop up viewfinder from the Sony!A professional (or semi pro) camera needs a viewfinder. The LCD screen in the back is just not enough for good framing and composing.
I am in love
Lassoni: boycott canon. no more bad cameras. that's the only way around this
Great backup body
bernardly: My own personal opinion is the T5/1200D is the only currently available Rebel worth buying. I was never and still not impressed by the T5I for its price. The price of the T6S/T6I puts the 70D within reach which is a much better camera all around. The T5 is good enough for its intended demographic of novices and importantly, the money saved on the body can be used for buying additional lenses. The T6S/T6I duo are not for enthusiasts because they are overpriced beginner cameras. Canon will make tons of money upselling customers these newer cameras with their whiz bang consumer features and perception within the brand.
For the same reasons, I would always recommend a Nikon D3300/D3200 over the D5500. And for a bigger budget, the D7100/D7200.
As for the choice between brands, I always encourage people to make up their own minds based on handling the cameras themselves and taking their time to make an informed choice. And of course, there are mirrorless options.
Your "own personal" opinion. Of course. Who else's would it be.
Absolutely love it. What a great backup camera to have
Why did Canon choose to abandon the viewfinder?
jhwaaser: I am shocked at the lousy response to the Kodak name on here. Kodak invented digital photography, and Kodak, Nikon, and Olympus, all involved in film photography, were the first to tame the excess contrast of the charge coupled device. As a professional photographer, I tried Agfa, Ilford, and even earlier, Ansco products, but I discovered that Nikon cameras and Kodak film, paper, and chemicals made it easier for mecto make top quality photos without problems. I owned, used, and loved Kodak Z510 and Z712 cameras (okay, so my C735 was a p.o.s.) and I thought I would wait and get a Z-Max at a cheap price when they went out of business, but they sold out of that model first, and I lost out. One of my favorite film cameras was the Retina, and I had a iiic stolen out of a Stouffers motel, and haven't bought a Stouffers product since! High-end Kodak products rock, and I hope that the new products treat the brand name as well as, say, the resurrected Triumph motorcycles....
@RDMPhotos - Kodak is completely out of the photo equipment business. I'm sorry your highly literate mind is also a highly literal mind. Kodak made huge strategic mistakes in their entire approach to digital and cameras, mistakes that basically burned whatever respect you might have had for the brand.
MarcMedios: More blah blah blah from Leica. Why would anyone settle for fixed lenses for $4,500? It seems that being tied to the lens that some marketing guy in Germany decided was "right for you" is surrendering your personal choice as a photographer. I have nothing against this Leica (yet) or its price... but having a single lens fixed there... forever... nah. I'll pass.
Sorry Clint, not buying it. If you can't change the lens, it is a point & shoot. A good one, for sure, the sensor matches the lens, blah blah blah, but, at the end, you have a nice P&S
More blah blah blah from Leica. Why would anyone settle for fixed lenses for $4,500? It seems that being tied to the lens that some marketing guy in Germany decided was "right for you" is surrendering your personal choice as a photographer. I have nothing against this Leica (yet) or its price... but having a single lens fixed there... forever... nah. I'll pass.
MarcMedios: Honestly, I didn't find it that good at all. I think one might be jaded by the sheer amount of photography one sees on a daily basis.
I didn't say "overwhelmed". I said "jaded". It is a completely different word. I still don't find her work that great.
Honestly, I didn't find it that good at all. I think one might be jaded by the sheer amount of photography one sees on a daily basis.
In spite of the drawbacks, it is an absolutely great idea. I hope Canon and Nikon do it soon... and better.
FeDost: Why spending money for something which is just a cool gadget which is desperately copying Leica's camera when you can have the same result or even better with the Ricoh GR?
P.S.For who gonna say "because the viewfinder" you can have a Zeiss viewfinder on the GR for less than money than x100T.
The main problem with the add-on viewfinders is that they completely destroy the entire raison d'etre of the rangefinder type camera: the slim silhouette which is discrete, easy to handle and compact. The tall viewfinder feels like an add-on all the time. The Sony R100III has a very credible solution: a pop up viewfinder.