bigdaddave: And Adobe's unquenchable lust for money continues.Still it won't be long before user lens profiles appear like 'dehaze' did for Lightroom so Adobe can go f### itself
'Bigshooter' ? Really? Dick complex much
bigdaddave: I'm sure the camera is great but all the full sized samples on this page look noisy, soft and mushy
Compared with a G1X it's nowhere, nowhere at all
And Adobe's unquenchable lust for money continues.Still it won't be long before user lens profiles appear like 'dehaze' did for Lightroom so Adobe can go f### itself
I'm sure the camera is great but all the full sized samples on this page look noisy, soft and mushy
Marty4650: Those industrial design students may think they invented this, but Walmart has been selling them for years.
And their kit includes the lights, and sells for $31, not for $290...
Yup, not sure why this is on DP at all
Bought one exactly like it on ebay cheap years ago. Didn't need much designing and came with a carrying handle too
Markol: There's so much wrong with this, I'm sorry but a Leica user completely messing up a photo with Photoshop. DPR audience voting this to be the winner. Ok, who am I to say what others should like. To each his own.
Quite agree, I think it's just awful
Looks like it's on Mars, wierd
Nice enough pics, well done. Nothing very specialWhy all the fuss about the gear, any camera can produce shots this small, try a big enlargement and see the limitations
I am a dedicated Canon user (genuinely I am).Yawn this a boring camera
Searching: OK, I see it is only available in CC and not CS6.
how vile you are
bigdaddave: So now users who won't agree to pay Adobe regularly are OFFICIALLY second class. How telling that is.
Adobe are simply vile.
"This was to be expected and its best to get over it instead of keep on complaining. "
What a self-satisfied smug reply. Must remember to avoid you.
So now users who won't agree to pay Adobe regularly are OFFICIALLY second class. How telling that is.
Does this one shoot in color? Or just ultra-violet and x-rays?
What an utter waste of money
bigdaddave: The criteria for me is simple - do top professional photographers - for whom image quality is everything shoot Leica digital cameras? No, of course not because they offer nothing a good system dslr does at a vastly more sensible price. Plus they are massively limited in speed and focal lengths
Pontificate about how lovely they are all you like, they offer nothing new, special or magical, they just cost a ridiculous amount
Your reply shows how little you know about pro photography. Any of these tasks can be performed better by a dslr, for a fraction of the cost.
kadardr: This camera is for masters of B&W film photography who want to take high resolution B&W images above ISO1600. Using such camera requires a B&W state of mind, which is a different endeavour. For me the whole business of using corrective color filters and work with B&W eyes just does not fit. I like to use Color Efex Pro in a free style mode (film simulation without film simulation) and that is it.
The point is the pictures are almost all terrible. This is what the vast sum of money buying a Leica gets you if you don't know what you're doing
Masters, all of them
tinternaut: What doesn't sit well, with me, is the probable lifespan of this luxury product. It's no different to the gold Apple watch, in this respect; just a computer with added craftsmanship. Unlike a well maintained1950s mechanical Leica, or a fine automatic watch from the same period, both of which will work today, I doubt the digital Ms will have the same longevity. For many of the generation who shot film, using Leica, I'm guessing the value proposition has been turned on its head, at least with respect to the camera bodies.
<<Leica's aren't simply luxury products.>>
That is exactly what they are