JEROME NOLAS: The hall of shame has a new leader!
Boy, at least beyond the gimmicky shell of the Lunar you have a Sony NEX-7, a f r i g g i n good camera in good light.
CameraLabTester: Let's all be gracious and allow reason to prevail.
The underlying reason for the exorbitant retail price of this camera is the sheer man-hours of research and brain splitting sleepless nights of the best scientists of the Leica factory trying in their utmost strength to come up with the most appropriate location of the Leica red dot logo.
It wasn't easy.
The World may never know how much pain and suffering a few heroes inside the Leica lab sacrificed to pinpoint the exact spot for the red dot.
Har-har LOL, man, you sound just like those overcomplicated marketing sentences that someone in Solms, I believe in a stark, white cell of an office, mirror translates straight from German to English. Like: "It brings a new level of sense experience that heightens and enhances the photographic process like never before." Oscar Barnack is rolling in his grave.
Leica, read my lips and get down to making a usable camera, please please! Wish list:- APS-C or FF (sigh)- 16, 18, 21 MP, whatever- zillion dot, OLED, state of the art BUILT-IN EVF!- decent, articulating LCD (I know it's not sleek, but man, is it handy?!)- bouncable built-in flash- M exposure dial, aperture setting on lens (that corner dial was clumsy even on the Hexar, it can be knocked inadvertently) - proper HD vid, red button on back, manual settings available- mount: make a mini-M mount, much like an M-NEX-E adapter, allowing infinity focus extended AND macro range with tighter close focus when retracted with a lever, opening up a whole new world with M lenses, old and new- optional fast zoom lens in that mini-M mount, 28-70 or 35-90 equiv., 2.8-3.5 at least; or, if size matters, make it 35-75, or like a 35-50-75 tri-elmar, classic M focal lengths, who needs in-between zoom settings?- or make anything that cries 'Leica' instead of 'outdated status symbol rip-off'Please!
Tom_A: There is a lot of cynicism here about the camera.What I found immediately attractive were the simple, classic ergonomics (which I also like on my XE1).Yes, it is too expensive, but let's wait for results on its optical performance. The lens is indeed slow at the tele end but that does not need to mean that it would be optically bad. After it is an area where Leica has a reputation.
Jesus holy Mary, what could possibly go wrong optically with a 70mm (equiv.) / 6.4 (!!!!!) lens? Even Lyubitel can make a plastic lens perform OK with that front element size and f-value! And Petka is right, optimal lens performance is in the f:4-5.6-8 vicinity. I feel like screaming, packing up and ditching my Leica gear (all but the M6 and 50 'cron, of course :-)
f:3.5-6.4No EVF920K fixed LCDAPS-C16 MPMpeg-4 video format2000+ US street price1/2000
What year is it – 2009? Am I supposed to be raving about this? What's wrong with you Leica people?Give us a break, really. I get a Sony NEX-6, third party adapters with macro helicoid for next to nothing, and have barrels of fun with my old M and Minolta MD lenses, or get proprietary Zeiss or Sony glass for less. Who needs a half blind compact lens with no DOF these days? The only sexy feature is the M footprint, the rest is hogwash. Mein Gott!
Anyone any experience on how Leica M lenses perform on M43 with an adapter? Forget the focus and working aperture issue, I'm curious about image quality.
Sham, sham, sham. No excuses are good enough for such a mishap at Magnum.Shame.
Thickness is a bummer.The M9 is borderline OK, although it feels chunky compared to the M6 or MP (THE best Leica bodies on the planet). Further 5mm plus sounds and looks like a brick to me. Thanks but no thanks. You wanna shoot video with M lenses? Get a SONY NEX body or something with an adapter.Nice idea that you can use the same M for different jobs but it's as awkward as it gets, like a a Visoflex. An M is an M, simple and neat, RF, small lenses, nerdy but sexy, Just point, focus, shoot and hope you got it right. But putting all those gadgets on... c'mon, it feels like a NASA operation, docking modules to the ISS.
At last! If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Well done, Leica.I kind of like it, wish my M9 were that discreet. I'd swap the red dot for a black one, that's all. The 'panda' looks don't appeal to me, a blackish body calls for black dial and shutter rim.Only thing seriously missing is the bright-line preselector lever. Yeah, maybe that's the thousand-dollar cost cutting.Anyway, if any of you decide to buy this baby (don't think twice if you can finance it, it's a steal, compared to what the M9 had cost), make sure you get a Giottos Schott glass LCD protector and a Thumbs UP thingy that slides into the hot shoe. And then you deserve an Artisan and Artist black strap :-) It is a joy to shoot. If you have money for one lens only, get a used 35 summicron. Then a 50 'cron. Then a 28 or 90 Elmarit, and you are done for life. Leica, keep rocking!
kodachromeguy: Does anyone use "scene modes?" "Sweet Child's Face" - seriously? I would think the level of photographer using a G5 would not be interested. For that matter, I cannot recall seeing point-and-shoot users selecting the modes, either; most of them just point and shoot.
You're right, 90% of the time pointandshooters use green all-auto settings. Scenes maybe for party, candle-lit, night shot, portrait, landscape, but rarely. I personally think that scene modes are rubbish and confusing.
foto guy: Since when is a sensor half the size of a 35mm frame considered "large"? So, is a full frame sensor "extra large"? And medium format is "super-sized"?DPR ignorance strikes again.
APS-C in compact is LARGE. Why do people keep saying they'd buy the X2 if it was full frame? I used to shoot half-frame Olympus E-3 with great results. Is that a minuscule frame, or what? Serious DSLR users can put up with APS-C, they win contests and do glossy magazine assignments!The APS-C sensor is the least fault of this camera.
Kodachrome200: why dont they every make thes with a standard lens why is always wide angle?
40mm is supposed to be the ideal NORMAL lens. See Leica CL, Minolta CLE, and also Voigtlander is making 40mm glass, good ones as well, I used one on a Canon 5DII. A compact with 38 or 40mm lens makes sense. Having said that, a 35 'cron is glued to my M9. Whenever I put the 50mm on, I feel that I need to back away from the scene. Unless it's a portrait or you need to keep distance.A friend asked for advice what camera to get for a tour around the world and I talked her into the Fuji x100. She never regretted it, although it took some time to get used to the 35mm angle.
That Viso is cumbersome but DOES look like the old Visoflex mirror houses! Nice design touch. Other than that, I don't see any point in the X2.Fuji x100 is way more innovative and closer to the Leica spirit, it being something of a rangefinder.230K LCD is not a big deal on the M9, enough for a quick chimp check of focus, composition, histogram. But when it is THE interface to focus, compose and control – it really is an insult.As much as I love, use and pamper my Leica babies, this one is a laugh.The strong point of a non-rangefinder compact camera is ZOOOOOM! Versatility. You don't shoot Vanity Fair covers with it.My two cents for a usable Leica compact:- Tri-Elmar lens, f2.8 all the way or at worst f2.8-4; equiv. focal length 24-35-50mm or 28-50-90-Fast, accurate AF- Macro maybe not but close focus to 0.3m- Decent hybrid optical finder with three-step magnification, parallax bright lines + switchable live view (External finders suck!)- APS-C sensor- Very simple menu
ISO 1600 with those details? Give us a break. This baby shows how much reserve of resolving power still there is in M lenses. If you shoot BW only, it seems to outperform medium format hands down!
Holy smoke! I do regular BW conversions of M9 shots but it's impossible to get such details.Can you DPreview guys give more info on the LR settings? It would be really helpful to know. Clarity, sharpening, detail, and grain settings please!
Bluetrain048: For those debating the PS/Lightroom black&white conversions versus this black&white sensor, there is one thing to consider.
It has already been mentioned that having no CFA, AA and debayering going on you gain a large resolution advantage (and the samples, to me, really show it).
However, when you use the colour sliders to adjust the black and white conversion from colour, you are losing even more resolution. If you drop the blue channel for instance (to simulate a dark red filter - gives you dramatic skies), you are essentially losing much of the information / resolution those blue pixels would provide.
Try it. Crank down the blue and green sliders in a black and white conversion and then look 100% at the sky, the clouds, the hills and surrounding areas. You will probably notice nasty pixelisation, posterisation and other artifacts.
FWIW I 'get' both sides of the colour vs B&W argument. But a conversion versus a native mono sensor will be leagues apart.
SLove, "I didn't know there was an "argument" about color vs. B&W.") I think Bluetrain meant the argument whether a BW sensor makes sense in comparison with a converted colour image. I guess no one here disputes the esthetic merits of either.
Lupti: Ok, I say take an ordinary DSLR, set it to B/W and take the same shots. I doubt that most people can distinguish them from the Leica shots if not told from what camera they are. Really. I also would go as far as taking an ordinary P&S with B/W mode and compare them with these.I don´t see the point of this camera aside from being a new toy for people with too much money. I also never understood what´s so great about the Leica system, the cameras and lenses cost megabucks for what reason? Handmade in Germany, a red dot? But the parts are so expensive there isn´t money anmyore for a higher resolution display? Okay...there are still too much people with too much money.And no, there is no envy at all.Now I think some people will tell me I´m trolling(I´m not) or that I don´t understand the special art of photographing with a Leica, but really, I couldn´t care less.
"I think some people will tell me ... that I don´t understand the special art of photographing with a Leica, but really, I couldn´t care less."
Well then, why on earth are you wasting time – yours and others – commenting on something you have no idea about? Have you ever used a Leica? I don't think so.See, the Nikon D-whatever shoots a zillion fps. Some people need just that and pay high bucks for it. Others couldn't give a flying F for fps, but they love to punish themselves with an obsolete rangefinder, and have a whale of a time doing just that. I certainly do. We are all adults here, accountable for our deeds and purchases, stupid or wise. You should respect it, and stop wasting your precious time with slagging.
UnChatNoir: Clearly the X-Pro1 may not be a winner on this forum even not after this firmware update. Nevertheless, I love to see that the IQ is on par with a D700 or 5D. That it surpasses the M9 in IQ including glass; some finally admit it. I love to see conclusions here and there that the AF-behavior isn't so different from f.i. the 5D MKii. Most mid-class DSLR's btw let you assume it's possible to focus under very low light conditions until the results are being revealed. I love to see how the X-Pro1 allows to pass the magic iso 6400-limit still delivering very exploitable results. Where are the DSLR's that can do the same without colorized noise? The other famous EVIL's? The far overpriced M9's at this point? The truth is this isn't just a camera for the P&S-crowd, gadget freaks or spec-geeks but for true photographers. Most of all, I love to see that Fujifilm is updating firmwares even more then after a year, re: X100. Something again not too obvious for some of the far superior competitors!
I love Fuji. 645, 68, 69 MF, I owned and shot them all. I tried the X100 and talked a friend into buying one. I am exhilarated about the X-Pro1, might even consider getting one when the bug fixes are done (X-Pro2, more likely :)What bugs the hell out of me though is how – for no real reason apart from maybe not being able to afford it – people keep slagging off the Leica M9 here on this forum. Yes, the Fuji is based on rangefinder cameras, but not necessarily on the Leica M. Fuji had their own RF cameras, albeit in medium format. Why comparing apples and oranges again?I am very satisfied with M9 IQ thank you, shooting raw DNG full time and developing in Lightroom gives me stunning results. ISO zillion thousand I don't use, wouldn't go above 1600 with ANY camera. I shoot in light and sleep in darkness.Having shot with the x100, I must say: lovely and fun as it is, nothing surpasses the feel and immediacy of a mechanical rangefinder camera. What with close focus, parallax and all.