Leica is steadily breaking away from Panasonic for their small camera line. They are going for very high quality cameras to satisfy every need; from completely manual M's to automatic fixed prime lens Q's. I'll stick with my M9P with a Fuji X100 backup for now, but the Q looks like an ideal small street shooter/travelcamera as long as price is no object. This camera is getting back to the original Barnack concept; a small carry around camera with few complications. Keep it up!
simpleshot: A few things that I don't like with this camera:1. It is has a color sensor.2. It is has auto focus.3. It costs $4250 only. I want a $9000 one.4. It does not have the parallax thingy that I really like./s
GO GET A KODAK BROWNIE. IT WILL PROBABLY SATISFY YOU.127 FILM IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE, WHICH SHOULD MAKE YOU HAPPY. NO FILM, SO NO SCREW-UPS. PERFECT SHOT EVERY TIME.
It is an incredibly fine job of stitching. It also stands for the proposition that some people have too much time on their hands.
VENTURE-STAR: Pardon my obvious stupidity, but where's the actual preview for this camera? There are a series of images that don't even show the back of this camera - is that the preview? Wouldn't a bit of technical spec and comment have been useful?
Leicas are lovely things and nice toys for lottery winners who have an interest in photography, but what's the point of a camera body that only does monochrome even if the images are fractionally cleaner? What's the advantage over making whatever you want monochrome on your PC? I'm afraid the point of this camera body seems to be going right over my head. It must be aimed at an extraordinarily small specialized market! I certainly don't know anyone who would seriously consider buying it.
Note to DP Review:Your previews are, in general, not very informative and this latest preview of the new Leica M Mono is near useless. Both DP Review and it's readers would be better served if you would wait and give us the full review. Your full reviews are usually excellent. A simple new product announcement with the advertised features followed in due course by a full review would work very well.
To princecody, Re.: Steve Huff claims that 4/3 is as good as FF.
I have the best of 4/3's, the OM-D. It is better than excellent for a 4/3's and if it were FF, it would rule the market. But it is not FF. I do my own printing and believe me, 4/3, even the Olympus 4/3's has a discernible upper limit well below that of FF.
So, before you go spouting off about a camera you do not own concerning its merits and its deficits and relying on alleged opinions that are patently incorrect, you should check out the products yourself. Both my Leica M9P and my Fuji XPro-1 surpass the 4/3's in very large enlargements.The advantage of the 4/3's OM-D, and the reason I use it when traveling is that it is weather resistant, very light weight and the camera with a large zoom lens does not give me a sore neck like some of the larger cameras. But I always pack my Leica + lenses as well. It's not quite as light as the Olympus, but it's FF images are amazing.
What did he use for lens and camera?
iAPX,I have no problem focusing using my M9P. I learned that part of theproblem getting a sharp image on the Leica M's can be solved simply dipping back into the camera practices we had before image stabilization. I find that shooting at 1/125 sec or higher eliminates camera shake and the rangefinder focusing is really right on. At slower shutter speeds you need to be extra steady; shooting after exhaling. These are mostly ignored practices these days with auto focus, auto exposure options and image stbilization and to use the manual cameras properly, you have to re-learn old practices.
Just so you know I am not a fanatic, I also have Fuji X-Pro-1 & a OM-D.
As for the price, this camera is not everyone's priority. It is hand made and the tolerances and inspection criteria are super close. It's a labor intensive camera.One of my first cameras was a Leica IIIf. I was seduced by the SLR's coming on market at the time and a few years ago I bought a new/demo M8 and never looked back.
Looks like a nice bag, but what do I do with my Billingham Hadley? As nice as it is, there are so many other nice bags in the marketplace that cost both more and less. How does one compete with the excellent Domke bags on the lower end, the Billingham and/or Ona bags on the higher end and the really well thought out Think Tanks in the middle. It's a crowded marketplace and so many of them are already very good. Anything else is just a style statement and how much do you pay for that?
Actually, it is the Leica bodies as well and they do not suck. They are built like a bank vault which it not necessarily appealing to the average amateur, but very necessary to the professional and even the amateur that wants a long lasting camera body that can take a beating.
I bought my first film Leica many years ago and then succumbed to the SLR's. A few years back, I bought a factory refurbished demonstrator M8. Leica's are intuitive uncomplicated cameras that simply take superb images. No deep menus. As you remarked, the glass is unparalleled and combined with the Leica sensor and firmware gives the Leica that certain look which combines IQ with contrast, color and texture that is different from the competition. Not necessarily better. It is just different.
I've found that owning a Leica is a long term thing and in the long run, I doubt if it is any more expensive than owning a Canon/Nikon replaced every 3 to 4 years by owners that must have the latest bells & whistles.
THE DREADED SENSOR CORROSION ISSUE?I went to LensRental's article which had several images of the problem.It looks suspiciously like the Leica M9 sensor corrosion problem with the tell-tale "fisheye" spots. Leica replaced my sensor at no charge as an act of good customer relations. I also had the same issue on the sensor of my old Nikon D70s, although no one recognized it at the time as glass corrosion (yes, glass corrodes).
I wonder if Canon will be as responsible when it comes to customer support.
What many of you fail to realize is that Leica has no aspirations to be a cookie cutter camera giant. Canon, Nikon (at least some), Olympus and Fuji all make very fine cameras. Leica has never made cameras for the masses. The very first Leica I was unlike any other camera in the world and was predicted to be an absolute failures. So here we are 90 years later and the Leitz/ Leica camera company is still going strong in its own small way. It has a loyal customer base.
Leica knows it's market. Customer relations are excellent, IMO. It is an excellent camera and a unique shooting experience providing superb images again and again.
Will I buy a M240? No. The M9-P satisfies me very much. It is built to last and I love the fact that its functions are basic, and the images are tack sharp with the right balance of contrast and color; that illusive Leica look that non-Leica people believe is a fiction. Believe me, it is very real. The M240 and 240 Monochrom appear to be worthy successors.
First, colored cameras from Pentax, followed by various color schemes from all the rest, culminating in a red, white and blue homage to the French by Leica to add to their olive drab Safari models.Now comes the ultimate insult to our intelligence. A very bad idea by Hassleblad is copied by Fotodiox, an otherwise sensible accessory company to turn a slick and pocketable camera by Sony into a hopeless lump guaranteed to rip the seams out of any pants pocket you are silly enough to attempt to put it in.
Attention Fotodiox: the Sony RX100 doesn't have a grip for a reason. It's pocketable unlike most of its competition. I don't own one, but it's small profile has me very tempted; but without the lovely looking cherry wood lump.
My challenge image of Rustic Cottage in Iceland was DQ';d for not including information about the HDR used. I was invited to respond with the required information. I attempted to do so by clicking on the challenge administrator's link provided and was told that I am not authorized. Since the challenge is now closed I cannot access the challenge to add the information.
For general information this is the response I intended to make supplying the requested information.
Reply to Challenge Administrator
Re.: Rustic-HDR ChallengeThe challenge link is no longer open for access. I am unable to comply with your request. But for your information, I used HDR Efex Pro II and applied minimal HDR manipulation in as much as I believe that excessive use of HDR manipulation would have spoiled the image.
You may re-enter this image as my entrant with this information, or don't as you please, in as much as I am not able to access this challenge, it being posted as full 100 out of 100.
Re.: TRANSFER SPEED:, Their website only says class 10 speed transfer rate.I've been packing an iPad or a Macbook Air with my camera equipment and use only class 10 cards, so aside from the convenience of not carrying extra hardware, I'm not sure there is an advantage to the wireless route for me, at least.
With Ricoh dropping its excellent but very different GXR, it looks like the Ricoh brand will be relegated to quality point and shoots and the more sophisticatedequipment will carry the Pentax brand.
Jim Evidon: I usually avoid phone reviews on what used to be a digital camera site, but I decided to take a look at the review.
What I find is that digital phones are now where digital cameras were 10 years ago. As far as I can see, the only use for digital cameras in hand held phones is (1) use it if you need to catch the freeway accident you pass when your real camera isn't handy; i.e, it's probably better than nothing...a debatable point point. And/or (2) it's good for those people that really could care less about photography and like to engage in narcissistic exercises like taking selfies. Blech!
My 3 mgpxl.Nikon Coolpix 995, which I used nearly fifteen years ago, also produced amazing images and I got excellent 8x10's out of it. It was state of the art for consumer level cameras. But today, I use it as a paperweight. Yes I still have it out because I can't even give it away. Photography has moved well beyond it's capabilities and I can't understand cell phone users who marvel over the IQ of their phone cameras that are not serious tools but only a convenience add on for people who don't want to use a camera. The cheapest pocket sized point that costs 1/3 or less than an iPhone or Galaxy can shoot rings around them.
I usually avoid phone reviews on what used to be a digital camera site, but I decided to take a look at the review.
This is what happens when the bottom line becomes the only reason to operate a business. When you have the company run by the bean counters rather than by the product oriented management as was the case at one time, then the only thing that matters is increasing profit margin over what it was in the last quarter.
This is the demand of the investment community aka Wall Street. Theinvestment gurus on Wall Street make a prediction as to what the next quarter's profits and dividends will be. If the company doesn't make that mark even though it may have increased it's profits over the last quarter, the company is deemed to have failed and the stock price drops. This is what happens when the decisions are made by the street instead of the company's product division.
It is all going down hill fast and it seems to make no difference what product the company makes as long as it can cut costs to artificially inflate the profit line to keep the investors happy.
Welcome to the new reality.
I have the prior model which is not Di III. I'm not sure what the difference is. Can someone in the know please respond?
I find the lens perfect for general traveling. It seems sharp and responsive although I find the contrast and color rendition of the Olympus lenses to be superior as they should, considering the price. The Tamron lens is a good value, however.
And this was the camera that DP Review did flip-flops over only a week or so ago. Nikon D750, "the Gold Standard" indeed!
At least the D600 had an excuse; sloppy assembly procedures. This one looks like a major design flaw. And Canons latest and greatest (?) suffers from the same bad designing.
Maybe if the big four camera companies slowed down and stopped trying to come out with new useless gimmicks every six months and concentrated on making quality cameras, they might avoid such embarrassments.
I gave up on Nikon and the other of the big four a couple of years ago. My money now goes to Fuji, Olympus and Leica; all camera companies that build honest to God real cameras and superior lenses rather than the newest in gimmick machines that will be obsolete with the next model 6 months from now.