Retzius: It appears that Leica's CAD software is only able to draw circles and squares.
I can see a Leica engineer now screaming in a German accent: "Circles and squares only. We will have no ovals, triangles, or any complex polygons when designing this camera. Circles and squares only! Schnell!"
Because they don't care. Leica is a small and highly profitable company now unlike their former financial status. They will continue to make generations of RF cameras to satisfy a large potential market from owners of legacy lenses. But they have come out in the last four to five years cameras of exceptional quality in sufficient quantity to satisfy their market.
It is obvious that they are not concerned with the lower price cookie cutter market. What they are after is the high end market now dominated by Nikon and Canon with the brilliant new high end Sony's coming into their own. They used to own this market outright, but Canon and Nikon began taking their market share starting in the 1970's and 80's. It is clear that they are serious about taking it back and evidently have enough money behind them to invest in the R&D and advanced manufacturing tooling and techniques to do so.
I, for one, wish them a bright future. Photography would be a much dimmer place without Leica.
I checked out the studio image comparison page showing the Leica SL, the Nikon D750, The Canon 7D MK II and the Sony A 7II, 7RII, etc.
At ISO 6400 RAW, all cameras showed noise as should be expected. But the new Leica showed noise as tight and grain-like similar to extremely fine grain film. No particular color such as red or green was particularly prominent in the noise pattern. Perhaps their decision to hold the sensor photo sites to 24 megpxl instead of going for bragging rights with higher megpxl count like the others was the proper decision.
I see a lot to like but the $7000+ price rules out my purchase any time soon or even not so soon.
Retzius,You've already made it clear that you do not like Leica or its products, but I have to ask you what you would prefer in a camera body design beyond sensible ergonomics. Would a body design that incorporates tail fins or perhaps racing stripes be more to your liking? Olympus went to the plain Jane vanilla vintage looks when they came out with the OM-D series and their sales took off and it continues to be a big sales leader dispite its corporate difficulties of late. Unlike you, the camera market and most photographers seem to prefer function, fit and performance over camera body styling.UNGLAUBLICH!
rfsIII: I would like to buy this camera, but there are too many submodels of the A7 and and I just know that I would screw it up and walk out of the camera store with the wrong one. They should use real names like BlackMagic and Arri do, much easier to remember.
Or Bruce and Suzie. That would be unique.
Jim Evidon: Once again, DPReview show that it prefers to give a big splash to Sony products.
Don't get me wrong. My wife has an a6000 replacing her Sony DSLR and I agree that Sony is on the cutting edge for everything but their infernal menus.The a6000 is a little wizard and a fine camera.
But certainly, DPReview can consider giving a little more space for some of Sony's competitors. I'm certain that if we were to review DPR's featured cameras over the last six months we would find they are heavily weighted for Sony. If DPReview is to provide a service to it's readers it should review more than a Big Box store's large camera company's sales leaders, even if it is owned by Amazon.
Take Leica for instance. They make excellent cameras; some within the price range of high end Sony's and yet DPR's last review of a Leica camera was back in '09. Sure they have given preview space for new Leica models since then, but no actual reviews. The same can be said of Sigma cameras last reviewed in 2012.
To sibuzaru,Reviews are used by sensible people to help choose equipment and not to justify purchases already made, or as you put it "back you in your choices". That is really a small minded thing to say as well as your comment about insecure and growing up. If you can't be civil, then perhaps you are the one that needs growth experience.But I wouldn't be so ill mannered as to suggest that to you, a perfect stranger.
As for Leicas, I own three of their cameras and none need justification for the choices made. We also have Fuji, Olympus and Sony cameras in our family zoo of cameras. Each camera was chosen in part by reading several reviews beforehand as well as later experiencing hands-on before purchase.
My comment was directed at the narrow choices made by the reviewers in this website and none of my comments were personal.
My "panties", as you call them fit fine and you missed the point entirely.Other and smaller camera makers have issued and continue to issue new models, some with technology quite sophisticated and IQ right up there with Sony, et.al. Yet, full reviews of these products have been overlooked. I pointed out that DPR failed to review new products of at least two other camera companies for periods of 1 to 6 years. There are several other camera makers that are consistently overlooked except for a casual mention or a picture gallery. Look to the right hand column today in re.: the Leica M (246); a slide show of the camera body, but not informative at all. When was the last review of a Sigma or the very excellent Ricoh cameras before they merged with Pentax? It's not sour grapes because luckily there are several other reliable review sites I use that do an excellent job reviewing all enthusiast and professional cameras regardless of the brand or size of the company. DPR doesn't do so.
Once again, DPReview show that it prefers to give a big splash to Sony products.
Mirai Dorloba: Why no full frame version?
I'm sure they will when the market becomes large enough. Right now APSC and MFT have the largest market share.
Cane: I assume these are manual focus only?
Probably, they are manual. They may not be for everyone, but if someone is looking for supersharp well made optics for not a lot of money and doesn't mind manual focusing, they should be a nice addition to the camera bag. I own their 8mm f 2.8 lens for the Fuji X mount and it's a wonderful, if little used lens. Little used only because it's 8mm.
In shopping for a replacement for my iPad v.2, I settled on the Fire HD7 because of the price point and features. I never regretted the purchase. I still use the old iPad occasionally because of the really big screen, but the Fire HD7 is, IMO, as good as my wife's iPad mini and a much lower price.
I'm glad to see Amazon continue to expand the Fire line. In all other respects, I am an Apple Mac user.
www_zeeshan_de: Good pictures. Without overused photoshop effects.
There is a great temptation to over saturate and otherwise over-manipulate images, I would agree. However, when you look at most of the prized images published in the PSA journal and other publications, it does make me wonder to which side of culture and art I belong. It seems that image "pop" sells and the winning images have it. Subtlety is being increasingly lost in arts, literature and last but not least in politics and communication. Nevertheless, Welling's images are wonderful.
acidic: Nice stuff, but probably half of the images don't belong on DIGITAL photography review.:-)
acidic, "...so I could shoot a few rolls of the Velvia 50 I hoarded early in the last decade..."
You showed more foresight than did I.
acidic,Why do you say that? Just curious.
Image #4 and #10 are the most interesting, while all are beautiful. I had to really study #4 to realize that there was an owl plain as day and not just a picture of a tree trunk. #10 really illustrates nature cruelly at work. It is a truly great shot.
SimenO1: A 50mm f/1,9 equivalent lens without AF that probably is somewhat sharp around 50mm f/5,6-8 equivalent, just what the MFT people needed. :p
rpm40,Your comment is noted and it's tough to disagree with it. However, for really critical focusing, manual focus is still the most accurate; not enough to make a difference for most of us, but there is still a difference. Frankly, I think they came out with manual focusing in order to put a probable quality lens on the market at a low price point. Well, enough of this. I must return to listen to my crystal radio set and put more ice in the bucket for my air conditioner.
Lassoni: Meeh, for bokeh and shallow DoF, I'm sure the 75 f1.8 does better job. Not really sure if 50mm equiv. has ever been "that good" focal length for anything
To Jon Schick,I had the 20mm Lumix and it was a wonderful lens. I sold it and bought the 25mm Summilux. It has a slightly narrower fov, but this lens is really outstanding.
KameraFever: $400 for a f/0.95? I hope I'll be pleasantly surprised by it's performance;however, I doubt it considering it's price. Sharpness probably suffers at the wide end. But who knows? I'll cross my fingers.
I'm sure @ $400 he is referring to a used price for a fairly old cine lens. Schneider lenses have been among the top performers for years; not quite up to some Zeiss lenses and most Leitz/Leica lenses, but still top drawer. Actually it sounds like a worthwhile project and probably entails some deep and lengthy searches in shops that carry used motion picture equipment. Thanks to RichRMA for the suggestion.
50mm is the standard focal length for 35mm cameras that closely approximates normal human vision in terms of perspective. That's why it is considered the standard lens. Most people, me included, prefer 35mm for street shooting as long as you don't get too close to the subject. WA lenses like 35mm distort badly when close up.So, don't knock the 50mm lens. As a matter of fact, if you want extremely large apertures for low light photography, a 50mm lens happens to yield the lightest and most compact package. That is probably why most lens manufacturers prefer that focal length.A 75mm lens is considered an ideal portrait lens because for closeups it flattens facial features rather than distorting them.
So please be sure of your facts before launching into a criticism.Whether or not this particular lens is any good remains to be seen pending it's release and evaluation. But if it is anywhere as good as my Rokinon ( Chinese) 8mm lens, it should be very good indeed.
Aw, just when I wanted to take my Cape Ann Red shack with the lobster traps on it like everyone else has done. I guess there goes my Old Faithful shot, too.
DStudio: Since some here are raving about the Sony A7R II in comparison, I went back and reviewed the gallery again. I remember I especially liked the photos of the girl looking out the window.
Too bad, they would have been even better with this camera.
The Sony is good, but it's not even in the same class as this camera. Not a single one of those photos compares to the better photos here. These simply have better dimensionality. The photos look and feel more like the actual items, rather than just photos of the objects. These are the nicest quality photos I've seen in a DPR gallery in a while.
There's really no trick to seeing the difference. Just take your analytical, rational glasses off for a moment. Instead observe and feel the photos as you go through them. Don't try *too* hard; just notice that most photos don't have quite the qualities these do. Perhaps some purists will prefer other Leica models, but this Leica glass is still capturing something special that most others miss!
to Steven R. Rochlin,I know from personal experience that manipulation goes only so far.There is no way to make a silk purse out of the proverbial sow's ear. I find that I need to do less with good Leica images than with some of the others. Perhaps bump up the color a little according to taste, play with shadow-highlights tool a little, adjust the exposure as needed and crop to taste. But manipulation will never make a lousy shot, Leica or otherwise even an acceptable one.