Jefftan: $1000 for RX100 IV? Sony are you serious?way overpriced
G7X is a much better deal. 4k maybe the only justification for price but how many people even have TV/monitor to view 4k now?
nice future proof feature but mostly useless for now
>Editing 4K is another headache !
Easy, easy, don't be provoking the 800-pound gorilla of video editing.
What's that thing sticking out the back? The viewfinder? Does it have to stick out so far? Oh, wait, it helps keep one's oily nose off the LCD.
Are the added points worth the added $300?
Is the RX100 IV a mere selling-point horse?
Is it worth the $150 uplift?
Doesn't look enough like a camera for me. Then there's the price.
Nice, nice, nice, but too dear by a factor of 7.
km25: Sorry DP not much of a preview. If the camera came in about 2/3 to 1/2 this cost. I may buy it. It is just over priced. Prehaps Leica should make this camera in an other country. they did with their 35mm SLR. Just too much $$$.
David Eisendrath once described Leicas as overpriced. The Leica IIIg I used was a loaner. I could only afford a Nikon F and Nikkor lenses. Poor impecunious me. Besides, have you ever eaten a Leica? Is it ever sour! To be honest, whenever I see someone wielding a Leica, I go prostrate with envy.
Astrotripper: Never even touched a Leica, never really shot 35mm film, and never used an actual rangefinder camera.
Still, I think the Monochrome is one of the most interesting things that happened in photo gear in last couple of years. This thing here is really one of the kind. I respect Leica for getting such a camera out into the market.
And if I had the chance, I'd love to try this thing out. If I were a fat cat that rents an apartment in Trump Tower just for his cats, I'd buy this immediately, together with some Hassies for my cats.
ThePhilips: ... The photographic fads get more ridiculous with every year.
Dear J GGG,
Pay no attention to the vapors that blow so abundantly in these parts. You know what you know, and that quite suffices.
All the best,
This is very good. But I miss the old target. (Sniff.)
naththo: Much better than Canon 7D MKII for the dynamic range and less shadow noise. But AF seems a concern though is a let down due to critical problem in review. Still that beats Canon again and again without stopping.
>MichaelTheMentor on YouTube
Excellent referral, really helpful. A validating example of the expository power of video. Where has this been all my life?
Do you have any more like that one, Mr. Silver?
Boissez: The Dpreview scoring makes no sense to me. With 84% it's the highest rated camera in its class (except the D7100). Silver award.
Does that also mean that Dpreview honestly believes that the D7100 is better than it's successor?
>It guess it all makes more sense when you realize that there's no reasoning behind the awards but rather a gut feeling.
NeilBart: The comments in the review of the D7200 that caught my attention at "Focus Accuracy" are: "I mentioned in my shooting experience that I had some problems with AF accuracy."... and ..."However, because the camera is using a separate sensor as a proxy for correct focus, rather than directly measuring it, we feel confident saying the D7200 simply can't match the focus accuracy of mirrorless cameras.".
My Nikon D7100 is very poor at autofocus accuracy, especially wide open with Nikon G f1.8 35mm, 50mm and 85mm lenses. So poor in fact that I won't use any of those lenses on the D7100 at less than at about f3. I sent the D7100 to Nikon claiming that each of the lenses exhibited front focus requiring adjustment between plus 10 to plus 17; thus there must be a problem with the D7100. Nikon said the D7100 was within tolerances for AF.
No AF accuracy problems with my mirrorless Olympus OMD EM-1 (x2) and EM-10 with f1.8 lenses wide open. Images are always sharp.
Your report made me sit up and take notice.
Used Digital ROC (br=42, wc=0) and got a fairly nice result. ROC can sometimes save loads of time. In Hue-and-Saturation, moved yellow towards red a little (-7).
Couldn't pull anything extra out of the shadows.
The shot could've used an additional EV or two (1/30 or 1/5 sec).
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.
And when Frankenstein speaks, people should listen, I always say.
I understand the appeal of this camera. And I understand the appeal of rare liver.
That's a complex tripartite question that's making my brain go into spasms. Let's see--
Leica -- for plutocratsB&W -- for all humanityplutocrats -- get no props from me
I'm bloated (20 stone) but definitely not a plutocrat. It seems I'm a ptochocrat. And a gruesome pedant.
I gotta get out more.
I used a Leica IIIg and preferred it to the Nikon F because it was quiet. But that's all gone now.
My cat doesn't eat or play with cameras, poor thing.
All for bloated plutocrats. :)
At this price, I'll rush out and buy a Canon full-framer for it.
Be careful, you're rocking the boat with your mordant reasonableness.