Camera Brand Representatives have to be really carefull these days when they make a presentation of one of their product. A single word (or english mistake by a non english native speaker?) could ruin an entire company's image when some gear heads jump on any occasion to make a big buzz.
We still don't know from whom, and when, or at what event DPR heard this "LIE". We did not see any proof yet showing they Leica really said so. No video. No Press release. No documentation where this LIE is reported.
This "lie" is obviously not used as part of Leica's marketing strategy for advertising their new T lenses so why blame the company so harshly?
I feel DPR was kind of overdoing it on this supposedly lie by Leica.
It's good we know that Leica is correcting their new lenses. And we sure don't want to see this tendency to take such proportions for M lenses for example. But I cannot stop thinking DPR was a bit dishonnest in the way they chosed to present the facts.
Tom Caldwell: It just means that the new Leica lenses are tied to cameras that can add the software corrections and that the lenses will be less competent in non-oem situations. I guess we had all figured that anyway and no one in their right mind had any idea of taking these rather expensive lenses and slumming them on a NEX body - if only that would work.
One of the nice things about the old "perfect" Leica lenses is that once bought they could be used on a lot of different camera bodies and enhance what could otherwise be achieved. Leica lenses were justifiably revered. Not any more - Leica lenses have been shown to be just subject to the same market constraints as the rest of them.
One should not put T lenses and M lenses in the same wagon.
If without any doubt T lenses are software corrected for Distortion, M lenses in another hand retain their Optical qualities with little use of software tweaking via their 6bit coding (vigneting and colorshift in some case are corrected in body).
There are tons of old M lenses wich are optically stunning without any software correction. In the other hand, there are many modern M lenses too which are performing marvelously on Film or even digital sensors even though they were bought before the generalization of 6bit coding on the newer M lenses mount.
This "issue" (if it really is an issue. Sounds more like a weird and surprising troll from DPR to me) with T lenses should not be used as a wrong interpretation of the performance of other Leica M or S lenses. These lenses series have nothing to do with T lenses design and are not targeted for the same clients and for the same needs.
olla: what happened to Zeiss? they seem to have dropped the ball on digital cameras. I guess they did not think a full frame Contax G3 would find a market. My G2 was not only a beautiful camera, the lenses produced sharp & detailed photo's without needing photoshop correction. Most camera companies seem to be growing their mirowless digital camera's choices. I think Zeiss made a big mistake in abandoning the digital camera market.
Seems so many people dont know zeiss is owned by sony.
A journey through israeli landscape. I guess he meant palestinian landscape right ? Right ? Right ???
papa natas: I don't understand the mud slinging here on account of the Leica's very expensive lenses' distortion, plus the long explicative text about it on BobYIL 's text on a different link.Why to prove & test it with brick walls?Who, in his right mind, will buy such a pricey camera to shoot walls?The results will show two hard headed guys: one arguing that his Panasonic is the real bargain, and the other one trying to convince the World that those bricks on that wall are crooked.Hasn't anybody get it?:LEICAS ARE NOT TO SHOOT PICTURES.THEY ARE TO BE SHOWN, SAME AS WE DO WITH SHOW DOGS.THEY ARE NOT BRED TO KEEP YOUR HOUSEHOLD SAFE.
I didnt know I would lose my status of (amateur) photographer at the right moment I put my hands on my first Leica after a long savings period (sorry I am not yet a millionaire like all Leica owners; obviously). My bad. I thought I was just enjoying shooting with a well made camera, to me a perfect mix of modern enough digital technology coupled with the appeal of using your camera like in the old days (manually), but I was just a fool. In fact after some Dpreview psycho therapy I realized I was just in the seek of a status symbole and I was just hyponotised by the red dot sect. Thats right. Damn...I don't know if I will be able to look at my pictures ever again or worse...be able to sleep tonight. But the real question is: will my Leica improve my photography? Because it is so important that my photographs, seen by nobody except me and my friends, are up the mighty mighty highest standards one could expect one this planet. Just as only a pro pilot should be allowed to buy a benz or a bmw...obviously.
Yes these lenses are corrected like all manufacturers do (thats called a lens profile), but it doesnt lower the other quality of their lenses: edge to edge sharpness and micro contrast from wide angle to maximum zoom. Since barrel distortion is very well software corrected these days then why bother. I dont know if they lied or not (where are evidences?) But if I agree these lenses are nowhere near the performance of Leica M lenses, they do not seem to be any slouch either. When I hear people saying its just a basic kit lens it just bugs me. This lens have nothing in comon, performance wise, with a standard cheap kit lens. Its focal length should not fool you. Then if price bugs you, well its certainly overpriced for what it is but Leica always was. To conclude this camera looks very nice and the new T mont seems able to take on a full frame sensor whic is good for future possible development. I am tempted by the body itself as a backup or easy go camera but to put M lenses and not T ones.
BeaverTerror: To get off the "Lie-ca" lens controversy: it is amusing that people have spent the last three years criticizing mirrorless cameras for adopting touchscreen interfaces at the expense of reduced physical buttons. Now that Leica has announced a camera with basically no physical controls, the same people who said "touch screens are not for real cameras" are now lapping up the "elegant touch interface and body design" like it's the newest cool-aid. It truly goes to show that some if the opinionated individuals on these forums have no idea what they want in a camera and have been spewing out if their back sides all along.
Certainly Leica is currently the only camera maker that successfully integrated a touch screen technology that is actually ergonomically working in all aspects. At least it is what all previews are saying so far, including Dpreview which is now praised by all Leica haters for saying the holy "truth" about Leica.
HawaiiVolcanoes: Leica sells cameras to collectors....NOT Photographers.
thank you very much
The fact that you don't need a Leica to take that kind of photographs does not make you less a photographer. Very stupid comment, as well as HawaiiVolcanoes saying.
And now people complain about Leica price.
Amazing optics and built quality = expensive.
Seems people are too used to "Made in China" pricing these days, so they don't really have a clue of the real value of things.
That means: paying your skilled employee well, have a lot of social advantages because our society is developed, long and paid holidays, decent working hours, rights, will make your products very good but expensive.
In an other hand, of course you can like in China make your products built by almost unpaid ants, with no social advantages, no holidays, mediocre working condition, mediocre life.
It will much cheaper to make...so usual buyers will be much happier too and they won't complain at anything until they lose their own job because they cannot produce as cheap as those ants so their own company has to move in Asia in order to satisfy their "always cheaper customer's philosophy".
I am into the M system, and I am proud to buy "Made in Europe" because it means something.
JEROME NOLAS: "If you want, you can take photos without a smartphone (as the cameras have physical controls) and transfer the photos later." How do you compose/view images without smartphone?Thank you.
A HotShoe where you can put an EVF. THen you basically have a standard camera. xD
What are they smoking ?
HOLY CRAP !!!!! I sell mine right away on ebay cuz Sigma's are noobs !!!!!Just kidding but this could have been a true reaction few months ago.
So...he was a gear head...like all of us, seeking for the brightest lens. LoL
starwolfy: This lens sounds quite promising but "Nocticron" ?That is name is...marketing $!/"@%* lol.
In Leica territory a Noctilux is "currently" F0.95A summilux is F1.4A Summicron is F2
So this lens is a mix of F0.95 and F2 all together (Since the use of "Lux" is impossible due to Nocti"Lux") ? lol A F1.2 lens. Hmmm No ! A Nocticron of course ! xD
I'm not criticizing the lens...but just the name employed.
HowaboutRAW>I know the first Noctilux was a F1.2 that is why I wrote "current Noctilux" are F0.95.
I'm not talking about F stop or lens quality here, but about the meaning behind the denomination of this lens which is, as Leica do, based on its F Stop.
I've read somewhere that Leica, when they cooperate with Panasonic, don't design these lenses and don't build them. They just "validate" the optical design and share their Name.That is why the fact Panny is mixing "Noctilux and Summicron" to define this lens is a bit hilarious to me. Despite it may make sense to some, that is pure Leica-Like Marketing.
Again...I am not criticizing this lens. But its name.
This lens sounds quite promising but "Nocticron" ?That is name is...marketing $!/"@%* lol.
A brilliant 2013 camera well fit in our "modern" society.The best tool for lazy people who don't care, nor have time to spend learning photography. Thank you OMG for this automatic drunken party masterpiece pictures makers. Thanks to its 28K auto crappy trough-all-in pictures capability I guess we will be able to contribute easier to Facebook, Twitter, Flickr or whatever to make sure the world keep a piece of our absolutely essential footprint on the web.Since the world has never had so much active "photographers" thanks to the web I guess we could all say that the best camera in the world is the camera that is with you that's for sure. I can't wait to see all trendy "photojournalist" launching this new trade by advertising their amazing auto-skills while on duty on field work. lol !Since in our day anyone with a camera can pretend being a photographer, I guess my dog will be happy to join DPR soon enough with this around its neck.OMG !!! (not the company name)
Sean65: Note how, in spite of all our advancements in photography, the photos from 1935 are so much better. The framing, depth and clarity are all way more engaging.
I guess in this time being educated in art was more important than in our days.
My wife bought it with the kit zoom and the 40mm pancake.It's an excellent camera. Very simple to use, superb touch screen. There is lack of buttons so sometimes you have to find your way into the menu but hey it's an entry level camera isn't it ?The weight is sooooo light you can carry it everywhere. Lenses are ultra silent, focus fast and have great IQ.I was damn impressed really...it's a very good product by Canon !
Ok...but the most important question remains unanswered: How many Isos ?