Are you sure it was 1/500th sec? People are moving, more like 1/5th sec.
Kodachrome200: cut the price down to a third add autofocus, mirrorless live view, a decent LCD screen and get an up to date sensor. and then yeah this be a neat camera
Yeah great idea! then will it be a Leica M camera? No silly, Live view on a Leica M? Ha ha...oh boy don't comment if you've never used an M camera, please!
iau: I would very much like a Leica M camera, but I wish it had AF and was more suited for wildlife and general hiking photography (meaning weather sealed).
I'm not into taking pictures of strangers on the street, which seems to be the main object for Leica shooters.
No problem, Leica have your camera its called the S2!
Tell me what digital camera keeps its value over four years? Does any make? I don't think so, the M9 will certainly lose its value as will my Nikon D700 that's worth half as when I bought it.
The M9 sensor does not "suck" do you think it does just because its not perfect at 6400 iso? Like who needs that anyway? Fact is it was actually ahead of its time by being the first full frame compact camera to remove the AA filter, now Nikon and soon Canon will follow! So your comments are simply wrong!
Erik Johansen: Hmmm. I could buy me a Daimler or RR to take me to work. But is it wise when I have to pay for it with my own money?The camera-world has moved on, and passed the Leica M in every detail....exept the price tag......Even Fujinon and Zuiko are now very close on the optics.
I let the status hunters be happy with their red dot.....................
So how many pictures have you taken with a Leica then? Let me guess somewhere between 0 and none? Fuji lenses are not in the same league as Leica I have actually used both!
JacquesBalthazar: I have been using Ms since the early Nineties (M6), and l lusted for one for 15 years before that. It was really "outdated" at the time. Objectively, the Leica M was seen by many as "outdated" already in the Sixties... So you either look at it that way, or accept that the M's concept is in a place and time of its own. I accept that. The big problem with the M these days is not its "outdated" core design, as that design (optical rangefinder, mechanical precision, modus operandi) is precisely why people love it, but the big problem is the sensor.
In the film days, the M's excellence was upgraded every time Kodak, Fuji or Agfa came out with a new film. From the Tri-X of the early days to the Velvia or Portra of the end of the millennium, things just got better and better, even if you were using a 1956 M3.
In this century, the M's superb construction and wonderful mechano-optical engineering is plain overkill in view of sensor obsolescence.
Like I said you are totally missing the point! You don't understand anything about Leica M ownership!Go and try one out, hold one and use one.Oh the sensor is not outdated, it is capable of recording a lot more than most DSLR as it does not have an Anti-aliasing filter, Nikon have only just thought of the idea with their D800e! perhaps they are old?
Funny how after every Leica review comes all the negative Leica bashing comments and always be people who have never used or even held a Leica, why?
If someone calls a Leica M body "archaic" they have zero idea what Leica is about they simply look at the price and try to match it against a Nikon or Canon DLSR.
Someone else said "buy a D4" why? can you really not see the point of Leica M ownership? lugging a D4 around for the day is the opposite!
Like I said all the Weekend Warriors and wannabe pros will always knock Leica as they can't afford or justify them, so if you have zero knowledge about something then why do you comment? I know zero about brain surgery so i won't comment on that and knock it!
Truth of the matter is that Leica M use is the most purest and rewarding in photography, the fact that it does not have Live View, Face Recognition and a host of other useless features is welcome and might even make you concentrate on actually taking a decent picture!