Paul Guba: Comparing two cameras with similar sensors is like comparing two cars with V8 engines. The 645Z and the Alpa are two completely different machines. I won't justify the huge price difference but at the same time you can't compare the two as tools. Phase also has better software and years of experience getting the best data from a sensor. There both great cameras but the similarity ends at MP.
Canon and Nikon cannot reach the Leica and Zeiss lens optical quality? I'd say they're close enough for all intents and purposes and enough is enough with this fluff of an argument!
maxnimo: So what do you do if you need a 300mm equiv. telephoto on this thing?
Either Pentax is selling grossly inferior medium format cameras or Alpa is selling grossly overpriced ones. Something tells me it's the latter.
uhoh07: Also, why has the M9, MM or 240 have never, as far as I can tell, received a full review on this site? I did see an M8 review, and M9 preview, and a four page romp "shooting with the M9-P."
Love it or hate them, these are benchmark digital systems and can be easily rented, one has to wonder why such short shrift at DP?
Preferably such review would be done with the help of a working Leica pro, to avoid the all to common DP foible of "I can't get used to where they put such and such button".
The Leica takes practice to use effectively. I bought the M9 solely for the results with RF wide glass, and at first found the focus and framing method difficult real world. But 11 months later I far prefer the M9 to frame and focus over my A7 even at high speed.
Most hysterical is the DXO rating of the M9 sensor, which simply proves their numbers measure values which are irrelevant to many of us, and certainly have nothing at all to do with how sharp an image will be with a lens attached.
What some Leica followers/owners see in the output image that I don't when compared to a Canon 6D is a typical example of what sort of blinkers (and "Leica" glasses on top) these people wear. A brand new 6D costs approx. $1500 vs. $6000 of a M-E (latest M9-sensor Leica model). It's pretty pointless to discuss when such bias is involved.
Keep the self-delusion alive...
Early summer time (for the southern hemisphere) is OK?
RStyga: That serves them right, they needed that bit of humility, arrogant dinosaurs... I'm happy to hear, now, all those Leica fanatics telling me how superior Leica cameras are in terms of build quality, once more...
My friend (and I'm not being ironic), I have repeatedly stated that a) I have nothing against film Leica cameras, on the contrary, b) I even like digital Leica cameras *provided* the price is right, and c) my main objection rests with the pricing and marketing policy of the company as well as the mentality of a large number of Leica owners. I do use M39/M mount non-Leica lenses and I can afford a Leica (more so, a film one); I just refuse to pay the asking price. Recently, I found a near-new M8.2 for the price of three new Ricoh GXR+A12M and I passed. Probably considered a great bargain by Leica followers but it is utterly stupid to buy a much inferior camera because it's a Leica; the GXR is light years ahead in all meaningful respects and very well priced.
The problem would be for me to think that my word is nonsense and still stating it. What is quite amusing is the labeling and boxing I'm subject to because of my opinion, you included. So, if you'd all drop it this would a very small thread. Instead, you like to post nonsense. I'll stop here, though, as you are a waste of time. Like you said, my opinion is stated plus I never found much sense in most Leica owners.
I'm happy for you. However, the Leica owners/wannabes do not listen to reason, anyway. Hence, it serves them right what's happening. Maybe the next $7K will be spend on the newer model and life goes on happily in LaLa land.
Film Leica is mostly good with me. I'm referring to the digital series and to the hordes of fashion victims spending thousands on the Leica name for no real reason (hence the "serves them right"). The "Leica experience" is mostly delusional fluff. Agreed, nice cameras (in certain ways), but I'm not considering spending 3-4 6Ds in cost to acquire one solely on the base of the special RF experience. Get real...At the same time, I understand why Leica owners or wannabes are so passionate about Leica: you spent/will spend thousands on a digital camera, it has to be good enough to account for its price. It has to! It's a Leica!
King Penguin: Wow......that's going to hurt M9 second hand values enormously .......
And why not "good"? My comment is aimed at the certain minority-majority of fashion victim Leica "photographers". They know why it is made... What is your problem? Defender of the crown?
Have you got a large store of labels for people, Z? Isn't that the essence of the masses' "thinking"?
Ron Poelman: It's NOT corrosion ! It's an interesting patina you can only get on Leica.
:-) That would raise the value!
I'm "happy" to receive the expected responses. Supporting a company who milks the crap out of you, selling you hot air, is admirably nonsensical. Beats all marketing efforts having you true-to-the-art guys, the calm and composed non-fanatical Leica follo.. er.. consumers spreading the good word about the brand. I don't have to be arrogant or humble about Leica. It is what it is. Truth hurts, no question about it. Keep on spending the "reasonable" amounts of money Leica requires... I'm sure Canon, Pentax, Zeiss, Nikon, Olympus and Fujifilm will somehow find "stupid" consumers to make sense of their "inferior" products filled with "useless" features and "low" build quality.
@paulski66I do feel compassion for the people who saved for ages to buy one. However, spending $6K for an M-series body and $1.5-3K for each lens is a seriously stupid decision, especially if one cannot afford it. Whatever happened to maturity there?
That serves them right, they needed that bit of humility, arrogant dinosaurs... I'm happy to hear, now, all those Leica fanatics telling me how superior Leica cameras are in terms of build quality, once more...
Stingy and silly... with this "gift" they are trying to lure buyers into purchasing a camera system... Instead, they could 'afford' to offer a lens (to keep).
H has lost the plot...It might be a reasonable move in terms of modest profitability and target group analysis but it reflects rather negatively on the company's image. I'm pretty sure they could produce their own compact camera or -at least- do a better job in disguising the re-badged Sony to give customers the impression that it is an H version.
BadScience: not really useful for landscapes which would most benefit from higher resolution; but are taken with long exposures.
As oldfogey rightly says, not only does the camera need to be rock steady (not a problem) the subjet does to - and that is a big problem.
Cant see this being a good idea.
Not all landscape photography utilises long exposures...
Unbelievable. Just when we thought that by closing down the factory and calling the deal off, this charade would be over...