SPerez: (1) It is evident that you are angry with Leica, because they have sent a unit of the Leica T much after that to almost any other photography site. Please improve your relations with them. Your customers will be grateful.(2) Center your report in the main aspects of the camera: the quality of the pictures you can take with it, and the quality of its construction . In your report, you have been looking for the worst attributes of the Leica T. Again, please meet your customers demands and forget your little quarrels with Leica. My experience with the Leica XV and now with the Leica T: gorgeous photos, sharp from edge to edge and splendid colors. And both are built in a superb quality. Nothing in common with any other camera I have owned before.(3) Read carefully the instructions of the camera to avoid mistakes in your report. Check how to manual override the camera in order to focus manually with Focus set to AF mode; it is possible and very easy to do Post rectifying your mistake
Reichmann hasn't fully reviewed the T yet.
ldog: I applaud Barnaby's honesty. As an owner of a Leica M240 I have experienced some of the frustrations that he addresses in the T review. Contrary to Ivan's assertion real shooters do buy and use Leica but it's usually a love-hate relationship. Unless the M240 is used with the machine age technology rangefinder it is too slow for dynamic professional use. The M240 EVF cycle time is nearly a full second making it nearly useless except for studio or landscape work. I shoot weddings and could never use this camera responsibly. I have just purchased a Sony A7s which is a joy to use with the Leica glass and is delivering what I'd hoped that the M240 would bring. The EVF is excellent, bright and it allows me to focus quickly and surely. The A7s's EVF cycle time is instant and the camera is fast, intuitive and a total joy to use. The A7s proves that a pro level mirrorless camera is possible and that Leica has no excuse for their sophomoric human interface. Way to go Barnaby!
Decent AF is not as old as you think. 20 years would be pushing it. And a dozen years ago few cameras had really good AF. So up to that time one had to know how to focus manually.
Are you shooting the T with the EVF?
Sir Nick of High Point: Some people enjoy photography, others enjoy talking about high ISO and sharpness. If you fit into the first catagory, then I believe you will understand Leica once you hold one in your hand. If you fit into the latter catagory, then you will never appreciate these cameras. Not that they can't do low light or produce sharp images. I'm just saying that there's more to it.
Sold the Konica and M lenses--a bit before mirrorless became really strong. And the Noctilux wouldn't have been quite as sharp as I'd want.
Yes, the T is fun. It's not particularly slow, not a sports camera either. The method of playback is silly.
Annoying that EVF has no button to select EVF only, nor is there as setting in the menu to do so. The EVF turns on when you move your eye to it.
Firmware could add the menu setting for the EVF I guess.
hydrospanner: I'm seriously considering going to iPhone after 4 years with Android products, but this phone might keep me around for another contract. If it's waterproof, and there's definite specs out before my contract is up in December, I may well hold off until its release.
If it's not waterproof, though, I'll get an iPhone 6 in December.
The point is the smartphone is often the camera that's at hand. However my LX5 doesn't browse the web, read emails, etc, so it's not a daily carry item.
I already have more than a few cameras which are smallish and shoot raws.
Windows phones shoot huge DNGs, and you can get to those. You look to have confused one feature of the raw shooting Windows phones with the entirety of the camera system on recent Windows phones.
How do you know I don't have a Windows phone which shoots raw? There are two (that's 2) current models, and one has a card slot.
Phone I got.
Pretty safe bet that you don't follow camera phones much.
ProfHankD: The interesting thing is the lack of comments about the griplessness of this camera. I'm sure it feels nice to touch, but doesn't it proceed to slide out of your hand when you try to pick it up?
I've used the body, and for most people, perhaps not you because of your above claims, it is easy to hold.
AEY: Is D810 sensor the same as Sony A7r?
Same family, with slight variations.
I'd skip DXO sensor scoring entirely, many of the numbers are made up using theoretical light sources, so modeling, not testing to derive scores.
Ulfric M Douglas: You wrote ; " I suspect that really, this is a camera for Raw shooters"Surely the opposite is true : a fashion item for rich and mostly careless jpeg-wifi uploaders.
What's your point?
And the A7S doesn't have particularly good color, even at low ISOs with the 55mm SonyZeiss lens.
Perhaps Sony can fix this problem with firmware that allows for greater bit depth in the raw files.
I've seen a towing hitch on that Honda small sporty hatchback hybrid (shaped like a CRX).
A towing hitch on a hatchback isn't real helpful, unlike raw on any kind of digital camera.
Not having raw on a camera phone drives some customers away and the number driven away will increase.
Not losing sleep over the lack of raw on the iPhone, but wouldn't buy an iPhone for that reason.
Daniel Lee Taylor: I don't get it. This is an EOS M with an optional EVF but without IS, the 11-22 UWA, or EF lens compatibility...at 12-20x the price depending on which component you're looking at.
Who in their right mind would drop thousands of dollars to buy this thing? For the money you could have a Sony A7, and I dare anyone to suggest that IQ would be better with the Leica T.
Leica has made some great cameras and lenses in the past, but lately it seems like the red badge means "sucker."
It's not belief, it's experience that I've had and can demonstrate.
You can do it yourself, but you'll have to get the lenses to use.
The higher ISO thing is really easy to demonstrate.
You don't want raw some do, so the option should be there. You can keep the hypoPhone set to shoot jpeg.
If editing includes changing color or brightness, raw will be helpful.
Removable cards are real helpful in moving a few GB of data from a phone/camera to a computer--for backup storage, editing, etc.
Azurael: The menu system on the 'T' is horrific and inconsistent. It took me 5 minutes to work out how to change the darn thing from AF to MF. No, pressing the icon on the touch screen that says 'AF/MF' doesn't do it, it merely selects AF/MF as the function of the left-hand control dial ( the status of which is indicated with the smallest icon ever seen on a camera display.) Yet the ISO button from the same quick menu opens another submenu. It's fiddly as hell.
To my eyes, it's a pretentious camera designed for people with more money than sense, who care more about the Leica badge than having something that's actually pleasant to use. There are dozens of cameras which have the same or better IQ and would be a better option for almost anybody. Those looking to use M lenses would be better off with an A7, which will allow their proper use on an FF sensor, for less money. Those who actually want to buy into a smaller system would be better off with any number of Oly/Pana/Samsung/Sony cameras...
I had to ask about playback, but the rest was easy enough. Never did try re-assigning the wheels though.
M lenses on an A7 will have vignetting problems.
Be fair to DPR, this isn't really a review, it's a Preview.
IvanM: It doesn't really matter how bad the shooting experience is...the people that buy Leica cameras buy it for the name and the status that comes with owing a Leica 'luxury' product, because that is what Leica is, 'luxury goods'....the guys that want this T don't care how it compares or performs, they want a Leica product and wont settle for anything less...we who cant afford such luxuries of course don't understand it, but ask any Leica owner and he/she will explain it all very eloquently...
Many buying Leicas buy for the lenses, it's not that no one buys for the status symbol, but it's simplistic to imply that's the reason for most Leica purchases.
I didn't actually say "8 bit jpegs". So try again.
It's still best to avoid jogs when making color judgements about a lens.
It's well established that higher ISO shooting is helped by optically better lenses.
It's not really possible to make color judgments based on jpegs alone.
Yes, you can say a lens is good for color based on a jpeg, but you need raws to see what various lenses can do.
The jpegs I've seen from that Canon f1.2 50 look good, but then one needs to test things like high ISOs, where better optical quality really shows. (Example, shooting Zeiss lenses extend the useful ISO range of cameras like the D3s.)
There most certainly is a better understanding of colour. And companies like Adobe+Epson apprehend some of this.
That you suggest I look at a website with a lens comparometer tells me you're not real interested in camera lenses.
My claims are based on using lenses. albeit I'm not a Canon user, but no one says Canon L lenses are much better than Nikon ED lenses.
The label doesn't matter too much, there are not great to just good Zeiss, Leica and Sigma lenses. (However the Canon and Nikon labels tell of lessor optical performance.)
Well done Sigma, Samsung, Olympus, Zeiss, Leica, Fuji, and Schneider lenses are optically better than Canon and Nikon lenses.
And Rokinon (Samyang) lenses are also pretty consistently better optically than Nikon and Canon FF dslr lenses.
That 50mm Zeiss you mention above has beautiful colour but can be distractingly unsharp when wide open--why I was willing to sell my copy.
I think the inexpensive kit 50mm from the Nikon Df promising.
And you misread: I never said the special colour can't be manipulated, I said it can't be added after the fact of shooting.
More data is often not the answer, whereas better data is.