Leica M240 please...
Wow! This is a timeless beauty. A fine sample of art in photography. Congratulations Graziano!
BobYIL: Price aside, compared to Cindy Sherman's $3.9M picture Mr Lik did a good job.
Which one would you hang on your wall?
Price aside, compared to Cindy Sherman's $3.9M picture Mr Lik did a good job.
Hasselblad's CEO, IAN Rawcliffe, adds ".......... the pocket-sized Stellar models are proving extremely popular.... " and "This is most likely the last of the rebadged Sony cameras from Hasselblad, following the recently closure of the company's design facility in Italy."
They are closing the design facility because they can't keep up with the orders..
Remarrkable: Low or high ISO RAW as well as corner sharpness; looks better than the $2.300 Leica X (type 113)
Compared against Sony a6000 (APSC) and Lumix LX100 (4/3), RAW, from ISO 1600 to 6400; daylight as well as low-light.
- X113 has the worst rendering- X113 has the worst corner resolution (also at any ISO)
Facit: Thank you DPR for providing us with means to do our own checks against marketing myths.
For some $1 per picture is dirt cheap if you take 2800 pictures before buying another Leica...
Smallest of the MF format; only 30 x 45mm, a little larger than the FF... Only 37.5MP, a little more than the D800 series 36MP... A phased out CCD sensor to turn obsolete in couple of years in the world of MF-CMOS. Hopefully they can sell this "only 100 units" of limited edition. (BTW, would it differ much if the new lens was offered for $4K?)
Otus is outstanding, Sigma Art is magnificent, however many of us still need something closer to them but not costing more than $500.
When Leica was Leica, there was no red dot. The first red dot we have seen was on the preliminary run of the M4-2 (probably less than couple of hundreds units) and then on the M4-P. And on the red dot it was not "Leica" but "Leitz". It might be hard to believe but for the Leica users then, the red dot was also meaning the end of the most desired models (M3, M2 and M4) and a sort of "decline" for the quality Leica was famous of.
Looking at his portrait this monkey seems to be more talented than some of us....
Does this mean the 'noticeably unnoticeable' costs $1000 more than the 'unnoticeably noticeable'?
A camera costing only $2.500 has been chosen by some top pros to do the job of an Alexa costing beyond $50.000 and some of us bashing DPR for making it news??
Thank you DPR for the photographs looking like photographs worth to look at..
Pay $1.850 to have privilege to live with the Leica quirks.
Magnificent pictures; a new look and interpretation to macro photography. Thank you for demonstrating that art can be performed with macro photography too.
I wonder if Justin would want to upgrade to the "T" after reading all these..
Thanks Leica for making us appreciate the quality of the kit lenses we have.
"Leica is very proud of the T's unique 'unibody' design"; at the first rate, probably for machining down a solid block of aluminum of 1.2kg. which represents the most inefficient method of making a camera body. This inefficiency is reflected also in price: $1.850 on this side of the pond.. very exclusive. We, however, must be thankful for Leica for keeping this "exclusivity" within bearable limits by not starting with a solid block of aluminum of 1 cu.meter size, weighing some 2.8 tons and consequently charging probably $185.000 for each body and wasting 99.95% of the material to recycling.