Previous page Next page

Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review

April 2014 | By Andy Westlake


Preview based on a pre-production Leica T (Typ 701)

This year marks Leica's 100th birthday as a camera maker and, to celebrate, the venerable German manufacturer has launched an all-new camera system. Perhaps unexpectedly, though, Leica hasn't taken the obvious route and embraced the current fashion for 'retro' design with an interchangeable-lens version of its X Vario APS-C compact. Instead the Leica T is an innovative camera that combines photographer-friendly twin-dial control with a bang-up-to-date touchscreen interface.

Before we go any further, though, let's get the pricing out of the way. The Leica T is going to set you back £1350 for the body alone - a fraction more than the original X1. Two lenses will be available at launch; the 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom (27-84mm equivalent) will cost £1250, and the 23mm f/2 prime (which offers a 35mm equivalent angle-of-view) will be £1350. This places it in the same price bracket as the 36MP full frame Sony A7R as one of the most expensive mirrorless camera systems on the market, and means that only well-heeled photographers are likely to get their hands on one. Leica exists in a particularly rarefied space and, while the T is designed to appeal to a different type of buyer than either the X compacts or the M system, it is not in any way intended as a mass-market product.

This is a pity, because the Leica T turns out to be a really attractive camera. Its body is hewn from a single block of aluminum, which makes it an extraordinarily tactile, and rather beautiful object. It has five controls on its top plate - shutter button, video record button, power switch and two dials - but absolutely everything else is controlled via the large 3.7", 16:9 touchscreen. This, you can't help but feel, is the kind of camera that Apple might make, if it were so inclined.

Leica T key features:

  • 16MP APS-C CMOS sensor
  • ISO 100-12500
  • 3.7" 1.3M dot 16:9 touchscreen LCD
  • Twin top-plate control dials
  • Approx 5 fps continuous shooting
  • 1920 x 1080 Full HD movie recording at 30 fps; built-in stereo microphones
  • Built-in Wi-Fi for easy image sharing, and remote control by smartphone or tablet
  • Optional 2.36M dot electronic viewfinder with built-in GPS unit
  • Built-in 16GB memory
  • Brand new Leica T mount
  • 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 and 23mm f/2 lenses
  • 11-23mm f/3.5-4.5 and 55-135mm f/3.5-4.5 coming later in the year (at photokina 2014)
  • Available in anodized black or natural aluminum finish

The back of the T is dominated by its large, 16:9 aspect ratio touchscreen, with no physical buttons whatsoever. The main exposure settings are controlled by a pair of top-plate dials, but almost everything else (settings and menus, playback and so on) is operated though a generally well-thought-out touch interface. The back of the camera also proudly proclaims 'Leica Camera Wetzlar Germany', celebrating the company's recent return to its spiritual home. The lenses, by the way, are made in Japan (apparently because Leica doesn't have sufficient capacity in Wetzlar), although contrary to pre-launch internet rumor, they're not made by Panasonic.

The T uses a 16MP APS-C CMOS sensor, with an ISO range from 100-12500. It offers 5fps continuous shooting, and Full HD movie recording with stereo sound. The camera uses an all-new, fully electronic 'T mount', but Leica will also be offering an adapter to allow use of M mount lenses. This has an optical sensor to read the 6-bit code used to identify modern lenses, and electronic contacts to pass this information to the camera.

Naturally the camera has built-in Wi-Fi; this allows both image transfer to a smartphone or tablet, and remote control of shooting (complete with live view feed). It has 16GB of built-in memory, meaning you don't even have to buy an SD card if you don't want to. The battery can be charged internally via the camera's micro USB port, but Leica includes an external charger in the box too, giving the best of both worlds.

'Unibody' design

Leica is very proud of the T's unique 'unibody' design. Most cameras are built around an internal chassis, with all of the electronics fixed to it and a body skin finally added over the top. Leica has done something completely different; instead the body is formed from a solid block of aluminum, with all of the electronics attached to it directly. The result is an extraordinarily tactile, solid-feeling object.

The Leica T's body is formed from a 1.2kg block of aluminum, which is machined down to 94g at Leica's factory in Wetzlar, then subjected 45 minutes of hand-polishing. The camera has no separate internal chassis; instead everything is attached to this shell. Now you know why it costs so much...

Lenses and accessories

The Leica T launches with two lenses, a zoom and a prime. The Vario-Elmar-T 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 is a compact zoom that offers a 27-84mm equivalent range, while the Summicron-T 23mm f/2 ASPH is a small prime that offers a classic 35mm equivalent moderate wide-angle view. Both use a thoroughly modern design approach, with a fully-electronic mount, near-silent internal focusing, and electronically-coupled manual focus.

The first two lenses for the T system are the Summicron-T 23mm f/2 ASPH (left) and Vario-Elmar-T 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6. The Vario-Elmar-T 55-135mm f/3.5-4.5 ASPH telezoom and Super-Vario-Elmar-T 11-23mm f/3.5-4.5 ASPH wide-angle zoom are both scheduled to appear in time to be shown in September at photokina 2014.

Not unexpectedly these lenses are seriously pricey, at around $1500 / £1300 each (or roughly half the price of the camera / lens kit). The zoom doesn't even have optical image stabilization - Leica says it imposes too large a compromise on the optical design - which means the T is about the only system on the market with no image stabilization at all.

There's also a new optional electronic viewfinder, the Visoflex (Typ 020), which slides onto the hotshoe. It uses a new interface on the hot shoe itself, meaning that that it's not cross-compatible with the unit used for the X2, X Vario and M (Typ 240). Leica will also be offering a range of straps and covers in two distinct styles; either traditional-looking leather, or brightly-colored silicone rubber. We'll look at these in more detail later.

Color options and pricing

The T will be available in either a natural aluminum finish, or anodized black. Prices are as follows:

  • Leica T body (Black or Silver) - £1350
  • Vario-Elmar-T 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 - £1250
  • Summicron-T 23mm f/2 ASPH - £1350
  • M-Adapter T mount adapter - £300
  • Visoflex (Typ 020) EVF - £400


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2014 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
23
I own it
75
I want it
23
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 2301
12345
cannotshoot
By cannotshoot (1 month ago)

I don't why some of you are still buying crop cameras. This Leica T is so over rated. My sony rx1 is so much better and it stopped me from buying new cameras year after year.

2 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (1 month ago)

Aluminium conducts heat magnificently so those users in warmer climes will be troubled, doubtless by increased image sensor noise. As with its use in cooking where it should be banned due to Alsheimer's risks it really is an extremely efficient conductor of heat, so it will be at 37C handheld.

We have to ask whether the lenses are any better than the Sony ones because there must be a reason in 2014 to continue down the 16MP APS-C path abandoned by everyone else at this price level-even budget Sony and Nikon offerings are 24MP now.

Is it for monied myopic Swiss gnomes in alpine pastures??

0 upvotes
Mike FL
By Mike FL (1 month ago)

The low MP sensor is for professional who needs best IQ such as Nikon top of the line D4s body is $6,500 with but 16MP comparing to Nikon D810 body is $3,200 but 36MP.

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (1 month ago)

munro--

And I used the Leica T for an hour in the sun on an 80 degree (Fahrenheit) day, and it just wasn't hot to hold.

The Sony A6000 is not as good at high ISOs.

The the 23mm Leica T lens, the one I used, while not extraordinary is far better than Sony native Nex APSC lenses, with the exception of the Zeiss 24mm and if you count the Zeiss 55 for the full framed mirror less A bodies.

I did not use the T zoom and can't comment on it.

Note various Fuji X mirrorless bodies use a variation of that Sony 16MP APSC sensor. And those are not cheap bodies.

If you want a better high ISO APSC sensor with a few more pixels; there are other options: The A5000 has a 20MP sensor and the Samsung NX30 has 20MP sensor, both are better high ISO sensors than this 16MP sensor.

More mega pixels is far from the only way to judge a sensor, besides the Nikon examples cited by MikeFL above see the Canon 6D and the Canon 1DX.

0 upvotes
dale thorn
By dale thorn (2 months ago)

Got my first 'T' image today in b&w - the detail is amazing, and it really has the Leica Look (not kidding). Much better than I expected, and that was with the 18-56.

0 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (2 months ago)

I bet that's all in your mind. :)

3 upvotes
dale thorn
By dale thorn (2 months ago)

I bet $4000 on it, and I'm satisfied (and I'm a *very* picky customer).

1 upvote
EcoPix
By EcoPix (2 months ago)

Well I've just wasted half an hour of precious time looking into this camera, judging by the preview, the sample images and the comments.

I use a NEX-7 and Nikon, Contax and Sony glass. It does a good job, but I can't live with the terrible user interface or the horrid jpeg noise reduction. And now it's starting to play up.

What would you experts suggest for a replacement? Going by the info gleaned here, this camera ain't it!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
chillgreg
By chillgreg (2 months ago)

A6000?

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

For image quality a Samsung or Fuji, NX or X, with the better lenses.

For lower ISOs there's always the Olympus EM1.

The Sony A6000 really only has fast AF and a fast frame rate. Even the best lenses for this system, I've not used the Sigmas, don't really get to Sam, Fuji, Oly level performance.

1 upvote
Eric Hensel
By Eric Hensel (2 months ago)

"Even the best lenses for this system, I've not used the Sigmas, don't really get to Sam, Fuji, Oly level performance."
Wrong.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Eric Hensel:

Unless you're referring the the Sigmas, I've used the Zeiss and SonyZeiss lenses for this Nex system, and they're just very good, not extraordinary, so unlike the best from Samsung and Olympus.

And the better Fuji lenses also best these various Zeisses.

Now what's not possible is to mount the Nex SonyZeiss 24mm f1.8 on say an NX30 or XT1 and see how well the lens does using different sensor conditions.

And no, the 55mm f1.8 SonyZeiss is just very good, not spectacular.

So again, unless the Sigmas hide some magic, there be problems with the native Sony Nex lenses if you want extraordinary image quality.

That Sony A mount FF 85mm f/1.4 lens is amazing, but not exactly native.

0 upvotes
EcoPix
By EcoPix (2 months ago)

Thanks everyone. I have my lenses, so all I'd need are new adapters (and a kit lens, I suppose). I’m aware of Sony’s intended upgrade path, but was hoping to go upmarket, not downmarket. The NEX-7 was the top model, yet mine started playing up intermittently after a year and now has a couple of issues. I know I’m not alone with that problem. There's the A7, but is it built any better?
Cameras are different to hi fis and TV sets. A camera is an extension of our vision and bodies, and one likes a long-term relationship to build familiarity and style.
Hence I'm looking at this Leica, but in all the blurb and discussion there’s no mention of the No. 1 reason to buy Leica – they survive wars! Some photogs have developed their styles and conducted their careers with one familiar camera body. We forget that there were lots of forgettable Leica imitators.

0 upvotes
EcoPix
By EcoPix (2 months ago)

Can't Leica claim longevity anymore, now that a camera can only last as long as the first diode that burns out inside it? Leica doesn’t make diodes. I’m mostly a Nikon DX and Canon full frame user, and I’ve enjoyed cameras that last pretty well. I’d like a mirrorless body to complement them. But until Canikon wake up and provide a serious mirrorless solution to complement their SLRs, it’s a bit frustrating.
So the unanswered question here for me: With this camera that seems nothing special in IQ and handling, what does that red dot mean? Is it just snob value, or are we still buying a camera that we can grow old with?

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

EcoPix:

One buys Leica digital for the lenses. (Albeit the S series is cheaper than a Hasselblad MF digital body.)

In the film era there were reasons to buy Leica bodies.

You have adapters for this T system? There's more than an M adapter available? Or do you mean you have M lenses, and can therefore use M lenses, with an adapter?

The Fuji XT1 and Olympus EM1 are probably the best thought out and executed mirrorless--short of the FF Sony A7S. However Samsung has some extraordinary lenses, shaming pretty much anything but the best Leica M, or Zeiss FF, lenses for optical quality.

Or yes, if you'll focus manually, the Sony A6000 is a good APSC mirrorless body. Many of the native lenses are the problem.

This Leica T is a perfectly promising first step, however I was not wowed by the T23mm lens, it's very good by most standards, but it's not very good for a Leica. I've not used the zoom--it's not "kit"; it costs extra.

0 upvotes
EcoPix
By EcoPix (2 months ago)

Thanks H, that puts it in perspective. Re your adapter question, I'm confident there's a Chinese CAD engineer preparing a pattern as we speak.
Yes, I think if you're into unfolding camera history this is worth playing with, but personally I've stopped considering it. I don't think Leica imagined it for working pros.
I'm even considering throwing good money after bad and risking getting the NEX-7 fixed, and living with its interface. Maybe I'm crazy.
But we all eventually benefit from the smaller, agile and courageous boutique camera makers and the monied beta testers they need, so best wishes for Leica's T.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

EcoPix:

If you have the lenses for the Sony Nex system, or lens adapters for, and you like the results, what about the A6000? (Or for higher ISO shooting the A5000, no built in EVF though?)

Or is the Nex 7 going to be little money to repair? That Nex 7's EVF beats the A6000's easily.

0 upvotes
ldog
By ldog (2 months ago)

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!

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

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.

0 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (2 months ago)

If you can't operate " the machine age technology rangefinder" quickly and accurately that's on you the photographer, not the camera.

I just shot my sister's wedding solely with an M9 and a 50 Lux with no problems at all. I shoot concerts with it as well. And portraits. I've even shot Moto GP riders going by me at over 150mph with an M9. "Dynamic professional use" can be had with any Leica M as long as the photographer is competent with his knowledge of how manual focusing works.

1 upvote
white shadow
By white shadow (2 months ago)

Not many people nowadays are comfortable with manual and zone focusing. They are too spoilt by AF and most just point and shoot.

Doing photography manually need skills which most do not have. Thus, the frustration.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (2 months ago)

Ironically I actually really like the 240 because it's not pretending to be something that it isn't. It's enough like my old M3 that I can just slip into using it without much effort. I dislike the T (in its current form) because it just feels unfinished, and I get the strong sense that it's been specifically manufactured to be an attractive object rather than a truly effective camera. Which is a shame, especially from a manufacturer like Leica.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

B2:

Are you shooting the T with the EVF?

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

white shadow:

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.

0 upvotes
IvanM
By IvanM (2 months ago)

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...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

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.

0 upvotes
SPerez
By SPerez (2 months ago)

(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

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Be fair to DPR, this isn't really a review, it's a Preview.

2 upvotes
dale thorn
By dale thorn (2 months ago)

We got the point, no fairness required. It was obviously a slam against Leica, who must not have come across with any favors. Michael Reichmann (a real photographer) loves the T.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

dale thorn:

Reichmann hasn't fully reviewed the T yet.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (2 months ago)

@SPerez - I seem to recall praising the image quality and the construction... it's the laggy operation, slow startup time and broken AF operation when the EVF is used which I dislike (as stated clearly in this article). As for manual focus override, you are right - through trial and error we have discovered that yes! It is possible. Not that useful, though. I'll edit accordingly.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Azurael
By Azurael (2 months ago)

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...

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Azurael
By Azurael (2 months ago)

Oh, and the downward swipe gesture to switch from record to playback and visa versa works. Sometimes. When it feels like it. I've got to admit, I'm not a big fan of touchscreens as a primary input mechanism to a camera, but this is one of the worst implementations I've seen yet since the bad old days of resistive touch panels.

And why doesn't it have peaking? Wouldn't that make using M lenses easier?! The M240 has peaking - albeit a pretty poor implementation, not helped by the M EVF's low resolution (although the T's Visoflex is good!)

Anyway, the Leica reps were more interested in showing us how the 'amazing' patented strap lugs work (exactly the same as the SIM trays on every smartphone with a non-removable back) and how great it is that the metal strap ends can never come into contact with the soft and easily scratched aluminium body. The fact that this is the best feature tells you everything you need to know about the camera, really.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

A:

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.

0 upvotes
Azurael
By Azurael (2 months ago)

That's true of ultrawides on an A7R, certainly. On a standard A7 or an A7S, less so. And certainly not with anything longer than about a 35mm. Anyway, it's better than wasting half the imaging circle of your £2500 lens, whichever way you look at it. But nobody said you had to have an A7. There's always the a6000 or various Samsung NX bodies if you want a better featured APS-C body for 1/3 the price (and the a6k comes with an EVF!) - okay, it's not hewn from a single block of aluminium, but if you've ever seen an Apple device that's been dropped, it's not the best of ideas anyway.

I 'get' the appeal of the M - I wouldn't buy one, since shooting with rangefinders isn't my cup of tea, but at least it has some unique and compelling features which somewhat justify its high ticket price. The T is just overpriced high-fashion jewellery. They can try and get me on board once they've put some proper buttons on it, added peaking, brought out a range of lenses and made the UI far more logical.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Azurael:

Right, there are indeed better APSC bodies than this Leica T.

I thought the T easy enough to use, it's not a body I'd buy because high ISO sensor performance is better with Samsung NX30 or Sony A5000. And the Leica T 23mm lens is not optically stunning, as it should be. While Samsung does have stunning NX lenses.

The Sony A6000 doesn't have a good EVF, unlike the excellent EVF on the Fuji XT1 or the just good EVF on the Samsung NX30. The Leica's EVF is very good, albeit one can't switch the camera so it's only using the EVF.

Never seen a new MacBook Pro dropped, and those are the only Apple products with chassis hewn out of aluminum blocks.

0 upvotes
JPdeJ
By JPdeJ (2 months ago)

"Shooting experience"? Look at the photos with the article. "I don't know what to shoot. I just need some content." Hardly any qualities that entitle to an opinion.

The camera is part of a system. It allows you to use M lenses with full functionality. I would have wanted that to be part of the review "experience."

Expensive? Think of Oscar Wilde - the "simple taste" man - some people know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

Would I buy this one? Never bought Leica. Shot Hasselblad with Zeiss lenses, yes. Nikon with Nikon yes. Sinar with Schneider and others, yes.
Still, the other day I was looking at a second hand Leica R lens for my Nikon full-frame. Only 3000 of these Leica lenses were ever made and second hand prices go up into 4-5 thousand USD range.
Do I now hate Leica?
No.

1 upvote
b craw
By b craw (2 months ago)

I get the criticisms (and agree with many). But this insipid need to repeat...repeat...repeat. Do you sincerely think after 2,000+ comments, your contribution qualifies as new? Please.

1 upvote
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (2 months ago)

Why is it "beautiful"? What other camera you think is "beautiful"? Sony NEXs? They already looked quite a bit like this.

1 upvote
dcshooter
By dcshooter (2 months ago)

Leave it to Leica to present a point and shoot with a horribly crippled interface, excruciatingly slow load time, middling image quality (have you looked at the supposedly "nuce" images attached to this article?) for something supposedly high-end, and poor ergonomics, and claim that it is revolutionary and merits a nearly $2k pricetag.

As usual, the Leica sycophants will drool all over it, but it's becoming increasingly sad to watch this once-proud company lift its leg to its own legacy. Unfortunately, a luxury price tag does not equal relevance in the digital age, and the technical and advantages they had in the film era which, while overstated, were at least real, simply aren't there any more.

4 upvotes
PhotoKhan
By PhotoKhan (2 months ago)

(deleted)

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Ulfric M Douglas
By Ulfric M Douglas (2 months ago)

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.

5 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

No one seeks out even half decent Leica digital bodies to shoot jpeg only, even if it has wifi.

NB, right now this body only shoots raw+jpeg, not raw only.

0 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (2 months ago)

Jpg

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Rage,

What's your point?

0 upvotes
Fran D
By Fran D (2 months ago)

I sold my Leica M-E and Zeiss lenses and had a T on order at the Miami Leica store. While waiting for one to come in, I realized that what I really wanted was a (much more expensive) M240 and 50mm Sumicron. I never looked back.

0 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (2 months ago)

I'd love to try it for a day or two with 23mm lens. That EVF looks really cool!

0 upvotes
lemonhooker
By lemonhooker (2 months ago)

It is in no way difficult to handle. Leica designed it to fit right in your hand , much better than any of the competition .

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

And I think this a well enough designed body, but you've handled the entirety of the competition?

4 upvotes
Jim Salvas
By Jim Salvas (2 months ago)

The shape is a close match for the Sony A6000, but the Sony has a slightly better grip, and a built-in EVF. And, the Leica, with its kit lens and removable EVF, costs almost seven times as much, has no IS, and is apparently slow as molasses.

4 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Jim:

The A6000's kit zoom is awful. 750 divided into 4500 is ...?

The Leica is not a sports camera, but far from slow.

The A6000 does NOT have a good builtin EVF, unlike say the Fuji XT1.

1 upvote
nicolasrao
By nicolasrao (2 months ago)

I once owned a Leica IIIf a long time ago..Using it was painful, right from loading film to taking a shot..but the results made you forget all that...but this one seems even more painful to use.. we had less controls then.

0 upvotes
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (2 months ago)

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?

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

It doesn't slide you of one's hand.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

out

0 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (2 months ago)

Yes. It's as impossible to hold as a greased pig.

Seriously? You act like aluminum has no tactile properties that can actually allow the human hand o hold it. When was the last time you tried to pick up a MacBookPro and utterly failed because it was too slippery?

Truth be told chromed wrenches are much slicker than aluminum. Have you haver had trouble holding a wrench?

2 upvotes
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (2 months ago)

All that matters is that it is a smooth and incompressible surface -- hence, no grip. I can name quite a few compact cameras with this problem, although their smooth aluminum is usually just a thin cover and isn't quite as featureless. For example, the Canon PowerShot A4000 shell is slightly curved and has a Canon logo on it, but is still quite hard to hold, especially with just one hand.

Your analogies are bizarrely distant given that there have been tons of cameras with hard-to-hold aluminum outer skins. A MacBookPro doesn't have an even remotely similar shape, but I'd challenge you to carry one around by simply holding it vertical from the right edge like one normally holds a small camera. Wrenches are levers; they are not designed to be held for any period of time.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

ProfHandkD:

Sockets (the part of the wrench doing the driving) are also usually chrome plated, and do indeed slip out of one's hand. Also wrenches, the ratcheting drivers, are indeed used for hours at a time. Adjustable wrenches, Crescents, plated in chrome are much less common than chrome plated ratchets and sockets.

Back to this Leica body:

Again, I've used this Leica and it does NOT slip out of one's hands. It is easy to grip. I've used it outdoors on a hot day.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (2 months ago)

I agree with JD and How...there are very valid criticisms about the T but it slipping from one's hands is not one of them. Grippy as a pine-tarred bat? No. Going to fly out of your hands at every turn? No.

0 upvotes
BeaverTerror
By BeaverTerror (2 months ago)

Wrench handles are small bars which allow the user wrap their entire hand and fingers around the handle, hardly a suitable analogy for defending the ergonomics of a camera, which one has to pinch with a semi-open hand. They do make nicer wrenches with rubberized grips, as well.

0 upvotes
Jono Slack
By Jono Slack (2 months ago)

Well, I actually used the camera for 3 months with no strap (it wasn't ready). and no, it doesn't slip out of your hands, even with a large R lens attached

1 upvote
JDThomas
By JDThomas (2 months ago)

@BeaverTerror:

I wasn't defending the ergonomics of a camera (that would be stupid, why would an inanimate object need defending). I was pointing out the ridiculousness of the statement, which portends that since a camera is made out of aluminum it will automatically slip from the hand.

1 upvote
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (2 months ago)

My original comment was more about the shape than the material.

0 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (2 months ago)

There's a little handgrip right there on the front. What more do you need? It's not like it's a 2 pound camera.

1 upvote
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (2 months ago)

Since you ask, what I usually need is some horizontal texture or compressible surface. I have a lot of trouble holding cameras that don't have that.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

ProHankD:

I've used the body, and for most people, perhaps not you because of your above claims, it is easy to hold.

0 upvotes
BeaverTerror
By BeaverTerror (2 months ago)

@JDThomas:

That's a straw man. He doesn't mention the word "aluminum" in his original post, nor does he use the word "automatically". You clearly are defending the ergonomics of the camera. He posted a statement criticizing it; you posted a response refuting his statement: thereby you are defending the camera. That's what defending means.

0 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (2 months ago)

@beaver:

he says, and I quote, "doesn't it proceed to slide out of your hand when you try to pick it up?"

This infers that when you pick up the camera it immediately slides out of your hand. Try reading for comprehension and not trying to defend his post by using semantics.

I'm not defending a camera. It's simply dumb to assume that you can't pick up a camera because it will proceed to slide out of your hand if you even TRY.

If he said that about ANY camera on the market I'd make the same comment.

0 upvotes
BeaverTerror
By BeaverTerror (2 months ago)

@ JDThomas

The goal is to try to read for correct comprehension. Proceeding is a matter of sequence. Immediacy is a matter of speed. They are unrelated words. He sees that the camera is less than ideal to grip due to a combination of both the shape and the material. There is a range of ergonomics from absolutely terrible to extremely good. He is saying that this camera falls on the less desirable side of the spectrum. He is not implying that the camera will fall out of your hand literally within one second.

It is a sunny and humid day; you are sweaty; during the second half of a long shooting day, you begin to find it difficult to grip the camera. You find that your hands are strained due to the extra effort you need to exert in order to hold on to a shiny block of aluminum with sweaty fingers. You wish you had a substantial rubber grip, such as on the Olympus EM-1. That would have made your life much easier.

Part 2 follows below.

0 upvotes
BeaverTerror
By BeaverTerror (2 months ago)

So no, he doesn't mean you will drop the camera to the ground the moment you pick it up. You are extending his argument to absurdity and then attacking that. It's called a straw man. I'm not sure why the fallacy in your understanding is so unapparent to you. It also doesn't help when you accuse others of poor reading comprehension and stupidity, when you clearly need so much work in these areas yourself. What's stupid is the fact that I just had to write three paragraphs to explain to you what should have been understood automatically and immediately.

I find it amusing that you repeatedly state that you are not defending the camera. Now you are trying to disassociate yourself from the brand by saying that you would defend any other camera. If you disagree with someone about a certain aspect of a camera you like, then by all means defend it. There's no shame in that, even if it's a Leica. No need to pussy around so much.

0 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (2 months ago)

Didn't read that. Too long. Sorry.

0 upvotes
BeaverTerror
By BeaverTerror (2 months ago)

@ JDThomas

Says the guy who advocates for reading comprehension.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

BeaverTerror:

I'll defend the Leica T's grippiness. And I used it on a warm sunny, reasonably humid day: It's easy to grip.

Perhaps gripping it would be harder if I were really exerting myself and sweating.

0 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (2 months ago)

@Beaver:

I don't really care to read an overly long diatribe. Keep it short, thanks.

0 upvotes
lemonhooker
By lemonhooker (2 months ago)

This review is BS. I own a "T" and its one of the best "carry around " cameras on the market. I use 5dmk3's everyday in my business and after lugging them around I find the "T" a pleasure to use. All the "cons" that were pointed out are just BS.

5 upvotes
weinschela
By weinschela (2 months ago)

Maybe those pot shotting at the T should have a look at the images it can produce. Sure it is a new interface but once you figure it out it is very simple to use. Using Leica M lenses is easy too. Is it expensive? Yes. Is it to everyone's taste? No. But it is a terrific little camera.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

This isn't a review.

There are other nice mirrorless APSC bodies, which also take nice lenses.

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

weinshela,

I'm a big fan of well done Leica, and PanaLeica, lenses, but the DNGs I shot with the T 23mm just weren't great.

I've not used the zoom, nor have I put M lenses on this T body.

1 upvote
Flashback
By Flashback (2 months ago)

Hey Leica, have a chat with the Panasonic boffins, and get some of that GH4 video magic into the T2.

2 upvotes
Jim Salvas
By Jim Salvas (2 months ago)

They got this wrong from the unboxing. You're not supposed to unbox a Leica. It's a collectible. It doesn't even have to work.

16 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Wrong.

0 upvotes
Jim Salvas
By Jim Salvas (2 months ago)

It was a joke. It can be funny or not funny, but it can't be "wrong."

But, I"m not surprised humor is something a Leica fan doesn't recognize. After all, the entire marketing position of that company is a joke on the buyers.

13 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Jim,

Yeah, I got that it was a joke, but it's a silly one that's oft repeated by people who can't see a reason to buy a Leica.

The marketing position of Leica is far from a joke. It's a sad joke that optically Canikon just can't touch Leica lenses after 50 years.

Whereas there are other companies doing lenses optically a lot closer to Leica than Canikon.

0 upvotes
Jim Salvas
By Jim Salvas (2 months ago)

These are "Leica lenses" in the same manner that Sony has "Zeiss lenses." They are both made in Japan and both depend on software correction of optical imperfections. The only real difference is that you can get a Sony A6000 with a Zeiss lens for 1/5 the price of this Leica, considering that buying the EVF is almost a necessity with the Leica T and the EVF costs what the entire Sony body does.

When the review is done, it should be interesting to see head to head comparisons of results. Especially with Sony's optical IS and much faster AF.

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Jim:

Nope.

SonyZeiss lenses are made (likely designed too) by Sony to some Zeiss specs. Some are very good, some aren't. That FF 85mm 1.4 is extraordinary.

Zeiss has Cosina make Zeiss MF lenses in Japan with things like Schott glass, and most of those are extraordinary. Leica is doing something similar with a Japanese lens maker--unidentified.

The 24mm SonyZeiss ($1000) is a good lens, but it's only good not extraordinary. $1600 is not 1/5 of $4000.

Software correction is perfectly normal for pretty much all digital camera lenses--including Leica M lenses.

If you want an APSC body with optically better lenses, at least better than the Leica T 23mm, try the Samsung NX30. And yes the good Samsung NX lenses are optically better than Sony Zeiss lenses for the Nex APSC system.

0 upvotes
Wubslin
By Wubslin (2 months ago)

Unboxing it would reduce its value. Like those collectible figurines of various characters from SF/fantasy franchises.

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

W:

And cameras (Leicas, Sonys, etc) are meant to be used. And even in box perfectly preserved in 40 years this camera won't likely be real valuable--unlike a Darth Vader action figure from 1977 in a never opened box.

0 upvotes
eastwestphoto
By eastwestphoto (2 months ago)

This is a lousy review from Andy Westlake- Most old leica fans want to know if they can use an older leica M mount lens on this camera? If so how does a 50mm perform on it and what angle of view will cover the chip entirely without vignetting the chip? What size is this chip? m4/3, or APS-C? DPreview is a manufacturers review forum for New camera, new lens and they are so biased against photographers who adapt old lenses to new mirrorless cameras, its disgusting and obvious bias. I would match my leitz Leica summicron 40mm F:2 CL lens against any NEW lens made for this camera in zoom and a manual lens test would of allowed me to understand, distortion, chromatic abberation and image quality of JPEG and contrast. After all Mr. Westlake, we do buy bodies and use our old lenses! Wake Up! Don@Eastwestphoto

3 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

There are Leica M adapters for virtually every mirrorless body on the market. If you're willing to accept a cropped view you have plenty of choices: Sony NEX, Fuji X, Samsung NX, even EOS M.

If you want FF grab the Sony A7.

6 upvotes
Mountainwalker444
By Mountainwalker444 (2 months ago)

What you read was a preview Don. For god's sake, wake up! before you post!

6 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (2 months ago)

Um, they state the sensor size (APS) literally on the first page, and again on the 2nd page. They also discuss the M adapter on page 4.

6 upvotes
yehudakgtbnet
By yehudakgtbnet (2 months ago)

Beautiful???

3 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

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."

12 upvotes
BorisK1
By BorisK1 (2 months ago)

Hey, my $36 Casio tells better time than a Rolex, but for some occupations it comes with a territory:
http://media.mensxp.com/media/photogallery/2013/May/1369377624_75825.jpg

1 upvote
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

So it's supposed to be a status symbol? It fails miserably at that as well. A Leica M9 with something like a f/0.95 Noctilux certainly makes a statement about your income. But it's also a serious photographic tool apart from price.

This? This is a kit car replica, not the real thing.

5 upvotes
NCB
By NCB (2 months ago)

I bought an EOS M. Gave it a thorough workout, but eventually sold it on. The IQ wasn't good enough, not nearly. The Leica T is in a different ball park to the M; the images look sharp and the colour spot on.

Sony A7? Too many minuses. Yes, I reckon the T's image quality is better, if by quality you mean what you see in real world pics.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

Well done Leica lenses are extraordinarily better than all Canon lenses.

Albeit it remains to be seen how well all of the T lenses are done.

The Sony A7 is incredibly audible. Also it's a FF sensor, so better at higher ISOs. In fact with a good lens, I suspect the Sony does do better image quality, but it's not exactly cheap. And Leica may fix the T lens (I can only speak to the 23mm.)

0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

NCB - PCMag.com has reviews with Imatest results for the T 23mm as well as the EF-M 22mm and 18-55mm.

The Leica 23mm at its best aperture (f/5.6) isn't as sharp as either Canon lens wide open! The Leica 23mm is not even worth comparing to the Canon 22mm at the same apertures. This is a $2,000 lens getting blown out by a couple of lenses that retail for just over $100 each, one of which is a kit zoom.

Shame Leica...shame.

There's nothing special about the T sample photos. They're not bad, but they're certainly not better then images from any other crop mirrorless, including the EOS M and current m43 bodies. Nothing stands out in terms of color or noise characteristics. As for sharpness, well...I'll take that bet on behalf of the Canon 22mm any day.

8 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

I'll look magazine review, but sharpness isn't a problem with the 23mm T lens.

And the T23 does a lot better color than most Canon lenses.

When checking samples use DNGs.

0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

If hard evidence won't convince you, nothing will. Enjoy the $2,000 red badge.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

That PCMag thing is not hard evidence.

The hard evidence that I have for this 23mm lens being sharp are the DNGs I shot.

Now, nowhere have I said this T23mm lens is optically extraordinary like it should be for the price. So you've made an addition to my argument not there.

The fact remains that optically Canikon lenses lag behind good lenses and the T23mm lens is plenty good, just not extraordinary.

0 upvotes
GuyAF
By GuyAF (2 months ago)

Do you really believe that Nikon or Canon engineers are inferior lens designers? Keep kidding yourself. It"s about as valid a statement as pretending Nissan engineers cannot keep up with Porsche's engineers.

Where are Leitz' equivalents for, say, the 14-24 2.8, for the 24-70 2.8?? And Japanese cannot make good primes either? What about the new 50 mm 1.4 Art from Sigma. Some of you use the word Canikon as an insult, something to be ashamed of. Canon and Nikon have done more for photography, especially for professional photography in the last 50 or 60 years than Leica could ever hope for or dream of (they were totally bankrupt when some extremely rich man helped them to get out of the financial black hole)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

GuyAF:

Not exactly, I think Canikon engineers don't understand some things about light that Sigma, Samsung (Optron), Leica, and Zeiss engineers understand. (Olympus too and on a good day Fuji and Panasonic.)

Where did I say "Japanese"? Also I said "Canikon" not "Sigma".

Leica hasn't made 35mm SLR lenses in a while, and there's only one sort of zoom for the M system.

The fact remains that optically Canikon can't touch a good Leica lens. It's mostly about lacking good color for the Canikon lenses. (Both Nikon and Canon appear to be waking up a bit and showing some promise.)

I made no claims about Nissan (irony owned by a French company) engineers not being up to those from Porsche, but with car engineering there aren't as many secrets. Given the choice I'd pick a GTR over almost any Porsche.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

Your DNGs...which nobody else has or can reproduce...are not hard evidence.

Imatest...which is an open, reproducible, scientific optical testing suite...is hard evidence.

"Now, nowhere have I said this T23mm lens is optically extraordinary like it should be for the price. So you've made an addition to my argument not there."

I never made any such addition.

"The fact remains that optically Canikon lenses lag behind good lenses..."

The latest Nikon 200 f/2 holds the record for sharpest lens ever tested at DxO. In the 2000's photodo found the Canon 200 f/1.8 was the sharpest lens ever made for 35mm format up until that time.

So much for "lagging behind."

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

My DNGs remain hard evidence, as would other DNGs, that's the point. I didn't say I was going to share my DNGs.

Your whole argument assumes I think this T23mm lens very special, and I don't.

Nikon can indeed make sharp lenses, sharpness is far far far from the only important quality of a decent lens. And the fact that you bring up sharpness suggests you don't know much about good camera lenses.

Likely the sharpest 35mm lens ever made is the Leica M f2.0 APO, but that's new in the last couple of years.

DXO lens scoring can only say if a lens is good, but it can't really distinguish a good lens from an extraordinary lens.

Now, I'm sure that both those 200mm lenses are good, but I'll bet neither has great color.

I didn't see the lens review listed at Imatest when I searched that website.

Anyhow that kind of "testing" is often very misleading.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

"The fact remains that optically Canikon can't touch a good Leica lens."

This is a ridiculous statement in light of the fact that you've called the T 23mm a "plenty good" lens yet it falls well short of a $120 Canon pancake "kit" lens.

But no matter. That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. Since you have no evidence for your blanket statements about Leica and Canon/Nikon lenses...

0 upvotes
GuyAF
By GuyAF (2 months ago)

Canon and Nikon engineers can make any lens you could want to own, but engineers alone don't make decisions, especially not in giants like Canon and Nikon.
German engineers don't have a magic book about designing lenses somewhere hidden in the German woods.
Nissan is in a partnership with Renault, it is not owned by Renault.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

The T23mm lens is a good lens, it is not good for a Leica lens. Thought that was obvious.

You can get ahold of DNGs shot with a good Leica M lens and see for yourself.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
GuyAF
By GuyAF (2 months ago)

To be complete one should also state that it is easier to make an M-lens than a (D)SLR lens.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

GuyAF:

Sigma, Samsung, Olympus, and Panasonic are not German companies.

If Canikon engineers knew the magic I don't doubt for a second that they could build optically better lenses.

Renault controls Nissan; it is far from a partnership. Now Renault may not own all of or even a majority stake in Nissan.

Don't care if an M lens is easier to make. Leica made extraordinary R lenses too.

Comment edited 50 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

"My DNGs remain hard evidence..."

You honestly expect people to accept your testimony regarding your DNGs as "hard evidence"?

Really?

"And the fact that you bring up sharpness suggests you don't know much about good camera lenses."

Way to show everyone that Leica users are not snobs.

"Now, I'm sure that both those 200mm lenses are good, but I'll bet neither has great color."

You've never touched a Canon or Nikon pro telephoto, have you? I have access to examples from both lines...though not those particular 200mm primes...and you would lose that bet. Before you even bring it up...you would lose the bet on bokeh and microcontrast as well. Canon and Nikon dominate pro sports and wildlife photography for a reason.

Although betting on lens color biases is kind of pointless considering that your choice of RAW converter, camera/lens profile, RAW settings, post processing steps...heck, even printer and paper...all have a greater impact on final color.

0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

"If Canikon engineers knew the magic I don't doubt for a second that they could build optically better lenses."

If you can shoot with an 85 f/1.2L, 135 f/2L, or 17mm T/S and not find "magic"...then you're doing something wrong.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

They can accept my claim and also get their own DNGs/raws from whatever body.

Haven't really used a Leica in years.

I've touched Nikon pro lenses, though not that one. And they're not impressive for color.

I won't go so far as to say those are bad 200mm lenses. I'm even sure they're pretty good, and fast, and AF.

Your entire last paragraph suggests you don't know much about color, almost none of what I'm talking can be added in post processing or by using better paper/printers.

It's either there for expression or not, even in 8bit files.

I'm not familiar with the Canon f/1.2 85, I know the Nikon f1.4 85 and it lacks.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

"Your entire last paragraph suggests you don't know much about color, almost none of what I'm talking can be added in post processing or by using better paper/printers."

I would ask for evidence but we all know what your response is going to be.

"It's either there for expression or not, even in 8bit files."

Yes...there's magical lens color that's visible at the 8 bit level (16m colors) but cannot be manipulated or altered in any way by software and processes operating at the level of billions of colors (10/12/16 bit).

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
GuyAF
By GuyAF (2 months ago)

Microsoft bought Anders Hejlsberg from Borland back in the days and the rest is history.

Ever wondered why Leitz engineers are not bought by Nikon or Canon. Think they cannot afford them?

Any Nikon or Canon optical engineer can make the best lens you could wish for.

Ever wondered how come Nikon and Canon's actual flagship cameras are infinitely superior to any Leica digital camera and hardly cost more. Not the same brains that are used perhaps?

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

GuyAF:

I made no claims about Leica digital cameras here. And agree that Canon and Nikon make extraordinary DSLR bodies.

The point stands that Leica and Zeiss lenses, when done well, are optically superior to lenses from Canon and Nikon.

I suspect that Nikon and Canon are under the false impression that their engineers understand colour. So would not seek out the necessary philosophy to better work with colour.

My guess is that few Leica engineers know these secrets either, and are instead working from a set of principles which are given to them without the reasoning behind the principles being provided.

Samsung NX lenses, when done well, are also stunningly better than Canon and Nikon lenses.

I don't think it an accident that Sigma's lenses so vastly improved after Sigma bought Foveon.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

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.

0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

HowaboutRAW - You are appealing to magical properties which do not exist. There is no 'special' understanding of color, and there are no 'color secrets' privy only to a few wizards in Germany and Samsung. Human perception of color is a science rooted in well understood properties of physics.

The differences in color imparted by modern lenses is several orders of magnitude less significant then the other influences in the chain, including the vast array of user preferences while converting and processing files.

Put another way: if you were handed unlabeled prints you couldn't tell us which lenses produced which prints based on color to save your life. That's not one of the properties that typically survives processing because it's so infinitesimally small.

Canon and Nikon make some of the finest lenses in the world. So does Leica. Which is better depends on the lenses in question because each has lenses the other has not matched yet.

0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

"The point stands that Leica and Zeiss lenses, when done well, are optically superior to lenses from Canon and Nikon."

Head on over to The Digital Picture and compare the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar T to the Canon 50mm f/1.2L. Or the Sigma 50 f/1.4. Or the Sigma 50 f/1.4 ART. (Ouch.) Or even the Canon 50 f/1.4. (Hmmm.) Or the Nikon 50 f/1.8 AF-S (oh wow). Or...wait, WAIT! I found a 50mm lens that the $725 Zeiss is superior to: the $120 Canon 50 f/1.8 "nifty fifty."

Not the $120 Canon EF-M 22mm f/2...that's better then the Zeiss to :-)

Stop pretending that label matters. Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, Fuji, Zeiss, Leica, Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, Rokinon...who am I missing?...oh yeah...Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung...all have examples of bad lenses, good lenses, and legendary lenses. A badge does not automatically mean that one is always or even usually better. Look at the individual lens in question, not the badge.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

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.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

"That 50mm Zeiss you mention above has beautiful colour but can be distractingly unsharp when wide open"

The 50 f/1.2L and Zeiss are both reviewed at photozone. Looking at the studio bokeh shot the color differences are minor, but if I had to choose the Canon is more pleasing. But the tiny difference in color is a) trivial to equalize in PS, and b) may not actually be caused by the lenses in the first place.

So...off to Flickr, where I opened two browser tabs and searched for each lens. Guess what I found? The shots with good lighting (and likely good processing) had beautiful color from both. The shots with crummy lighting had...flat colors from both.

The very first shot I saw for the Zeiss actually really impressed me. For a split second I thought "could he be right?" Then I scrolled down the page and saw a Canon shot of a very similar scene with pretty much identical lighting...and color.

So much for that.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

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.)

0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

"It's not really possible to make color judgments based on jpegs alone."

Didn't you say this earlier: "It's either there for expression or not, even in 8bit files."

Hmmm...

"...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.)"

LOL no. Just...no.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

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.

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Daniel Lee Taylor
By Daniel Lee Taylor (2 months ago)

HowaboutRAW - it is...painfully clear you have no idea what you're talking about. Have a nice life believing in magic colors and lenses that boost ISO.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Daniel:

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.

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Maklike Tier
By Maklike Tier (2 months ago)

Wait......so you put your eye to the viewfinder, and if you half-press the shutter button, nothing happens?

Whaaaa-t?

1 upvote
stevens37y
By stevens37y (2 months ago)

"solid block of aluminum"
They should use titanium. Looks and feels much better.

1 upvote
HuwW
By HuwW (2 months ago)

That would drive the pricing even higher. The machining costs would be horrendous

0 upvotes
Sir Corey of Deane
By Sir Corey of Deane (2 months ago)

I'd want solid gold for the price!

3 upvotes
BorisK1
By BorisK1 (2 months ago)

The *real* men of status would choose one machined from solid enriched uranium. Gives that extra unique touch.

It would have to be carried in a lead container, of course, but that's not a problem - they have people for this sort of thing.

2 upvotes
stevens37y
By stevens37y (2 months ago)

Actually gold and uranium are heavy like hell. But titanium is absolutely not unrealistic. Bicycle frames are also made of it.

0 upvotes
BorisK1
By BorisK1 (2 months ago)

A camera made from same material as *bicycles*? That's so pedestrian!
(badabum)

0 upvotes
Snikt228
By Snikt228 (2 months ago)

Yeah and be much heavier, I'll take aluminum

1 upvote
BorisK1
By BorisK1 (2 months ago)

But with enriched uranium, you'd get a much brighter flash!

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

stevens37y:

Titanium is hard to work and when smooth feels oily to the touch. Apple tried it for a laptop and failed.

0 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

Yeah Boris, I want a camera that'll have me positively glowing after years of use.

0 upvotes
stevens37y
By stevens37y (2 months ago)

"Titanium is hard to work"
I know and it would be a good point for this camera.
They could make a 10h video how it was made.
https://vimeo.com/92073118

0 upvotes
SeeRoy
By SeeRoy (2 months ago)

The camera market is simply evolving to resemble many other sectors of the consumer goods market - watches would be a typical example. The function of any given watch is almost identical to any other. An inexpensive quartz watch is likely to be more accurate than the most expensive chronometer-grade mechanical example from Rolex, Patek or Omega. No one questions this any more. These products are primarily signifiers and their function secondary.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (2 months ago)

The difference is that the mechanical watches are incredibly complex, whereas the Leica T is using commodity electronics Made in China wrapped up in a cool shell.

6 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

J:

What part of this camera is made in China?

SeeRoy,

The big draw of Leicas is usually the lenses.

0 upvotes
GuyAF
By GuyAF (2 months ago)

There's something else about mechical watches from Rolex, Omega and even more when talking about Patek or Breguet: the finish of these watches cannot be found on any of even the higher priced Seiko's (which by the way is a very fine brand I believe). The finish of the case, the bezel, the straps, the lugs, the clasp, the hands, the dial is exceptionally refined. In today's mechanical watchtmaking true state of the art and brand new technologies and newly invented materials are being used. Mechanical watches today are extreme 'high-mech'. When you look at one of these movements through a microscope you ask yourself: 'How is this even possible?'

1 upvote
SeeRoy
By SeeRoy (2 months ago)

Function. All watches are timepieces. They're only incidentally male jewellery (we're talking men's watches, in the main.) All the other differentiation (mechanical complexity) is a way of justifying high prices. I own a few old mechanical watches - back to the 1920s - and they're all usable but need periodic and expensive servicing. Practicality or better fitness for purpose isn't their justification.
The average new Rolex - to take a single typical example - is manufactured in huge numbers and depreciates by about 50% as the punter leaves the shop.
Cars, TVs, furniture, clothing all would have equally been examples of the decadence in the consumer goods marketplace. Essentially identical items differentiated by advertising in order to appeal to an artificially stimulated status anxiety.

0 upvotes
GeorgeP71
By GeorgeP71 (2 months ago)

The last Leica review was in 2009. The CONS outnumbervthevPros. And the review gave it ( Highly Recommended) ???

GET REAL

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (2 months ago)

Um, score isn't based on the number of pros and cons (eg. a few important pros outweigh a bunch of minor cons) and the Leica X1 only got a "Recommended" badge, not a "Highly Recommended"

2 upvotes
crisotunity
By crisotunity (2 months ago)

Flash X sync speed: 1/180 sec
If this camera is so well-machined, how come it doesn't get you to 1/250?
Beyond the aluminium, what exactly are you paying for? Where is the innovation?

Looking forward to a shoot-out between EOS M and this Leica :-)

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Focalplane shutters are hard to sync with higher flash speeds.

One pays for Leica because of the lenses.

For IQ, with even the not great Leica T23mm lens, this Leica will trash the Canon for image quality.

0 upvotes
crisotunity
By crisotunity (2 months ago)

I agree that focalplane shutters are hard to sync with higher flash speeds; which is why I expect a £1,350 camera to outdo my £100, 2nd hand GF1. Shame they spend all their budget on buffing the aluminium.
Leica "magic beans" lenses are extra and these days they can be fitted to almost any camera.

0 upvotes
AngryCorgi
By AngryCorgi (2 months ago)

"This, you can't help but feel, is the kind of camera that Apple might make, if it were so inclined."

Except that Apple wouldn't allow it to be all form and very little function. The GUI would be intelligent/intuitive and it would operate briskly. People would complain because the Apple version would have proprietary ports that needed special cables, but it wouldn't be a functional flop like this thing is.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Apple(Kodak) already made a digi cam in about 1994.

0 upvotes
AngryCorgi
By AngryCorgi (2 months ago)

Yes they did, but I believe the author of the article was referring to Apple in it's current state, following it's current design ethos.

0 upvotes
GeorgeP71
By GeorgeP71 (2 months ago)

Overpriced like all other Leicas

4 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

The S2 is a lot less expensive than the equivalent Hasselblad.

You'd have a point if you'd skipped the "all".

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
groucher
By groucher (2 months ago)

Should be a good caver's camera - a bit of grit, mud, water, bashed around in a tackle bag. Don't like the silly touch screen though - will it work with muddy hands?

0 upvotes
BorisK1
By BorisK1 (2 months ago)

From the manual:
"If you intended to take a shot and discovered that your hands were muddy, ask the enclosed butler to wipe them for you with dry, clean cloth."

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (2 months ago)

You can realize what the world of photography is coming to when a lens is described as a "peripheral". Once the heart of a system, lenses are now humbled down to the category of accessories. Oh well.

3 upvotes
electrophoto
By electrophoto (2 months ago)

My dentist still loves it. He says it goes well with his Porsche Cayenne GTS...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
corbus
By corbus (2 months ago)

My german podiatrist likes the camera. She says it's is level with here old Wolksvagen...

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
SeeRoy
By SeeRoy (2 months ago)

Also likely to prove very popular amongst proctologists and spelunkers.

1 upvote
JulesJ
By JulesJ (2 months ago)

Interesting, but the slow startup is not so great.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
electrophoto
By electrophoto (2 months ago)

No - you have clearly NO CLUE what you are talking about.
This is LEICA... there is a higher sense with EVERY thing the T does...
Slow startup? NO - it gives you the time to contemplate the shot you're about to take. It will make you a much more reflected photographer - taking you to the next level.

{Sarcasm off}

13 upvotes
stevens37y
By stevens37y (2 months ago)

It is not supposed to be switched on.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
GSD_ZA
By GSD_ZA (2 months ago)

But it looks great, doesn't it!

0 upvotes
Thorgrem
By Thorgrem (2 months ago)

I think it's a very nice camera. To bad it's way to expensive, and to bad the lenses are even more expensive. If Leica just made a unique m4/3 body with reasonable price and some good but expensive m4/3 lenses they would actually have a change of (financial) success.

1 upvote
electrophoto
By electrophoto (2 months ago)

And they could sell Leica Red-Dot stickers for 130$/piece so you can stick it on these low life m4/3 lenses and turn them into something special.

0 upvotes
badi
By badi (2 months ago)

Since there are already some panasonic-leica lenses (m4/3), it really makes sense what you say. And probably they would have made more money that way too :)

3 upvotes
Olymore
By Olymore (2 months ago)

No they wouldn't. Because then people would compare the Leica with the other cameras and lenses in the system and would question why they are paying four times as much for similar or marginally better IQ and poorer performance in other respects.
They want you to buy Leica lenses for their cameras, not Olympus or Panasonic and they don't want to dilute the brand.
In addition, Leicas have always been 3:2 aspect and the smaller sensor and aspect ratio crop that most Leica users would use would probably be a compromise too far as far as traditional users are concerned.

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (2 months ago)

I wonder if Leica will consider make matching toilet paper for this camera?

C

3 upvotes
Johannes Zander
By Johannes Zander (2 months ago)

I don't think you want red dots on your toilet paper.

13 upvotes
electrophoto
By electrophoto (2 months ago)

as long as it's not touch-screen operated and takes 5 seconds to unroll.

2 upvotes
Preamp
By Preamp (2 months ago)

Please use both sides. The advantage is on hand.

1 upvote
Clint009
By Clint009 (2 months ago)

I think you never handle a Leica in your life, a little education would be good for you.

0 upvotes
BorisK1
By BorisK1 (2 months ago)

Matching? As in, machined from solid aluminum? Yikes!

1 upvote
cgarrard
By cgarrard (2 months ago)

Would education be good for me? We'll education I've done. Cameras I've reviewed aplenty. My opinion however stands. I'd not buy this camera if you gave me the money.

I would buy the TP though.

Carl

0 upvotes
backayonder
By backayonder (2 months ago)

okay Leica if no one is going to buy this camera I will volunteer to try it out and report back

2 upvotes
BobYIL
By BobYIL (2 months ago)

Pay $1.850 to have privilege to live with the Leica quirks.

2 upvotes
0MitchAG
By 0MitchAG (2 months ago)

$1.85? It must be a Hasselblad at that price!

0 upvotes
Alexander Vienna
By Alexander Vienna (2 months ago)

I hope they correct the firmware!!!

1 upvote
electrophoto
By electrophoto (2 months ago)

I hope they fix LEICA

3 upvotes
grimescene
By grimescene (2 months ago)

Full touchscreen controls isn't exactly unique is it? Doesn't the Samsung NX2000 have only three buttons?

1 upvote
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

This is exactly it. Galaxy NX was a "bold" move by putting a full open source OS into a ILC. But that "boldness" was hampered by an almost exclusive requirement to use a touchscreen. Here Leica has that exclusive requirement to use a touchscreen, but nothing else about the camera does anything daring. It's just a NEX-3 wrapped in aluminum

1 upvote
cgarrard
By cgarrard (2 months ago)

Barney, you said it all when you said it.

-grinz-

Carl

0 upvotes
Photoman
By Photoman (2 months ago)

I suppose it's time for Leica to make one fail (does the M8 count as a fail?). Once the firmware is sorted it should be fine. Remember the Fuji X100 GUI was a dog when it was first released. Maybe the engineers drank to much at the New Leica Wetzlar openning!

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
tommy leong
By tommy leong (2 months ago)

hope it uses Sony mount ;)

would be awesome if they had a full silver lens to match

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (2 months ago)

It doesn't, it uses a new custom mount.

1 upvote
adegroot
By adegroot (2 months ago)

IQ is everything; and this camera ain't got it.

10 upvotes
badi
By badi (2 months ago)

I suppose that by IQ you understand pixel peeping. In this case, you're right, it's not up to the competition.

But if IQ means image quality - you know, pleasing image, nice in focus and out of focus areas, accurate color rendering, etc ... than is more difficult to make such statements :)

6 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

adegroot:

What raws are you looking at?

0 upvotes
adegroot
By adegroot (2 months ago)

http://dpnow.com/9487.html

0 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (2 months ago)

read...

NEXT!

0 upvotes
Vegasus
By Vegasus (2 months ago)

This is a nice product, all aluminium, nice design, high res screen, amazing buttons and dials but all of these back to the lens and sensor.

1 upvote
SammyToronto
By SammyToronto (2 months ago)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but this thing doesn't look beautiful to me. It may be built like a tank, but it looks like the average Sony/Samsung mirrorless camera and less attractive than the average Fuji/Olympus mirrorless camera.

Now, I'm not talking about performance, status, heritage or any of that, but purely on the aesthetic level this Leica underwhelms.

19 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (2 months ago)

Maybe it looks better in person, but in the picture it is ugly, especially with the EVF which does not match the silver body (and neither are the black lenses).

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
11 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

ST:

It be plenty good aesthetically--unless you don't like the industrial look.

0 upvotes
Drofnad
By Drofnad (2 months ago)

Amen, you said it. (That red badge makes reviewers go nuts. (Somehow, the ol' D-Lux4 was supposed to be soooo lovely vs. the LX3, though it lacked the functional element --a grip-- of the cheaper camera (one could pay even MORE to add the grip!).)

1 upvote
nicolasrao
By nicolasrao (2 months ago)

Absolutely! I do not find it good looking at all. Unless you like bricks.
The Olys look like Spitfires compared to this Me 109..which also had poor visibility and difficult slow speed handling... no wonder!

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (2 months ago)

Dro:

Nobody thought the D-Lux 4 so much more than the LX3.

0 upvotes
The Customer
By The Customer (2 months ago)

I've already read enough about the camera, on line, to know that if I could afford one, it would almost certainly be my daily shooter. Beautiful!

Exquisite lines and, from the footage I've seen about its creation, craftsmanship! I especially like the colourful body skins -- very stylish and high-tech while still conveying a playful air! I think that's what appeals to me the most about this camera, the feeling that it's been designed for people who want to fit precision, performance, and Leica's rich tradition in their pockets, while still being able to have fun. It's a camera that says, "Hello friend, let's play!"

2 upvotes
AlanG
By AlanG (2 months ago)

Those colorful skins may not have been so well thought through. This comment is copied from a Leica forum....

Looks are indeed great but what a disappointment in use. It not only is very hard to put on or to remove, but you have to do this every time to acces the SD card or USB port or to replace the battery. On top of that I did not figure out yet how to remove or put on the T snap without detaching the strap (left side)

So every time you need to charge the battery you need to do the following :
- search for the "pin" to detach the strap (where do you guys put the pin so that it is always with you and does not get lost )
- detach the strap left side
- detach the lens
- try to remove the T-snap (good luck to do that in less than half a minute)
- put the lens on or a body cap to prevent dust on the sensor while charging
- remove, recharge battery and replace
- detach lens again or body cap
- put the T snap back on
- attach the strap left side
- mount the lens

1 upvote
John Driggers
By John Driggers (2 months ago)

Methinks you replied seriously to a post meant as satire...at least I hope so.

1 upvote
GrahamJohn
By GrahamJohn (2 months ago)

I suspect the Leica executives will be chuckling away at the comments of the plebeian masses who see the Leica T as a piece of bling and not a serious instrument. In truth it IS a piece of jewellry for the likes of people who buy Rolex instead of Timex, or AudioNote instead of Yamaha. Leica doesn't cater to the masses nor cares that most can't afford it. There will be enough dedicated Leica lovers to keep the production line going and it will be around for a while. They are catering to a niche market and I wish them good fortune.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
1 upvote
SuperAttilio
By SuperAttilio (2 months ago)

I own a Leica Monochrom, Leica M6, a couple of Leica lenses, along with another 13 cameras and around 20 lenses: 35mm and medium format. I suspect I can afford several tens of "Leica T". Now, I find it extetically "ordinary" and - from a shooting experience point of view - a piece of junk. I was at the Leica Singapore event that introduced it to their customers. Shall we stop this paranoia that if you don't like a Leica it's just because you can't afford it? If a camera is crap, I just say it's crap: don't care about the price tag or how "status-symbol" it is. A Leica must provide outstanding shooting experience. That's all I care about. My camera of choice, at the moment, is my Sony A7r, which I use with M lenses and Nikkors. And the company that really excites me for what it's doing right now is Sony (A7s, 50mpx sensor on new Hasselblad CFV and new medium format fixed lens), not Leica.

Comment edited 6 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (2 months ago)

Both of you, well said.

0 upvotes
sixtiesphotographer
By sixtiesphotographer (2 months ago)

The Rolex/Timex comparison isn't quite right, at least for mechanical watch aficionados. People who pay gobs of thousands of dollars/Euros for a top tier mechanical watch do so because they love an all mechanical hand made watch - even more so if it has "complications" such as a (mechanical) perpetual calendar. Yes, a $15 quartz watch will do the job and be far, far more accurate, but it is the love of seeing just how well a mechanical watch can be made that interests horologists. I might also say that in this realm, Rolex is not even in the top tier -- maybe in the third tier of what is desirable.

Yes, there are many who will buy Rolex just for the name or as jewellery, but it has other desirable qualities as well. This Leica T does not.

1 upvote
cgarrard
By cgarrard (2 months ago)

All three of you, well said.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 2301
12345