Reading mode: Light Dark

Leica asks 95 euro to paint 6 dots???

Go to last post
Roland Karlsson said:
BobTrips said:
I'm not knocking the PanaLeica joint effort. I think that it would
be (has been?) a great move for Leica to take their lens
design/manufacturing skills to a company that really understands
electronics. Leica is not big enough to do it on their own.

Right now I'm thinking my next camera will be the Panasonic FZ30
and that's largely because of the excellent lens.
Click to expand...
The main strenghts of Panasonic are the good designs and the good
lenses.

The main weakness is sensor/interpolation quality.
Click to expand...
The two superzooms that I've been considering are the FZ30 and the Fuji S9000. I took Phil's Martini bottle test shot from each and had them printed out at 8" x 12". IMO the FZ30 is better.

Who would you say does a better job at small sensor interpolation?

(I'm guessing that the Leica digital firmware will come from Panasonic engineers. There will be some APS sensor advantage but algorithms is algorithms.)

--
bob

The Blind Pig Guild
A photo/travel club looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Blind-Pig/

Flowers of Asia
A photo club for appreciators of Asian flowers - looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Flowers-of--Asia/

Travel Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
 
I think you missed the point. Leica was never much about innovating, and Leica users were never about using the latest gear. Even though I really don't like Leica as a company, I think the M system still has lots of appeal. The lenses ARE excellent, and on the rangefinder system they still beat SLR lenses in terms of quality. That's a fact. The whole system is compact, durable, simple to use, and gives some spectacular results. That's why people use it - though I've met idiots who bought the most expensive gear on the market thinking it will make them great photographers. Is the price justified? Hell no. There were/are other rangefinder cameras and lenses as good as Leica at a fraction of the cost. Minolta CLE/CL and the Rokkor-Ms, Konica Hexar RF and the Hexanons, Contax G, Nikon made some great M-bayonet lenses too... A digital rangefinder will surely find it's market, but personnally, I don't understand it. The people using such cameras are surely not looking for the convenience of digital photography.
 
Member said:
We haven't seen the Leica digital 'M' yet, so we don't know how
well they will implement manual focus.
Click to expand...
How they will implement manual focus, is one area of which there is no doubt !

The M8 will look as close to a MP/M7/M6....M3 as they can make it. ( but not like the M5 ).

The rangefinder and viewfinder windows must be the same distance apart and the viewfinder window must be the same size as currently - for the goggled lenses and accessories to work.

For current Leica lens owners this camera will still be a cheaper option than buying a Canon 5D ( or Nikon D200 ) class camera and a couple of L lenses ( which probably will be optically inferior ).
Or at least it's worth waiting to see how it performs before jumping ship :-).
 
Ross said:
BobTrips said:
My complaint (using that word loosely - I really don't care all
that much) is that Leica takes the same camera (same quality
output) and sells it for more money. I want a return for my money
in terms of image quality, not personal image enhancement.

--
bob
Click to expand...
Bob,
I think the Leica versions of the Panasonic digicams should be
thought of as "limited editions". They have better warrantees, so
may have better QC and both of those have some value. So, if you
wouldn't buy a lizard skin MP, then why bother getting a Red Dot
digicam.....:-)
Click to expand...
You could be right. But how much would the typical merchant charge for an extended warranty.

Past that we're back to lifestyle statement aren't we? (It's clear that even Leica film cameras are not "investments".)

--
bob

The Blind Pig Guild
A photo/travel club looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Blind-Pig/

Flowers of Asia
A photo club for appreciators of Asian flowers - looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Flowers-of--Asia/

Travel Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
 
ywos said:
I think you missed the point. Leica was never much about
innovating, and Leica users were never about using the latest gear.
Click to expand...
ywos said:
....
Click to expand...
ywos said:
The people using such cameras
are surely not looking for the convenience of digital photography.
Click to expand...
I think they get the convenience, just not the range of ability that one can get with a reflex/EVF viewfinder.

--
bob

The Blind Pig Guild
A photo/travel club looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Blind-Pig/

Flowers of Asia
A photo club for appreciators of Asian flowers - looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Flowers-of--Asia/

Travel Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
 
BobTrips said:
You could be right. But how much would the typical merchant charge
for an extended warranty.

Past that we're back to lifestyle statement aren't we? (It's clear
that even Leica film cameras are not "investments".)
Click to expand...
Member said:
--
bob
Click to expand...
The Leica Passport warrantees on the M & R equipment are really broad 3 year things. Leica may have a PDF on their site. I have heard that the digicam warrantees are two years and I don't know how broad they are. I suspect merchants would charge more for coverage with fewer exceptions.

A note for one of the other messages: Jenoptik will be doing the image processing for the M8. The sensor is rumored to be a variation of the Kodak sensor used on their DMR. That is a KAF series FFT CCD with 6.8 micron photo sites (roughly double the area of the E-1's sensor of the same kind).

As for film Leicas as investments, I found the receipt for my M5 + 50/2 that I bought used in 1977 showing a total of $614. Current price would be $1498, but I wouldn't sell it, it would ruin my lifestyle statement if I did....LOL
--
Bob Ross
http://www.pbase.com/rossrtx
 
Member said:
My complaint (using that word loosely - I really don't care all
that much) is that Leica takes the same camera (same quality
output) and sells it for more money. I want a return for my money
in terms of image quality, not personal image enhancement.
Click to expand...
To some degree there is truth to the notion that if you believe you are getting more, then you are getting more. The world is filled with such products and people buy them all the time. I have no problem with that. I also tend to steer away from products that have the main extra benefit of selling you an impression or belief.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com
 
Ross said:
As for film Leicas as investments, I found the receipt for my M5 +
50/2 that I bought used in 1977 showing a total of $614. Current
price would be $1498, but I wouldn't sell it, it would ruin my
lifestyle statement if I did....LOL
Click to expand...
$677 adjusted for inflation would be $1992.42 in inflation adjusted dollars. So the M5 has been steadily decreasing in real value.

That is certainly better than most cameras. I think my $150 Minolta SRT-100 is worth less around or slightly less than $150 in 2005 dollars. So the Leica is losing value much more slowly than other cameras. But I don't think that makes it a particularly good invenstment - just a less costly expenditure. You've purchase nearly three decades of use for around $500. That's actually a pretty good deal.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com
 
Thanks
--
Way to go Sony! You didn't Blow it up!

Now, about those Zeiss Lenses..... Manual Focus Manual Focus Manual Focus.... AF in
Manual mode doesn't cut.
 
Ross said:
BobTrips said:
You could be right. But how much would the typical merchant charge
for an extended warranty.

Past that we're back to lifestyle statement aren't we? (It's clear
that even Leica film cameras are not "investments".)
Click to expand...
Ross said:
--
bob
Click to expand...
The Leica Passport warrantees on the M & R equipment are really
broad 3 year things. Leica may have a PDF on their site. I have
heard that the digicam warrantees are two years and I don't know
how broad they are. I suspect merchants would charge more for
coverage with fewer exceptions.
Click to expand...
Thing is with electronics, which digital cameras are, failure rates are best described as a 'bathtub' curve. Most failures happen at the very earlier part of ownership, fall to very infrequent, and then rise toward the end of product life. If you have a warrenty that gets you through the early phase of ownership you're unlikely to need anything more.

And with digital cameras we're still in a 'few years' phase. While innovation seems to be slowing it's still somewhat unlikely that today's 30D/200D/whatever will be a highly valued device five years from now.

And I'm going to bet that will hold for digital Leicas as well.

So get a warranty that gets you through the critical early period. Save the difference and put it toward the next camera.
Ross said:
As for film Leicas as investments, I found the receipt for my M5 +
50/2 that I bought used in 1977 showing a total of $614. Current
price would be $1498, but I wouldn't sell it, it would ruin my
lifestyle statement if I did....LOL
Click to expand...
OK, that's about a 3% return on your 'investment. Given that inflation has probably been in the range of 6% over that period you can get half your money back if you sell.

Had you put your $614 in a decent bond or treasury device at 6% you would now have around $3330. (That's what your camera sold for in today's dollars.)

And had you put your money in a non-managed index stock fund you might have experienced a 10% return. Your $614 would now be around $9740.

I'd call the purchase of your Leica a "purchase". Hopefully you got a lot of use and enjoyment from the camera and lenses. But the only kind of 'investment' that we could call it would be a 'bad investment'.

And there's nothing wrong with spending ones money on a camera if that floats ones boat. By 1977 I had spent a lot more than $614 on cameras.

(And after 1977 I spent a lot, lot more on boats. ;o)

--
bob

The Blind Pig Guild
A photo/travel club looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Blind-Pig/

Flowers of Asia
A photo club for appreciators of Asian flowers - looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Flowers-of--Asia/

Travel Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
 
can't be hard, soon the net will even have the charts and tutorials for it I am sure.
 
Jay Turberville said:
Jay Turberville said:
My complaint (using that word loosely - I really don't care all
that much) is that Leica takes the same camera (same quality
output) and sells it for more money. I want a return for my money
in terms of image quality, not personal image enhancement.
Click to expand...
To some degree there is truth to the notion that if you believe you
are getting more, then you are getting more. The world is filled
with such products and people buy them all the time. I have no
problem with that. I also tend to steer away from products that
have the main extra benefit of selling you an impression or belief.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. But there is (probably) a justifiable that without Leica the Panasonic cameras would not be the way they are - contrary to what people would like to think of Japanese design.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonf3ver2/htmls/index.htm

http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonf4/htmls/index.htm

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/NikonF5/background/index.htm

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/contax/contaxrts/index.htm

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/contax/contaxrts2/index.htm

Contrary to popular belief the Japanese industrial giants of Mitsubishi (Nikon), Kyocera (Yashica / Contax) and Matsushita (Panasonic) are very good at production...but not exceptionally good designers of ergonomics.

Nikon had to go to Giugiaro Design for (definitely) the F3, (most probably) the F4 and (most definitely again) the F5. Kyocera had to go to Porsche Design for the Contax brand (and Zeiss for a cooperation in optics).

The Europeans houses are known - even by the Japanese, as proof in the accreditation of the designs - for wonderful ergonomics and visually appealling camera products.

The Panasonics would be very nice cameras but they, probably, would not be as nice to use without Leica's input - no manual focus rings, poorly placed controls...

Doubt it? Notice where the shutter release is on the FZ1/ FZ2 / FZ3 / FZ10 / FZ20 versus where they are now on the FZ4 / FZ5 / FZ30.

Also note the "design" of the LC5 / LC20 / LC40 versus FX9 / LZ5 / LX1...

all after Leica's intial cooperative partnership - with the FX5 & LC1.

Take a look at that history chart, folks!

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/

There's Leica influence there? NO!! What could possibly make anyone say that?!

Japanese industial before...European sleek (changed over the course of the generations) later.

Panasonic and Leica ain't no fools. Panasonic gets Leica's design in terms of chic, chachet and name. Leica gets increased market exposure and a shared product line without the investment in the production facilities.

Without Panasonic there would be no Leica digital...but without Leica, Panasonic would not be so attractive in the marketplace.
 
BobTrips said:
The two superzooms that I've been considering are the FZ30 and the
Fuji S9000. I took Phil's Martini bottle test shot from each and
had them printed out at 8" x 12". IMO the FZ30 is better.

Who would you say does a better job at small sensor interpolation?
Click to expand...
The FZ cameras are very good cameras - in all respects IMHO.

But - Panasonic/Leica has made mistakes with some of the cameras, using inferior sensor/interpolation technique. One example is the Digilux 1. The sensor results from this camera was not state of the art when it was introduced.

Roland
 
AMomcil said:
I wolud really like to have good old Leica, strong as it used to
be, an ethalon of quality and a target for my dreams. But it is not
like that anymore. Not even close.
Click to expand...
I think this is the essense of it all.

The main reason for the Leica cameras was (at last in the late part of the previous millenium) a dream of durability and quality. The cameras was very expensiv, made out of one piece of brass and extremely high quality. They also looked very good.

So - using the camera you felt strong and vital and a real photographer. It also earned you some respect - "he is using a Leica you know".

And in this wonder of a camera you could put any 35 mm film - you yourself choose the quality of that medium.

Digital photography changed all that. Now we are in the electronics era. To be competitive you need the lowest noise, the most pixels and the highest ISO rating. And you need firmware and software and ...

If there was a standard for the digital sensor and it would have been possible to exchange the sensor easily - then Leica could just have made a super duper expensive container for sensors - and then sold that. Something made out of brass with a technical wonder of coupled range meter.

But - that is not the case. So Leica must make a whole camera including sensor. And that is a bad choice. The sensor will grow old in just no time at all. So - the life span of the camera is just some few years before you want a new one.

And that is totally alien to Leica. So - Leica dies - at least the old Leica.

Roland
 
Roland Karlsson said:
And that is totally alien to Leica. So - Leica dies - at least the
old Leica.

Roland
Click to expand...
Not everyone shoots the same way. Some of us still enjoy shooting with a RF camera and like the results we get from film. Leica is not dead yet.

Bill
 
Jay Turberville said:
Jay Turberville said:
Without Panasonic there would be no Leica digital...but without
Leica, Panasonic would not be so attractive in the marketplace.
Click to expand...
All well and good, but if in the end the Leica and the Panasonic
are just rebadged versions of each other, then the extra Leica
benefit is generated mostly by belief.
Click to expand...
If we're speaking of the same camera with a Leica badge, then I agree.

But if we're talking about the PanaLeica product then we don't know what Leica might have contributed to the product, especially lens, design.

And knowing that Leica might have played a roll with the Panasonic lens brings a bit more interest to their cameras.

--
bob

The Blind Pig Guild
A photo/travel club looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Blind-Pig/

Flowers of Asia
A photo club for appreciators of Asian flowers - looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Flowers-of--Asia/

Travel Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
 
Leicas are not the province of those who whine about price.

But I am surprised yet again by a person who believes that the price of something should be a tiny bit higher than the direct cost of the good or service.

YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY CONCEPT OF WHAT IT TAKES TO RUN A BUSINESS!!!!!

Do you work for three dollars a day over the price of your lunch?

Leica just emerged from a near death experience and you are telling them to charge less?

They have never been about volume. Their problem stems from a variety of issues from management to changing markets and their inability/fear of raising prices to cover costs. If they take in less than they spend they will go bust.

Remember, Leica is a photo Rolex. As such they have to build the brand in the same way. Status, perceived quality and exclusivity. Yeah it can take a great photo but so does the Rebel XT. They have to focus on building/re-building that image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top