Leica X1 = $2000 USD

Jogger · Sep 9, 2009

http://www.popflash.com/index.php?p=product&id=4316&parent=0

... also, M9 = $7000. Im not sure who would go for that Leica X1 instead of m43.

tameside · Sep 9, 2009

No video lol , Leica your having a laugh. Like the lenses for the Panasonic though.

Chez Wimpy · Sep 9, 2009

I thought $1500 ~ $2000 at the "nobody will buy me" end... but Leica never disappoints ;-)

Jogger said:
... also, M9 = $7000.

If I had (could afford!) a collection of M-glass, I suppose I should be happy to finally have a FF solution - at any price!

Jogger said:
Im not sure who would go for that Leica X1 instead of m43.

Spend some time on these forums, and you will see

--
-CW

よしよし、今日も生きのいい魂が手に入ったな

Godfrey · Sep 9, 2009

A bit more than I'd expected (around $1400 or so is what I'd thought).

Who'll buy it? People for whom it is an attractive camera that does the job they want, and who can afford it, I would bet. Not everyone looks at cameras purely from a matter of features over price, you know.

$7000 for the M9 is lower than I thought it might be. That's almost in the realm of realizable fantasy money. ;-)
--
Godfrey
http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

mpgxsvcd · Sep 9, 2009

Honestly, I really don’t get these cameras. Are they serious about those prices? What do these cameras do that an m4/3 can’t?

Who is the target audience for these cameras? They look more like museum pieces than actual useful devices to me.

--
ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads

Franka T.L. · Sep 9, 2009

we must applaud Leica for doing one, but Leica is really not the innovator it want itself be known. We must instead thank Ricoh for that; the original Ricoh GR-D really usher in serious photographic compacts and of course the Gr-D is also pretty pocketable.

Together with the Panasonic LX3 ( the LX and LX2 preceeding it is IMHO not good enough ), the Micro 4/3, Sigma's DP series and now the X1, these Mfr had establish between the DC and the DSLR some viable alternative. Not that others had been not providing, but usually they are either too big and bulky ( Sony R1 or Fuji S200EXR type, might just get a decent DSLR ) or too hell bend on feature/performance ( Canon G series ).

What these guys did is to marry decent image quality, relative compact build and also give their own iteration of how it can be done. Opening up possibilities. That to me is their biggest contribution to the market and consumers. No as of now none really can claim such fame and capability as old day Ricoh GR-1 or Contax T3 ( they image just as good and in many case better than their SLR brothers ), but they do at least edge us better to having the varieties

the funny thing is Leica take all that effor to furnish the X1 ( good for them Ok ) but yet stubbornly refuse to furnish a more down to earth common sense M series entry model that is affordable ( say 1600.00 body only ) and would introduce more into the M hold and certainly be contributing to Leica's long term health ... I doubt the M9 can really expand the business that much. Especially after the Sony A850. To be fair, the M form factor these days can no longer claim to be compact so the weight / bulk advanatage is only minimal ..
--

Franka -

pedroboe100 · Sep 9, 2009

mpgxsvcd said:
Honestly, I really don’t get these cameras. Are they serious about those prices? What do these cameras do that an m4/3 can’t?

Made in Germany. They have a niche.

mpgxsvcd said:
Who is the target audience for these cameras? They look more like museum pieces than actual useful devices to me.

Lawyers on vacation and some journalist/war correspondets?

mpgxsvcd said:
--
ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads

Harold66 · Sep 9, 2009

mpgxsvcd said:
Honestly, I really don’t get these cameras. Are they serious about those prices? What do these cameras do that an m4/3 can’t?

Who is the target audience for these cameras? They look more like museum pieces than actual useful devices to me.

Well

I dare to say that the price of a M would never feel right to anyone who has not owned one M before

I actually think that the M9 price is still reasonable ( even If I can't afford one)
the X1 however is going to have a harder time .
I am sure they will sell pretty well though
Harold
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

Clarkey · Sep 9, 2009

Exactly what is the mark up on a thing that's hand made? Take that mark up, add another 25%, and I think you've got the idea behind Leicas rediculous pricing model.

I may have missed the point, but forget the x1, that M9 has no better noise handling than a gh1, and I'll bet it has little gain in resolution. Given that m4/3rds cams are completly capable of shooting leica glass I see no reason why any person in their right mind would waste their money on these bodies, when a proper investment in great glass would go that much further.

Seriously Leica what was the point.
--
W.L. Clark Swimm
http://www.clarkswimm.com

Rriley · Sep 9, 2009

Clarkey said:
Exactly what is the mark up on a thing that's hand made?

about 500%
add low volume components, about 500%

Clarkey said:
Take that mark up, add another 25%, and I think you've got the idea behind Leicas rediculous pricing model.

I may have missed the point,

well you started out with something i can agree to

Clarkey said:
but forget the x1, that M9 has no better noise handling than a gh1, and I'll bet it has little gain in resolution. Given that m4/3rds cams are completly capable of shooting leica glass I see no reason why any person in their right mind would waste their money on these bodies, when a proper investment in great glass would go that much further.

M lenses dont shoot the same on mFT, as they do on an M body
--
ʎǝlıɹ

plɹoʍ ǝɥʇ ɟo doʇ uo ǝɹɐ ǝʍ 'ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ uı

TEBnewyork · Sep 9, 2009

Well, I own all three m4/3 bodies and have the GF1 on order. If the X1 were m4/3 and $2000 body only I would have gone for it. Why:

Very simple the user interface looks to be like that of an M8 camera. Very pared back. Very utilitarian.

I bet it feels really good in the hand.

Actually the sample shots on the M9 preview make me lust after one....I still have some of my lenses

.
--
terry
http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/

bg2b · Sep 9, 2009

Smaller and lighter than GF1/E-P1, bigger sensor, stabilized, supposedly fast AF, says "Leica". I suspect they'll sell a reasonable number of them.

Memerang · Sep 9, 2009

The viewfinder suspiciously looks like the VF-1.....

Also, is it me or the X1 seems like just a slightly bigger LX3 with APS-C sensor?

Even the dpreview side by side you can see the similarity to the D-Lux 3/LX3 body shape.

Not saying that its a bad thing though....

Bryan Biggers · Sep 9, 2009

I thought that it would be more like $3000 with the viewfinder and being a Leica and everything.

Harold66 · Sep 9, 2009

Clarkey said:
Exactly what is the mark up on a thing that's hand made? Take that mark up, add another 25%, and I think you've got the idea behind Leicas rediculous pricing model.

you must have some inside information

Clarkey said:
I may have missed the point, but forget the x1, that M9 has no better noise handling than a gh1, and I'll bet it has little gain in resolution.

Oh REALLY ? and you would know that I suppose from pixel peeping at some web posted pics . ridiculous....

Given that m4/3rds cams are completly capable of shooting leica glass I see no reason why any person in their right mind would waste their money on these bodies,

this argument does not mean much. you can say about the X1 but the M9 is in another league altogether
--Harold
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

mattmtl · Sep 9, 2009

Memerang said:
Also, is it me or the X1 seems like just a slightly bigger LX3 with APS-C sensor?

Even the dpreview side by side you can see the similarity to the D-Lux 3/LX3 body shape.

I'd say any resemblance is due to their shared heritage/inspiration in classic Leica styling, not the X1 being an extension of the D-Lux/LX.

If anything, the X1 is a shrunken and stripped down M, not a slightly bigger LX3.

And because of that sensor, assuming they got the other electronics right the X1 should blow the LX3 out of the water IQ-wise.

PeterLeyssens · Sep 9, 2009

Hi,

mpgxsvcd said:
Honestly, I really don’t get these cameras. Are they serious about those prices? What do these cameras do that an m4/3 can’t?

As the person you were replying to wrote:

"Not everyone looks at cameras purely from a matter of features over price, you know."

mpgxsvcd said:
Who is the target audience for these cameras? They look more like museum pieces than actual useful devices to me.

Because they're limited ? In 1999 or 2000, I paid about €1000 for a fixed lens 28/f3.5 Minolta TC-1. Even worse, it had only 4 available f-stops, too. €1000 back then is about €2000 now. Probably, the X1 will be cheaper in Europe.

What did the TC-1 have that set it apart ? Uncompromising usability and image quality. Your question is a bit like asking: why do people buy a €600 GR-D iii if they can get a big zoom compact for €200 ? Of course, to the owners of the GR-D iii, that's not the whole story. A fixed lens compact with incredible ergonomics and image quality is much more fun, and the fixed lens is part of exactly that fun: crafting photos, thinking about how to approach a subject, and working with a great piece of engineering.

Peter.

--
gallery at http://picasaweb.google.com/peterleyssens

PeterLeyssens · Sep 9, 2009

Hi,

Memerang said:
The viewfinder suspiciously looks like the VF-1.....

Well, yes, because it's a fairly standard design for viewfinders that fit into the hot shoe.

Memerang said:
Also, is it me or the X1 seems like just a slightly bigger LX3 with APS-C sensor?

Even the dpreview side by side you can see the similarity to the D-Lux 3/LX3 body shape.

Well, yes, because there's not too many ways to design a camera. It's a body without a grip with a slightly protruding grip. Very basic.

I like it !

Peter.

--
gallery at http://picasaweb.google.com/peterleyssens

rhlpetrus · Sep 9, 2009

Who in their better judgement would pay 2,000USD for such a camera? Just the Leica fanatics with deep pockets. I bet any of the

Maybe all the m43 also will have better performance, certainly the Pannys re AF and versatility.
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

rhlpetrus · Sep 9, 2009

Franka T.L. said:
the funny thing is Leica take all that effor to furnish the X1 ( good for them Ok ) but yet stubbornly refuse to furnish a more down to earth common sense M series entry model that is affordable ( say 1600.00 body only ) and would introduce more into the M hold and certainly be contributing to Leica's long term health ... I doubt the M9 can really expand the business that much. Especially after the Sony A850. To be fair, the M form factor these days can no longer claim to be compact so the weight / bulk advanatage is only minimal ..
--

Good point, no company now can live w/o a reasonable upgrade path. Leica thinks one starts with canon, Nikons, Pannys and will eventually see the light and get a 2,000USD fixed lens camera? Or a 7,000USD metal box w/o AF? With lenses that cost another 3K just to start shooting?

I think they like to be seen as the "martyrs" of the digital age. I loved my M3+35mm Summicron while film was viable, but will never spend 7,000USD on a M9 in order to use that lens again.
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

Leica X1 = $2000 USD

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts