Say it Isn't So!!!!

Started Jan 4, 2012 | Discussions thread
VladimirV Senior Member • Posts: 2,659
Re: It isn't so

Thanks for your reply, this is the kind of conversation I would like to have regarding the Leica cameras.

We might or might not agree but I appreciate you taking the time to reply to my post.

Irakly Shanidze wrote:

it is priced fully in accordance with laws of economics. any company is entitled to making the maximum amount of legitimate profit. leica prices may seem unreasonable to you, but as long as there is demand, there is no reason for leica to subsidize desires of those who cannot afford what they want.

I just wonder if the demand there is gives Leica enough money and if they would not be much better off lowering the price slightly to cater to a higher market. I don't think their strategy to re-badge Panasonic cameras to cater for a lower priced market makes sense or shows Leica for the innovative company they are believed to be.

I did. I am a professional photographer. Staying current with technology is a part of my job. As to your ISO remark, I was referring to quantity of light, not to properties of a camera. With Leica I rarely have to go above ISO1250 because there is no need.

Can you elaborate on why there is no need? I am not sure I understand?

The quantity of light is based on the lens but you can mount the very same lenses on the GXR and NEX cameras so you will not only get the same amount if light at ISO 1250 but you can go to ISO 3200 or 12800 and so on with these cameras.

Are you sure that electronically driven lenses focus at a working aperture, on wide open?

Electronic lenses focus at whatever aperture the firmware tells them but I was talking about using legacy and especially M lenses which you use at working aperture and have a TTL view and accurate DOF and histogram at any given time.

You should try out a GXR Mount A12 or NEX-5n with a M lens mounted on it, it's a different experience than what you would get on the camera with a electronic lens or on a rangefinder camera. If nothing else it will at least be an interesting test.

Fuji has shown that it is possible at the expense of the optical rangefinder. The company, which merges the two, wins.

While I don't think Fuji has managed to get the firmware side of their cameras right their hybrid EVF/OVF shows what Leica should have developed for the M9. The X100 hybrid viewfinder is in my opinion the future of rangefinders and this is what Leica should do. Leica was already late to develop the first digital rangefinder and Epson not only did it first but also did it better compared to Leica's first try with the M8.

I still am at loss with respect to in what they are better. Believe me, I am not stubborn. I am practical. I've shot with pretty much all professional systems in existence and doing so for more than twenty years, I came to what works the best for me. Do you think I spend money on Leica because I have no other needs and temptations?

Trust me, I don't want you to question your choice of equipment, there is a lot more to equipment and it is afterall very subjective. What I say is that you should look at the GXR Mount A12 and Sony NEX but also at the Fuji X100 to see what can be done with modern technology and how much more useful or better a Leica M9 would be if it had incorporated only half of the things these cameras have.

Being able to focus in almost complete darkness, have a 100% accurate viewfinder with realtime histogram and DOF preview, being free from needing rangefinder coupling on lenses, have a smaller camera with very good high ISO and so on is not to be underestimated. Sure, the GXR Mount or NEX might not be officially classified as professional systems but this does not mean they are not actually better or as good as professional systems.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow