Is Leica hitting notes only a dog can hear?

[KM-25]

the 24 1.4 and 35 1.4 are superb. All the longer Canon L glass is the best money can buy.

They better be, they are the largest primes in their class for 35mm. I have those two primes, they are exceptional indeed.

 

[RObert Budding]

I think the pattens have run out on the Nikon mount and that's why Zeiss is making lenses but WHY? Nikon glass is excellent. As to Canon the only lens that canon could gain from is a 19mm to replace the 20 that they have allready. the canon 20 is nothing to write home about but the 24 1.4 and 35 1.4 are superb. All the longer Canon L glass is the best money can buy.

Several manufactures make lenses in multiple mounts. It can be done.

 

[amateriat]

I think Leica has already been striking alliances that will better their chances for survival while (mostly) allowing them to do what they do best, as well as respond more quickly to conditions in the photogaphic market. The thing is, this can lead to unfortunate glitches (the M8's premature release - in my opinion, anyway - being one example). Solms obviously needs to calibrate their new product and business models, but I'm pretty confident they can and will.

But, for practical reasons, the closest I'll get to Leica stuff is a used M6, hopefully within the next year and a half.


- Barrett

 

[kevin m]

All of this has been said about Apple computer.

Apple products don't cost eight to ten times the price of a comparable Dell, do they? And anyone who's used, say, an iPod knows that Apple delivers loads of functionality and style for its price premium. Of which Leica product can that be said?

 

[kevin m]

I think Leica has already been striking alliances that will better their chances for survival ...

Credit where credit is due, I think Leica's collaboration with Panasoniic is producing some really nifty compact digital cameras. I went to the store expecting to walk out with a Fuji F30 and left with the Lumix FX-01 instead. (If they could stuff Fuji's excellent sensor in a Lumix body...man, would that be sweet!)

 

[Trius]

Please read what I said: For the price of a 50 summilux you could buy an excellent ZM 50 AND a hasselblad.

Yeah, Toby, I read that. No animosity, I just didn't see how it was relevant. He wasn't in the market for a Hasselblad. I don't think.

 

[HAnkg]

If you compare the Leica 50mm ASPH to any other lens for resolution, micro contrast and freedom from various types of errors and aberations the Leica will prove "best". The performance is not hype or brand snobbery (at least in the case of this lens). The problem is the law of diminishing returns. Once you reach a certain level of performance small improvements in quality result in geometric increases in cost. So to get 90% of the performance and be a little worse in the corners or wide open -you can cut the price of the lens by a factor of 4 or 5.

There are other issues. Some of the look that many find attractive in a lens signature are caused by errors and aberation. Correcting out those errors removes the look. Looking at the current line up if I were buying today (and I may be in the not to distant future) I think I would match the M8 up to a Zeiss 50 1.5 and 21 4.5. I prefer the smoother transitions and softer blur of the Zeiss lenses (Reid reviews had some useful comparisons, he prefered the Leica look). Resolution wise they are in the same league as Leica and price wise I think the 50 Sonnar is 1/3rd the cost. If its a close call the huge price differential really favors the Zeiss (which is not exactly cheap for a prime). If I were looking for a 35mm I'd go with the 4th gen Leica -trade a bit of performance for the sort of lens signature that makes images with the look that I prefer. So in summary I'd have to say that I think Leica's lens line has gotten above what the market, even the more rarified RF market can bear. They need to tune that price/performance equation.

 

[nightfly]

I wish the Apple comparison were apt. I would gladly pay slightly more for Leica glass the same way I'll pay more an Apple which has more functionality I can use, is made better and is more elegantly designed than a competing PC. However if my Powerbook cost say 5x more I'd make do with a PC.

If you figure you can buy a loaded Dell Laptop for $1500 and a nice MacBook Pro would cost you say $2500 (loaded with extra RAM etc) that's less than 2x. Take a CV 28/1.9 at $500 vs a 28mm Summicron at $3000 that's 6x. Sure the Summicron is a better lens in every regard and smaller but probably 2x better not 6x. At $1000 I'd buy one in a heartbeat.

But of course the expense of Apple's has always been overstated. People ususally compare a barebones PC to an Apple with a better video card, firewire, etc to point out how overpriced they are when if you spec'd up a PC to really compete the price differential isn't that great but of course that's another discsussion group jihad.

 

[Turtle]

But for £1500 (summilux 50 new) you could buy a hassie and a ZM prime and have the best of both worlds - and surely that's the point, you can buy an extra camera with the current price differentials, and not exactly a crappy one.

Its a fair point, but for those that want the best out of 35mm have only the 35mm route to go down. I would, and have taken the approach you speak of as it offer me what I want. I shoot a number of different formats, but if I needed the best (wide to std) fast primes that were the best wide open, you have little choice but Leica. Who else makes a 35 1.4 that is really sharp wide open and a 50 f1.0? Where like for likes appear, such as the 35 summicron and the 35 biogon, i get the distinct impression that the Leica is still sharper wide open at least on centre. I find the Leicaphiles who would rather obsess over their 35mm primes for lanscape work than learn to use a cheap 5x4 quite amusing as I know what I would use. One factor which has been mentioned here is that Leica can no longer claim to have the best build quality. There are a number of lenses which seem to be as well made if not better made. Its a real shame that this are has slipped leading some to get LHSA lenses in their retro mounts to avoid sticky stiff focus. This is nuts considering the price.

 

[KoNickon]

Wide Open

Wide Open

I shoot available light mostly. I would say 50%-75% of my photos are wide open, and I can never get enough aperture. I think your remarks are truer of snap shooters than serious photographers. (not disparaging snap shooters - it's just a different style.)

/Ira

You don't take pictures outdoors?

 

[Topdog1]

You don't take pictures outdoors?

Sure, at night. Who needs sunlight? :bang:

/Ira
P.S. I said 50%-75% available light, which still leaves alot of room for sun.

 

[Robert]

I think I would be happy enough using CV lenses. With normal hand held photos on HP5 I don't think I would notice any difference.

I think these Leica lenses would come into their own with the M8, tripod and large A3 and A3+ prints.

 

[kevin m]

Leica...performance is not hype or brand snobbery ...The problem is the law of diminishing returns. Once you reach a certain level of performance small improvements in quality result in geometric increases in cost. So to get 90% of the performance and be a little worse in the corners or wide open -you can cut the price of the lens by a factor of 4 or 5.

Hank, I've found the same thing. The 35mm Aspherical Summilux is better than the VC 40 Nokton. But only a little bit, and, for my purposes, only below f2.0. Not worth an 8X premium in my book. That's why mine is for sale.

The problem with the quest for lens 'perfection,' I think, is that it's simply a waste of time in most cases. Composition, lighting and subject matter are what make a photograph, and unless your lens is screwing something up (as in the case of Xray's Summilux flare example) then you're better off ignoring the whole subject.

It also bears mentioning that this 'quest for perfection,' no matter what the object of affection, is largely a malady that affects only us middle-aged guys with a bit of disposable income to spare. When I was in my twenties, my Canonet was good enough for me, and I was happy just to afford a fresh bulk roll of Tri-X.

 

[Topdog1]

Yes, a little spare cash works a wicked spell.

/Ira

 

[iml]

The problem with the quest for lens 'perfection,' I think, is that it's simply a waste of time in most cases. Composition, lighting and subject matter are what make a photograph, and unless your lens is screwing something up (as in the case of Xray's Summilux flare example) then you're better off ignoring the whole subject.

I agree with that, although different lenses (and different samples of the same lens) can have either small or large variation in the way they render. Which, I suppose, is why we all have a favourite lens or two - these are the lenses that tend to give us results which are more often than not close to what we want to achieve. The problem for Leica is that for many people older, secondhand Leica lenses give them exactly the result they want, and are easily serviceable, so shrinking the potential market for new, very expensive, lenses.

Having said that, Leica does have a great reputation for making quality lenses, and doing so for Canon and Nikon mounts would be a smart move, I reckon.

I'm very happy with a mixture of new and secondhand CV and Canon LTM lenses for now, the CV lenses especially are consistently excellent, although one day I would like to play with a Leica 35mm.

Ian

 

[Andrew3511]

OK, so a camera at the end of the day is a light-tight box with light-sensitive material behind a shutter, and a lens is a device for focussing an image onto that light-sensitive material. I'm purely an amateur and have only ever taken photographs for my own (and sometimes other people's ) pleasure. For me the Leica camera is like many other similar tools and gadgets. You know as a user when you have the definitive tool for the job in your hand whether that is a screwdriver or a violin bow. The optics deliver the goods reliably and are robust in heavy use, they inspire confidence. The cameras (including the M8, according to the reviews - I'm not fortunate enough to have handled let alone owned one) have the neccesary controls, properly placed and designed for use by photographers, with nothing extraneous or gimmicky. There is no better tool for taking photographs of people. If I wanted to take the definitive picture of the interior of a building I would use a large format camera with full movements. If I wanted to take pictures of motor sport I would use an autofocus SLR with a long lens. It does what it does better than anything else - if I had the money I would definitely buy the M8.

FWIW

 

[KoNickon]

I was partly teasing. Still, that's a high indoors percentage.

 

[Nachkebia]

50 summilux with 35 summilux and 75 summicron is what leica is all about today, everything else is a personal thing, which is not bad I mean who cares why you like leica? if you like it you like it, it is like religion, god is one, you have to have faith, to whom and why nobody asks you

p.s I love how radically stupid I can be sometimes

 

[Trius]

We love that too, Vlad!

 

[David Murphy]

I don't think investors will define success by how long a company has existed.

I don't know what some suit on Wall Street might think, but 158 years of making money is successful by my standards. They don't hang around that long by being in the red consistently.