Ive and Newson Leica Virgin One of a Kind design

[Godfrey]

Well, it's not a work of art and it's not a functional camera, so what sort of person IS going to buy it?

Cheers,

R.

Actually, it is a functional camera.
And it's a design statement by two celebrity designers, if not a work of art.

The sort of person who will bid for it is the sort of person who wishes to support the RED initiative in fighting AIDS.
You know, the sort of individual who is offering some of their wealth for the good of other human beings.

G

 

[Roger Hicks]

Actually, it is a functional camera.
And it's a design statement by two celebrity designers, if not a work of art.

The sort of person who will bid for it is the sort of person who wishes to support the RED initiative in fighting AIDS.
You know, the sort of individual who is offering some of their wealth for the good of other human beings.

G

Dear Godfrey,

If anyone wants to offer some of their wealth for the good of other human beings, what is stopping them? What has this camera to do with it? I carefully wrote "functional" as distinct from "functioning", because that control layout is nonsensical. Then again, what on earth does "design statement" mean? For that matter, just about everything described as "celebrity" is pretty shallow -- including this.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ZlatkoBatistich]

Actually, the look is something I thought a modernized M might look like...smoothed out, but same basic silhouette.

The only problem I see, from a shooter's perspective, is the inability to use the controls with gloves on or in the dark, somewhat limiting it's actual "professional usability." It'll work as a dilettante camera, but it'd be tough to be fast with it unless the light isn't changing and you shoot everything hyperfocally.

I agree. And I think it looks great! It is a modernized M, more Leica than Leica. It's the same camera, same philosophy, same simplicity, but updated to the present with new materials and lines. If it were a production model it would have raised controls (shutter, shutter speed and power), EVF port, hot shoe, movie button, etc. Add a new improved version of the M sensor and it would be a great success. It has absolutely no resemblance to the large, angular and unpopular M5.

 

[pieter]

Like it or hate it... I still think it is a great design statement that will help other people more than most of our own Leica camera's ever will.

Then again this is a tough crowd for any camera design that deviates from the M3 (or whatever favorite camera somebody has been polishing and fondling for decades).

 

[Roger Hicks]

Like it or hate it... I still think it is a great design statement that will help other people more than most of our own Leica camera's ever will.

Then again this is a tough crowd for any camera design that deviates from the M3 (or whatever favorite camera somebody has been polishing and fondling for decades).

How? And whom?

The very phrase "design statement" is vapid drivel for those obsessed by "celebrities" and Apple. Insofar as the two are distinguishable.

And what about those who USE their Leicas? You may polish and fondle yours, which is all the "design exercise" is good for. But those of use who use our cameras may want accessory shoes, usable speed dials, etc.

Cheers,

R.

 

[boomguy57]

Actually, the more I look at it, the more I like it. I'd have to see the shutter dial in person to gauge its "usability" but I like the recessed look. The weird leatherette-type stuff is a turn off but with some Aki asahi love that sucker would be raring to go. As David_Manning said, it's a modern update of a classic design. I could see elements of this in a future M.

Not sure what all the hate is about. I mean, I understand some of the vitriol, by some of the more pedantic members who are posting in this thread, as simply lashing out against the fact that it's not meant to be useful, cost a lot of money, insults their principles of photography or economic disparity or some such thing. I mean, we're all in the 1% here it's safe to assume.

 

[Scrambler]

There's another thread running at the moment about the oldest Leica on the forum - so far someone here would need to possess Oskar Barnack's personal prototype to beat the 1923 "null" series Leica.

There's been discussion, though, about upgrades, because quite a few of the "oldest" Leicas have been factory upgraded later, and some may have nothing but the chassis of the original camera.

This is like those earliest Leicas - usable but you'd be a mug.

This particular exercise is a unique example, a collectable. And created not to celebrate some cartoon character or historical society but to raise gobsmacking sums of money for health care in the poorest countries of the world. The purchaser gets a unique investment - it will always be worth "something" being what it is - plus bragging rights plus a warm inner glow that the majority of the money went to healthcare. If they didn't get the investment and the bragging rights they wouldn't donate the money.

Bono knows his way around this cause and around the target market. As a camera it's not perhaps as ergonomic as you might like (though if the shutter speed dial is a jog-dial type it just might be very ergonomic) but as a collectible, a bragging-rights object, it is unique. Hence advertising it, getting it discussed all over the net. It raises the bragging-rights value.

This has as much to do with practical photography as the read-and-white Steinway or the gold earpods. And in my eyes thats OK.

 

[Linkert]

It can't be a photo of the camera, right? Must be vector or some 3d rendering. Really hate product photos that strips everything that would give the viewer a sense of scale and texture.

What do I think..? Hm, can't tell due to bad product photos.. 😉

 

[Photo_Smith]

Yes they are made in house by Apple using Adobe Illustrator, textures over wireframes.

I would have thought most photographers could tell a vector image from a photo!

 

[Linkert]

Yes they are made in house by Apple using Adobe Illustrator, textures over wireframes.

I would have thought most photographers could tell a vector image from a photo!

Here we go, good one, great.. Really sweet..

 

[Photo_Smith]

How? And whom?

The very phrase "design statement" is vapid drivel for those obsessed by "celebrities" and Apple. Insofar as the two are distinguishable.

And what about those who USE their Leicas? You may polish and fondle yours, which is all the "design exercise" is good for. But those of use who use our cameras may want accessory shoes, usable speed dials, etc.

Cheers,

R.

Roger. It may be vapid drivel to you all it is to me is a one off designed by Ive to raise money for charity, it has nothing do with 'using cameras' more about raising money.
Its that simple.

 

[DominikDUK]

Good design is more than just good looks it's also creating a good user experience and usability. The looks of this Charity I-Leica are okay not great but okay, usability don't know since I've never handled the camera. But I admit even if it was for charity only, I would prefer a camera that is great to handle in short terms usable. Btw. Thank you mansio for posting the apple braun comparison

 

[Photo_Smith]

Dominik the usability is irrelevant for what is essentially a little piece of art, very few will handle the camera, probably no one will take a picture with it.

It is a 'one off' to go in the glass case of a design museum or a well heeled collector, the money is for charity.

Missing features, usability and benchmarks are meaningless in this case.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Here we go, good one, great.. Really sweet..

Eh? just stating the obvious, where is the contention in that?

 

[DominikDUK]

I tend to disagree if it's sold as a design piece as opposed to an high art piece usability matters. That said I prefer a good design to a lot of art but they do have different goals.

Furthermore if it was designed purely for charity the quality of the design would be defined by the amount of money the camera can generate for the charity and not by it looks and as you said it's usability. The design goal a money generator for charity

 

[pieter]

Think of it as a camera specifically designed to make money for a charity cause, instead of one designed to take pictures with.

In that sense I think it really is a great design and will do what it is designed for very well. It's actually a very practical camera in the sense that it does only that. There is no "let's design the best camera ever." or "let me design a better rangefinder camera than the M series" stuff going on.

It is designed to be a collector's piece to make loads of money and to get the internet abuzz with silly discussions about its design and maybe even bring some awareness to the cause. All these things it does in a very practical sense.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Think of it as a camera specifically designed to make money for a charity cause, instead of one designed to take pictures with.

In that sense I think it really is a great design and will do what it is designed for very well. It's actually a very practical camera in the sense that it does only that. There is no "let's design the best camera ever." or "let me design a better rangefinder camera than the M series" stuff going on.

It is designed to be a collector's piece to make loads of money and to get the internet abuzz with silly discussions about its design and maybe even bring some awareness to the cause. All these things it does in a very practical sense.

The best analysis yet, and indisputable. In other words, it's not really a camera at all. Hard to argue!

Cheers,

R.

 

[Photo_Smith]

The best analysis yet, and indisputable. In other words, it's not really a camera at all. Hard to argue!

Cheers,

R.

Which was what I stated, it was never supposed to be a production camera, just a design exercise to raise money!

How hard is it to understand?

 

[j j]

The best analysis yet, and indisputable. In other words, it's not really a camera at all. Hard to argue!

Cheers,

R.

Under the redesigned cosmetics it is a regular working Leica (or so I am told; I don't have one to hand). In other words, it really is a camera.

 

[DominikDUK]

I agree with j j it's a camera just like the mercury was a camera both look somewhat odd but they are cameras. The design goal was not to create a usable camera though but a collectors piece that helps charity.

A Rokkoko or Baroque Design with some serious curves would be a much bolder design statement than the sterile I-Look that is slowly getting boring imo.