Leica T "accidentally revealed"...

I think the price is decent, and it's got an interesting set of features, like the wifi. The clip on EVF always reeks of an ugly afterthought though and makes you think of 'compromise' rather than a fully though out design.

Nice price, not bad looking, and an interesting new camera from a company like Leica, but ultimately, no way I'd buy.

I think it's a good price, and a good, distinct camera from the M series, but I'd rather have a DSLR, weather sealing, optical finder, full frame, etc.
 
Kwesi said:
There seems to be a lot of over thinking the Leica T. It wasn't designed for the RFFer with M lenses. It was designed for the well heeled amateur who is comfortable holding a camera at arms length and requires seamless connectivity to social media for photo uploads. There are many, many people who fit that demographic to a T.
For the rest of us there are 3 current digital full frame M bodies to choose from. For those of us who want an M body but price is a little out of reach, why not just save a little longer?
Sorry if this seems like a rant but there just seems to be too much whining over what Leica is not "not doing"
Click to expand...
Quite. I sometimes wonder why Dr. Kaufmann doesn't just hand over the management of Leica to RFF, as there are clearly so many people here who know more about how to run the company than he does.

Cheers,

R.
 
Aristophanes said:
…Leica was never a value brand save for their outstanding durability; a rugged, enduring photographic tool. The T looks like it was made out of aluminum block so they could make a marketing video showing it made out of an aluminum block. This is engineered marketing wrapped around electronics that are as average as a sub-$700 Nikon.
Click to expand...

The circular motion. Rub it. (By hand. For 45 minutes.)

Seriously -- terrific post.
 
Well, I want one and this is probably the camera that will convert me back to digital, after selling my 5D in 2006.

I spend thousands on good glass for the 5D, lots of red L primes so I don't have a problem paying for the Leica glass for the T.
 
It's the lens that matter for me and Leica are one of the best here. I can't afford it, but i can't deny it :) It may be not the camera we are all hoping for, and the price is high, and the design is imo nothing special - a solid one piece of ... is that what makes the picture ? A solid block of aluminum ? I don't think so. And whatever lens comes out for this range will be mighty expensive compared to the rest, but that's Leica today and it seems they are doing good.
 
That thing looks so much like a NEX that I think Sony has a god chance to take them to court for copyricht infringement.
 
I'm still happy with 400 ISO film and slower, and with the M2 and even the Leica II. So the M9 is up to date enough and fast enough for me. I bought it when I realized that a new X-Pro 1 would see me needing to acquire a slew of new lenses and very likely an M9 as well anyway at some point. The M9-P was therefore a wife-friendly (and supported) tactical blocking manouevre which has largely worked for two years, so far. Except that once I had read about the new M10/M/Type 240, its dimensions, interface including menus etc, and Steve Huff's opinion on its B&W output equalling the Monochrom's, I knew I wouldn't want it and I bought the Monochrom. But that's it. Finished. I can live with my Barnack 80 year old technology, my film M 50 year old technology and my M digital 5 year old technology.

The new T looks clever but it isn't for someone as invested in Leica as I am already. If it evolves to a full frame digital back for my lenses and my M9 is defunct in some years time then maybe, but I don't think I am Leica's core market, as many have pointed out.
 
Ming Thein has an interesting review of the T, with some great product shots and sample photos, here. He states it's "the first generation of a paradigm shift in the way we control and interact with our cameras," refering to the haptics of camera interaction (what we at RFF might call the 'science of fondling'.)

~Joe
 
JoeV said:
Ming Thein has an interesting review of the T, with some great product shots and sample photos, here. He states it's "the first generation of a paradigm shift in the way we control and interact with our cameras," refering to the haptics of camera interaction (what we at RFF might call the 'science of fondling'.)
Click to expand...
I'm quite disappointed (though neither surprised nor discouraged) by the reaction to this camera and new camera system here and elsewhere.

While Leica-pricey (which seems somewhat unavoidable, at least to me) my long-distance impression is that the T-system appears to have a fair dose of Leica-goodness, in the non-ridiculous sense. Mostly (from what I've seen in the reviews) in the lenses but also - and perhaps more importantly - in the combined touch-screen and customised-control-wheel interface for operating the camera. All the reviewers I've read seem to think that is well done and easy to use, for those familiar with smartphone touchscreen user interfaces, while allowing for physical controls as well.

While that is not how I want to interact with a camera, I can see that there could easily be a (well heeled) market for people who want a camera that isn't everyone else's smartphone, is a nice piece of product design, is capable of providing good-to-excellent photographic results and yet is easy to understand and use, immediately, for those with little or no technical photography knowledge.

I see the EVF as a nod to the more enthusiast end of the market, and the M-to-T adapter as (a) a sop to those who can't conceive of a non-M leica; and (b) a source of street-cred-based marketing (for whatever that's worth, which is little enough) while also allowing the hope of capturing sales from a few die-hards.

I am not the person this camera is being marketed to. (If I am, Leica needs a new marketing department.) I imagine many at RFF don't fit that market segment either. Honestly, if one of these things - fully featured in it's multi-thousand-dollar glory - dropped from the sky, right into my lap, I'd admire it then play with it and then never use it again. If I were allowed to sell it, or give it away, I would. If not, it would make an interesting and even attractive paperweight. Not because it's a bad camera, but because I have other cameras which I'd prefer to use, and adding another interesting camera to my collection of cameras I'm interested in, once or twice, yet seldom or never use afterwards, seems somewhat more indulgent for something that costs $$thousands than one that costs $$10s.

But that's me. I can see a pretty reasonable number of Leica Ts being sold, and even a number of buyers actually using them to take photos. I won't be one of those people, and that's OK. It doesn't offend me that the camera exists. It doesn't offend me that Leica is making a camera I don't want. I hope a good many people do want this camera and do use it. Because that will make them happy. It will bring happine$$ to Leica, and that might mean that Leica will bring out the occasional product I want (but can't afford). Eventually the products I want might become obsolete, and then I might buy one.

And that might make me happy, if that ever comes to pass.

...Mike
 
They are just a sensor surrounded by a small computer that lets you see what a software programmer wants you to see.
Click to expand...
This made me laugh. It is so true, but we seem to focus on the esthetic of the whole thing.
 
Lss said:
I thought the Leica X and Leica T sensors are from Sony. Where do they get them from?
Click to expand...

I should have clarified FF sensor. Sony has not open marketed nor commoditized its FF production to date. Maybe with medium format sensors coming from Sony now we'll see that change.

I suspect the Leica T sensor is from Cmosis in Belgium, like the M 240. We'll have to see.
 
semilog said:
Just like an early-1990s mountain bike part. It woulda been state-of-the-art, a generation ago.
Click to expand...

How about the optics? A generation old??

The form factor is recognizable for a reason.
When you walk into a Leica store/boutique today, what'a see? Their optics are certainly state of the art if they don't actually define the art of optic design.
The Leica t needs to be on the shelves of all their popular stores. Its an impulse buy. (no not me the customer)
Me? Just out of curiosity, I'm looking forward to viewing more of the images from this thing.
 
Aristophanes said:
I should have clarified FF sensor. Sony has not open marketed nor commoditized its FF production to date. Maybe with medium format sensors coming from Sony now we'll see that change.

I suspect the Leica T sensor is from Cmosis in Belgium, like the M 240. We'll have to see.
Click to expand...

I believe nikon FF sensors are made by Sony
 
DougFord said:
How about the optics? A generation old??

Their optics are certainly state of the art if they don't actually define the art of optic design.
Click to expand...

You must be thinking of Zeiss and Nikon — the companies that design and manufacture steppers.

Camera lenses are pretty run-of-the-mill optical design problems, and given the Leica price point, any number of firms (Leica, Zeiss, Olympus, Nikon, Canon, Fujinon, Cook, Sigma, Cosina, etc., etc.) can and do produce optics every bit as good as those coming out of Solms. People who routinely drop $10k on microscope objectives or $20k on cine lenses do not imagine that a Leica optic is necessarily better than (or as good as) an Olympus or a Nikon or a Zeiss, etc.

I've used Leica cameras and lenses for a long time (still do), but the amount of magical thinking that this brand inspires among amateur photographers never fails to astonish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom