Really? A step back for some I guess...but a step forward IMO.
cam
the need for speed
I believe we were talking about new cameras...
you obviously didn't bother to read the rest of the post :bang:
even new, buying a Leica M9, would give me the most bang for my buck.
to get the same set up of lenses by any other manufacturer (if they even had them), would cost the same as a few bodies at least.
if you bought your Leica knowing it didn't give you the most bang for your buck, cool. i don't have that kind of money to throw around: Leica is the best bang for my buck.
Ok, cam, that may be true for YOU. However, I took the OP's stance to be based on not having a huge assortment of Leica lenses.
Leica is the best for me too... simply because their cameras are made the way I believe cameras should be made. However, if I was only concerned about the best deal at the expense of comfort and happiness, there are many better bargains. Just not for you and I, I guess. I'm not particularly concerned about bang for the buck... just what I feel good using to make photos.
The only reason I even brought it up was that everyone complains about Leica's prices... expecting Leica's prices to match up to big name DSLR prices value wise. This is not going to happen.
Leica is the best for me too... simply because their cameras are made the way I believe cameras should be made. However, if I was only concerned about the best deal at the expense of comfort and happiness, there are many better bargains. Just not for you and I, I guess. I'm not particularly concerned about bang for the buck... just what I feel good using to make photos.
The only reason I even brought it up was that everyone complains about Leica's prices... expecting Leica's prices to match up to big name DSLR prices value wise. This is not going to happen.
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
I believe this discussion, if useful, must start with a re-definition of Range Finder.
RF as we know it, helps focusing the lens...but not verifiable until the film is processed or chimping the LCD. Anything else?
Other terminology thrown into the mix is Point & Shoot...but that is what most RF shooters want to do anyway. You know...pre-set zone focus, sunny 16, point-and-shoot; perhaps now with metering or AE assist.
FF, APS-C, u4/3 etc. are format sizes, not really relevant to RF. Before anyone get emotional, film-RF cameras are available in double FF, 645, 6x6...7, 9 sizes. No? So, why couldn't dRF use other formats?
Fixed or interchangeable lens has no real relevance here. Many a fine RF camera have fixed lenses, including early Leica's. Also, to many the M is a fixed lens camera because one lens is all they can afford.
The 35mm equivalent focal length is the most popular in RF M-users. Elsewhere in RFF, there is a poll going on: "if you had only one M-lens..." The overwhelming choices are 50 and 35mm, with 35mm a 4:3 favourate.
So the X100 finds the range [and can focus the camera via EVF], has AF and AE, and full manual control if you insist; supports chimping, but uses APS-C, with a fixed but most popular focal length...and styled to match.
So what is the problem...except it ain't a Leica???
RF as we know it, helps focusing the lens...but not verifiable until the film is processed or chimping the LCD. Anything else?
Other terminology thrown into the mix is Point & Shoot...but that is what most RF shooters want to do anyway. You know...pre-set zone focus, sunny 16, point-and-shoot; perhaps now with metering or AE assist.
FF, APS-C, u4/3 etc. are format sizes, not really relevant to RF. Before anyone get emotional, film-RF cameras are available in double FF, 645, 6x6...7, 9 sizes. No? So, why couldn't dRF use other formats?
Fixed or interchangeable lens has no real relevance here. Many a fine RF camera have fixed lenses, including early Leica's. Also, to many the M is a fixed lens camera because one lens is all they can afford.
The 35mm equivalent focal length is the most popular in RF M-users. Elsewhere in RFF, there is a poll going on: "if you had only one M-lens..." The overwhelming choices are 50 and 35mm, with 35mm a 4:3 favourate.
So the X100 finds the range [and can focus the camera via EVF], has AF and AE, and full manual control if you insist; supports chimping, but uses APS-C, with a fixed but most popular focal length...and styled to match.
So what is the problem...except it ain't a Leica???
Last edited:
I agree with you... I see no problem. But the grumbling is coming from people who expect it to have interchangable lenses, a smaller price tag, say it is too retro, think it is going to feel cheap, it doesn't use film, it's not a real rangefinder, etc.
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
I have been to Japan 22 times, and in 2 week's time my 23rd time. "Retro" is something you have to be in Japan to appreciate:
There are assorted funky-retro looking micro cars we don't see here. Latest fashion mixed with a touch of old, and prized. Electronic goods that replicate old living-styles...best example is heated low table for the tatami room.
My sense is: what is described as retro is simply Japanese style...they've earned a right to have and to show their style.
The grumbling people think and insist the camera will feel cheap...without feeling or handling it. Meanwhile, on-the-scene journalists reported that "it is well-built", "not light" [yes, it could be lead-weighted just for the show] or "solid like a stone"...they all lied???
And for those who feel "if it doesn't use film, it is not a RF"...then the same sentiment must also be applied to the M8/9, X1 and the latest Leica line.
I think all the grumbling has to do with the disappointment that Fuji scooped Leica [how dare they], and it is low priced [compared to M8/9] as well.
paragon
Established
How many times have Leica been criticised as being "expensive" - "not good value for money" etc., etc.
If Leica continue to improve their M digital cams they will sell them at their usual price point - there will always be a market for Leica M RF cams - other manufacturers will "scramble around" producing whatever but the Leica M pedigree will always sell as they are the least "price sensitive' brand in the market
OK we are (all) unhappy above the price of an M9 (and a 35 cron), and continue to look (hope) for alternatives - but if we had the spare cash most of (us) would jump into the M9 camp
just my opinion
If Leica continue to improve their M digital cams they will sell them at their usual price point - there will always be a market for Leica M RF cams - other manufacturers will "scramble around" producing whatever but the Leica M pedigree will always sell as they are the least "price sensitive' brand in the market
OK we are (all) unhappy above the price of an M9 (and a 35 cron), and continue to look (hope) for alternatives - but if we had the spare cash most of (us) would jump into the M9 camp
just my opinion
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
I have the spare cash, I didn't and won't.
eleskin
Well-known
Leica price attitudes
Leica price attitudes
One thing I noticed is when you try to talk about cheaper prices, Leica M, for example, it gets under some peoples skin and they lash out that if you want Leica, you have to pay, and thats it. Kind of like if you ask the price, you cannot afford it. I have a friend who works as an orderly at a hospital and he bought a used Mercedes. Some of the Doctors said to him you are an orderly, why do you have a Mercedes? The point is the man works hard and wants something well made and cannot afford new. Same with Leica gear. I bought al of my lenses used, most on Ebay for a fraction of what people pay new. This is the only way I could ever afford any Leica lens. So here, if we ask for better prices, we are trying to get quality gear under conditions where economics are a key factor. When I hear there is news something cheaper is coming out, I cheer for the people who shot alot and are not that rich. Some people need a break, especially in these hard economic times!
Leica price attitudes
One thing I noticed is when you try to talk about cheaper prices, Leica M, for example, it gets under some peoples skin and they lash out that if you want Leica, you have to pay, and thats it. Kind of like if you ask the price, you cannot afford it. I have a friend who works as an orderly at a hospital and he bought a used Mercedes. Some of the Doctors said to him you are an orderly, why do you have a Mercedes? The point is the man works hard and wants something well made and cannot afford new. Same with Leica gear. I bought al of my lenses used, most on Ebay for a fraction of what people pay new. This is the only way I could ever afford any Leica lens. So here, if we ask for better prices, we are trying to get quality gear under conditions where economics are a key factor. When I hear there is news something cheaper is coming out, I cheer for the people who shot alot and are not that rich. Some people need a break, especially in these hard economic times!
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
That can be explained easily under Stockholm Syndrome or Sucker Syndrome.
Stockholm Syndrome...bonding with captors...are often found in people held captive. The chain in this case is financial. In our industry, a good photogrammetric instrument from Wild-Heerbrugg [later shared the Leica brand name owned by the Schmidheiny family] cost more than a good house. They worked hard paying mortgage on that instrument and hate anyone critical of it.
The Sucker Syndrome...terminal embarassment...are found in people realizing they need not have spent as much. They fell for it because "a sucker is always easily pleased" [c.a. 1982, Mr. Andy Un, a Vancouver camera salesman few heard of.]
Smarter people look for good-condition used Leica...most are good condition because Leica's are rarely used by photographic-jewelry collectors...a mint or new condition M2 is still available today on eBay.
ebino
Well-known
I think you're overlooking the fact that Leica M9 has absolutely no competition. So, Leica can charge whatever it feels like -not to forget Leica can always depend on its fan base who will pay premium.
In other words, Leica M9 is not priced on its market value, but on the crude strategy of "how high can we charge and still get away with it."
First of all, I just want to say I love the concept of the X100. I'm not against it at all...nor am I against the M9.
Retro is based on nostalgia, and retro / nostalgia exists in all countrys (well, in the big cities anyway). Remember, we would not have the current DSLR look if it weren't for the Japanese, so I'm not so sure they should be given credit for the retro look.
Last edited:
paragon
Established
it would be interesting to compare the relatives prices of the Leica M film cameras, (when they did have some "competition"), with the current price of the M8/M9
I reckon that the "premium" was always there
but it's not really worth the argument - a Leica is a Leica
(by the way I don't own a digital Leica - still trying to justify spending the money)
Regards
mph
Member
Why dont they make a micro 4/3rd version of the L1 , and some bright primes?
Leica can even rebadge it as Digilux4 or CL-D!!!
Leica can even rebadge it as Digilux4 or CL-D!!!
bwcolor
Veteran
Also, especially noted at the Leica Forum, many/some of these Leica folks have a superior posture and are very condescending. They simply negatively characterize anyone disagreeing with them. I prefer this forum, because the people here tend to be open to new ideas and enjoy the opinions of other.
Economic realities will force Leica to compete. This means that they can't just jog in place, or they will cease to exist as a camera company. It seems to me that their new products ( M9/X1) show us that they know this and within the heavy financial constraints of a previously ailing company, they have started to adapt and to recover. This help everyone, including those in love with the Leica mystique/tradition.
Last edited:
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Nope. If money were no object at all, I might shoot an M9. But if I "had the spare cash" I would not use it to buy an M9. Not even close.
I think that the M9 is a jury-rigged solution to deal with the quirks of a stable of legacy lenses. For the things I use an RF for, IQ is almost always limited by camera movement, because I am almost always shooting handheld. A good 12 megapixel sensor is adequate, and there is not a compelling argument for FF unless DR and high ISO cannot be optimized on a small sensor.
In other words, the *real* IQ that I get under field conditions does not demand an M.
For my purposes, user interface is THE reason to shoot a rangefinder (M6 in my case). If the X-100 is well-executed it will be worse than an M9 in some ways, but it may be much better in others.
The fact that an M has the best available interface for my style of shooting does not mean that it has the best possible interface.
Some of the ideas in the X-100 appear to be distinct improvements on the M. And, given that neither the M9 nor the X-100 has IS, but the X-100 is expected to have better high-ISO performance, it's quite possible that the X-100 will deliver better output (and thus higher resolution, since higher shutter speeds will be possible) versus an M9 in low light.
I know that it's hard for some of you to wrap your minds around, but anyone who's shot with one of the original Hexars can confirm that there's more than one way to design an incredibly effective street camera.
Last edited:
A bit harsh on the M9, but it brings up a good point. The only reason I want full frame on my M is because my brain wants the focal lengths to match what is on the lens.
I bought an M8 to use with my Leica Mount lenses, and bought An Olympus EP2 to use with my collection of lenses. Most of the time, an EP2 has a Nikkor-S 5cm F1.4 in LTM on it. So I picked up another EP2 in a trade.
I will get an M9 to use Leica mount lenses with a full-frame sensor. But for now, the M8 serves quite well. I was never big on Wide-Angle lenses.
I will get an M9 to use Leica mount lenses with a full-frame sensor. But for now, the M8 serves quite well. I was never big on Wide-Angle lenses.
Mister E
Well-known
My friend here has had his 645D or as I like to despairingly call it the 43D. It sucks. He'd be better suited with a Canon 5D2, D3X, etc, but he insisted on owning a Pentax. For years he has shot a 6X7 and always had great results with it, but the crop factor and small format of 4x3cm (6X4.5D is a 1.5 crop) is just limiting.
Jamie123
Veteran
For the money I want this.
Hasselblad 503 CWD
The 503CW has been custom built around the classic 500 series camera with its range of high performance, central shutter based lenses. The addition of a high-end 16 megapixel back with a sensor that is 50% larger than full frame 35mm DSLRs - aesthetically integrated with the rest of the camera - turns this classic camera into a digital workhorse.
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/products/v-system/503cwd.aspx
Really? You want the old 16mp one?? You do know that they just brought out a 50mp version, right?
I mean, I get that 16mp is enough for many uses but masking that great ground glass viewfinder to a small square that's only 50% bigger than a 35mm frame is a real bummer.