Lss
Well-known
Says he took two M mount wide angles (Zeiss 18/4 and Leica 24/2.8) with him. No comment about performance, except that he is delighted to see the adapter ring works (!). There's one heavily processed small file with the 18/4. At least that doesn't look bad.
This happens with every mirrorless camera release. Ah, finally someone has something more than the specs... and no, not really.
But at $7000+ are they targeting the same buyer? Let's be real... if people never were going to pay the $7000, then it doesn't affect Leica at all. If anything, they may have new lens buyers.
uhoh7
Veteran
Really, how did you come to that conclusion? The people I know that use Leica seem to like the mechanical rangefinder, the VF, and the lenses for the camera. They drool over the feel of the camera in their hands and look of the camera. Most of the M users I know would not be into this Sony.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
gavinlg
Veteran
probably not. The fujis still have shutter dials, aperture rings on the lenses, and a plethora of small high quality lenses in 14mm, 28mm, 35mm, 40mm 50mm, 85mm and 90mm. They also have the optical viewfinder.
I will be very curious to see how sony does lenses with this camera. Already the zeiss 35mm f2.8 looks optically superb but its large and expensive for a slow f2.8 aperture. Likewise you can buy 2 fuji 35mm f1.4s for the zeiss 55mm f1.8.
jarski
Veteran
agree on lens part. Leica can benefit from new Sony system.
but I think Sony will affect Leica camera sales both directly and indirectly. those $7000 bodies will sell less, if similar results can be had for $2000. until now it wasn't possible with such a small camera. yes mechanical rangefinder isn't there but I second TKH's comment that it never was deciding factor for many. the sensor with compact package was.
and indirectly. used M8/M9 prices will take another dip from this. less people able to upgrade latest M, if value of current model wont cover part of new.
cpc
Established
Not only are these cameras ugly, but they are also way too tall (taller than some DSLRs) and too heavy. The top end of the Nex line was perfect in ergonomics and size. They should have simply put the new sensor in a Nex-6.
TKH
Well-known
Not I came to that conclusion. Leica did.
Thats why an EVF is on top of the actual M.
ferider
Veteran
What's most important is that Sony set a new standard for mirror-less cameras. I predict that there will be more full-frame mirror-less bodies from different providers in less than a year, possibly from Fuji, too. Then the digital M is just one of many.
I'm not so sure... many Leica users are very loyal. I don't think they all spend $7000 because they couldn't buy a $2000 camera that did the same thing. Luxury in itself sells. There is no luxury in the Sony. Leica sold the M still back in the film days even thought there were SLRs smaller and cheaper than the M.
Black
Photographer.
What full frame DSLR is it taller than? http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/the-a7-vs-leica-m9-vs-canon-5d-size-comaprison-by-vaclav-mach/ And why do you think they haven't put the FF sensor in an Nex-6 body? I can think of a few reasons...
FrozenInTime
Well-known
I like the appearance of it more than the M.240 ( but less so than the MM ).
But am not jumping in ; until proven otherwise, it's probably got terrible corner performance with wide M lenses.
But am not jumping in ; until proven otherwise, it's probably got terrible corner performance with wide M lenses.
Basset
Member
I think it is only a matter of time before Fuji puts out is own FF that keeps the rangefiinder look. Sony getting out the gate first might not be that bad a thing for Fuji. I already see some negatives cropping up in the Sony first looks, such as concerns about how loud the A7 shutter is, making it less than ideal for candid photography.
Bassett, It could be the reason Fuji is putting out the X-E2 before making a X-Pro2.
FrozenInTime
Well-known
unixrevolution
Well-known
Please see my signature.
N.delaRua
Well-known
Will one often need a tripod and an unforgiving exacting lens to actually see the benefit of a 36 mp sensor without AA. Or will you just always have to shoot above 1/500 th of a second?