Why the obsession with "Leica Killers?"

[lukitas]

Didn't Leica use to advertise on precisely that point ?
You compare your camera to a Leica, so Leica is the measure of all things photographic, or something to that effect.

Advertising is insidious twaddle anyhow. It plays on primitive schoolyard one-upmanship. Who doesn't remember that stupid card game were you had to compare stats on airplanes, warships or cars? We were 14, we'd never ridden anything bigger than a bicycle, and we spent hours disputing the relative merits of Harley Davidson, BMW and Kawasaki.
I must admit, I find myself strangely attracted to this meta-comparison of gentlemanly bits : a dispute about people disputing the relative merits of...

I'm sure marketing people cream themselves at this sort of thing : Yay! People are building brand recognition for free! Pages and pages of comments, all about us! Getting all riled up and passionate! WooHoo!

I own and use an M3 and an M2. If anything could be a leica-killer for me, it would have to cost less than a 'user' M2. And not be much bigger.
Fat Chance.

 

[semilog]

I don't want the M-240 I want the Sony A7r because I trust Sony's electronics far more than I do Leica's. I can afford both if I want them so $ isn't the issue. Love my RX-1 and look forward to opportunity to put 28/50 Summicrons on A7r. Is it a Leica killer probably not, but does it kill my interest in a M-240? Yes! I had the M8, M9 and currently have an M6.

Stated perfectly. And the Sony is smaller and lighter — fully half a pound lighter per body vs. the M240 — a huge consideration for my purposes. Same for the Fujis. Mobility is key to much of the photography that I like to do. For a two camera kit, which would be typical on a serious project, that's a full pound saved.

And I jostle my cameras. I ride bikes with them and shoot basketball games. I shoot in the rain and on the beach. I shoot in neighborhoods where there's a reasonable possibility of robbery (including parts of my commute). Not only is replacement cost a hell of a lot lower* but following a drop, a dunk, or theft, immediate availability of a Sony or Fuji replacement body is (or in the case of the A7, soon will be) vastly superior to the M240.

These are not insignificant considerations.

*Yes, I do insure my gear.

 

[uhoh7]

It's not a leica killer, it's a leica helper 🙂

 

[FrozenInTime]

The Sony does not make me want to sell my M9 and MM, but it does make glad I paused over the M.240, which I turned down a couple of weeks ago.
Potentially, I am happy to let others test the water, the A7r would be a better compliment to the MM/M9 with my 21/1.4 and 180/3,4. Reports of the M.240's live view and high ISO have not impressed me enough to justify the cost. The next M camera from Leica is either going to make a big leap in the video/liveview/ISO departments or go more retro with core rangefinder appeal.

 

[Pioneer]

I am sure the Sony is a fine camera, and the Fujis as well. It is natural to enjoy using them.Everyone is free to choose their own poison. But none of these are Leicas, and to call them Leica killers is a bit silly.

The Leica has roots that extend all the way back into the 20s. Nikon and Pentax have done a relatively good job of maintaining links to their past heritage but none have done this as well as Leica. I am no great lover of Leica but they have successfully translated the Leica film experience into the digital era. Neither Sony, Fuji or the rest have done this. For one thing, none of them have anywhere near this level of photographic heritage to leverage, and as fast as they change things up they never will.

Leica may eventually stumble and kill itself off, it almost did this once already, but the current crop of digital wannabes are not about to do it. Any claims to the contrary are either marketing hyperbole or web reviewer sensationalism.

 

[semilog]

A "Leica killer" is no more a camera intended to kill the corporate entity called Leica than a "Ducati killer" is a motorcycle intended to put Ducati out of business. In this context, "killer" is a term of art indicating that a competing device can carry out some specified task faster, better, more efficiently, etc.

Honda has, over the last couple of decades, fielded more than a few Ducati killers.

And there are, for some kinds of photography, a lot of cameras that can be considered Leica killers. For the classical applications Leicas were designed for (a field really opened by Erich Salomon, who did not use a Leica).

Indeed, we might consider the Barnack Leicas as Ermanox-killers! To say nothing of the Nikon F…

There are now a LOT of digital cameras that are suitable for the sorts of reportage roles where at one time the M reigned supreme. And for many of these sorts of work, there are now many considerably better (depending on a particular photographer's preferences and priorities) alternatives to the digital Leicas.

Cameras also have functions other than photography, of course, which is what Leica's current CEO was alluding to when he explicitly positioned Leica as a "luxury brand…" Hard to think of any real "Leica killers" on that field of play.

 

[uhoh7]

...but the current crop of digital wannabes are not about to do it. Any claims to the contrary are either marketing hyperbole or web reviewer sensationalism.

Crop? I see one new groundbreaking camera.

I have seen the Leica name on many cameras. Not all so worthy of the history, as the M.

For all the mystique the M240 provides it's going to be very interesting to see if it's results with the great Leica lenses can stand up to those from the A7r with the same lenses.

it's not the latest crop, it's a new species.

 

[aizan]

remember the good old days when nobody even thought about "leica killers"?

 

[Pioneer]

remember the good old days when nobody even thought about "leica killers"?

You mean back when Zeiss Ikon, Nikon, Canon and other manufacturers were trying to take Leica's market share?

BTW, Nikon, Canon and the rest of the Japanese camera industry almost did kill Leica with their inexpensive, ruggedly reliable, single lens reflex. With a bit of help from Leica themselves they probably came closer then anyone has since.

 

[CameraQuest]

What is with every rumor site and spec chaser calling every mirrorless camera that hasn't been released yet a "Leica Killer?"

Why the obession with killing Leica? Sure, I realize they are expensive, but does anyone really think Leica is going to be killed by these cameras? or is it just something to say when you want a Leica and you don't want to / can't afford to spend the money to get one?

The way I see it, is that Leica can continue to exist along side these other cameras... :bang:

For better or worse, Andreas Kaufman turned Leica into a luxury brand ala Hermes.

A lot of Leica owners are irritated at that, especially the ones not willing to shell out the prices of the new M240 and its uber lenses.

Stephen

 

[airfrogusmc]

For better or worse, Andreas Kaufman turned Leica into a luxury brand ala Hermes.

A lot of people are irritated at that, especially the ones not willing to shell out the prices of the new M240 and its uber lenses.

Stephen

Funny part is the M 240 is no more expensive than the top of the line Nikons or Canons and I'm old enough to remember when Leica M was over twice as much as the top of the line Canons and Nikons. And you won't lose money on a Leica M lens.

 

[uhoh7]

Funny part is the M 240 is no more expensive than the top of the line Nikons or Canons and I'm old enough to remember when Leica M was over twice as much as the top of the line Canons and Nikons. And you won't lose money on a Leica M lens.

Considering the layout and the way it's made 7k is probably the least they can afford to charge.

That's a stretch for most of us, and 2 is a real stretch.

This is the first genuine alternative for the M glass I'm not losing money on. 🙂

"Leica Killer" need not mean their business is hurt. Instead it may refer to the coming bout, the heavyweight championship of digital image production from RF lenses.

If the A7r can beat the M240 below 35mm, with the same lenses, you might call it a Leica killer.

Again, I prefer to say: Leica Helper. This will be great for Leica Optics.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I prefer my Monochrom over every other digital camera I own or have used and thats a lot of digital cameras.

 

[semilog]

remember the good old days when nobody even thought about "leica killers"?

That would be 1958, the year before the Nikon F was released. Sorry, before my time.

 

[Rangefinderfreak]

Huh, this stupid thread is still alive... To kill a leica ? Just take a hefty hammer and hit it really hard, so nobody ever gets an idea on refurbishing it , "because it is a classic and worth a fortune in the future". I am sorry I didn`t do it with my original MP #302 and turned it to cold cash, I see it on auctions and it has at least two digits more in it`s price
tag.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

A lot of the time when skimming through these various forums I wonder just what sort of pictures people take and then I wonder how large a print they do. I hope it's obvious that you need serious kit to to get seriously large prints but - talking to the experts in my local lab - I gather 4 x 6 is incredibly popular and 5 x 7" and bigger are unusual, compared to the amount of 4 x 6's they do.

Of course, I've ignored slides and I gather they are a minority taste anyway.

But do we really need anything better than (say) a 1940's lens* for what we actually do in reality? And do we really need more than (say) 8 mega-pixels in digital?

Just asking out of curiosity and I don't believe we are all turning out dozens of poster or billboard sized prints all the time.

Regards, David

* I'm thinking of the Summitar and/or Sonnar in the 40's once they'd started coating them. If I just had that and a 40's body I reckon I'd cope; much as I love my more modern stuff with TTL CW etc...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger said the Vivitar Series 1 35-85 f2.8 varifocal was good. It's really not.

The key word may be "was", for its time -- though I've had a fair amount published that was taken with one. Perhaps "surprisingly good" would be a better analysis. Compare it with (say) a Nikon 43-86 and it was stunning. I still have a couple, and I'm rather looking forward to trying the Nikon-mount one out on an M typ 240.

What did/do you particularly dislike about it?

Cheers,

R.

 

[semilog]

Hi,

A lot of the time when skimming through these various forums I wonder just what sort of pictures people take and then I wonder how large a print they do. I hope it's obvious that you need serious kit to to get seriously large prints...

David Alan Harvey is exhibiting 5-foot prints from images taken with the Panasonic G1 adjacent to ones taken with the D800, M9, M6, and Mamiya 7. They all look gorgeous because they were shot by a real artist and printed by a great printer. DAH has used a lot of Leicas and can use any camera he wants to use. Last I heard he's mainly choosing the X100S, Mamiya 7, and iPhone.

Sensor resolution ≠ artistic merit. Presence of a particular focusing mechanism ≠ artistic merit.

 

[uhoh7]

looks like the tide is turning fast on the A7r.

The initial reaction was.......well, it was so ugly, terrible hump, and what does Sony know anyway? No history. etc.

Now even Keith likes it!!

haven't heard from Frank lately.

He said it was so ugly he wouldn't let it on the poorch if it shat golden gumdrops. Or something like that. 🙂

Let's face it: Leica needs a slap in the face. This is it.

 

[Lss]

Let's face it: Leica needs a slap in the face. This is it.

Everyone except Sony needs that slap. No one else is making a large-sensor mirrorless camera with interchangeable AF lenses.