Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Leica announcements
#1
Leica just upgraded their homepage with new products.



The S system gets a slightly modified camera (now just called the "Leica S") and some new lenses (a wide angle, a tilt/shift lens, a zoom).



The M system sees a modern new M camera, called the "Leica M" (and not M10) with a new 24 MP CMOS sensor, allowing for long wished-for features like Live View and video. There's even an optional external EVF. There's an optional R-to-M adapter now that allows to use Leica R glass on the new M with Live View.



For those who prefer a more "classic" digital M, there's the new M-E. To be honest, I haven't found any significant differences to the old M9 so far, except the body colour.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#2
In addition to the big systems, there are also new compact cameras (V-Lux 4 and D-Lux 6), quite likely the usual counterparts to their far more affordable Panasonic sisters.



The X2 get's a double "beauty treatment" by being included in the A La Carte program and a special "Paul Smith" Limited edition. Sorry, I can't help it, but those Leica limited editions always look terrible, don't they...



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#3
They look lovely ... till you notice how deep they actually are.
#4
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1347910349' post='20216']

They look lovely ... till you notice how deep they actually are.

[/quote]





and exactly when I saw the top view I thought :"Eeeeww"
#5
I have tried to understand the Leica myth for about 40 years and must admit that I still cannot see why one would pay 3 times the money for about 75% of the capabilities of a good "other" camera, such as a DSLR, a FUJI X or what want you. I can equip a D800 with 3 excellent Nikon lenses for the price of the body of a Leica or A Fuji EX-1 with all the 5 lenses announced or available for less than the body of a Leica and have equal or better IQ over a much larger ISO span. Now where is the logic? I could se it if the IQ was clearly better, but it is not, or if the camera could do things no other camera can, but it cannot. So there is only one explanation, you buy the myth and I do not want that myth <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mellow.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':mellow:' />
#6
[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1347963137' post='20231']

I have tried to understand the Leica myth for about 40 years and must admit that I still cannot see why one would pay 3 times the money for about 75% of the capabilities of a good "other" camera, such as a DSLR, a FUJI X or what want you. I can equip a D800 with 3 excellent Nikon lenses for the price of the body of a Leica or A Fuji EX-1 with all the 5 lenses announced or available for less than the body of a Leica and have equal or better IQ over a much larger ISO span. Now where is the logic? I could se it if the IQ was clearly better, but it is not, or if the camera could do things no other camera can, but it cannot. So there is only one explanation, you buy the myth and I do not want that myth <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mellow.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':mellow:' />

[/quote]



Strange question. You can also buy -say- a Ferrari or a Bentley although none of these cars is actually practical or economical.

Such luxury items exist because they've a personal value beyond purpose. And the world would be poorer without them anyway.





Other than that - let's face it - even the mainstream photo market is often way beyond arguments. It is obviously a religious market which can be easily concluded from those brain-dead "brand" war discussions. And you also don't need a 5000EUR setup for casual family shots.



However, let's have some fun anyway. [Image: tongue.gif]
#7
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1347964082' post='20232']

Strange question. You can also buy -say- a Ferrari or a Bentley although none of these cars is actually practical or economical.

Such luxury items exist because they've a personal value beyond purpose. And the world would be poorer without them anyway.





Other than that - let's face it - even the mainstream photo market is often way beyond arguments. It is obviously a religious market which can be easily concluded from those brain-dead "brand" war discussions. And you also don't need a 5000EUR setup for casual family shots.



However, let's have some fun anyway. [Image: tongue.gif]

[/quote]

I would say the Leica myth may have changed in the digital era.



You certainly shoot different when using a rangefinder compared to using an SLR. I would not agree that the outcome of a picture can only be judged by IQ in terms of resolution and noise characteristics as Vieux loop says. It is more about how you take a picture that changes what kind of pictures you take and this is where a rangefinder is just different.



In film days, Leica rangefinders were expensive, but kept their value on the used market. You could buy an expensive M6, which would last for decades (because Leica means not only expensive, but also good quality), and then sell it without much of a loss. This may still be true for the M7 and even more for the MP, but it is no longer true for the digital Leica rangefinders. When the M8 was introduced, some people thought it would not have a successor for many years, just to ensure the logic that any Leica camera should keep its value for a long time. Having introduced the M9 and now the M, it is clear that Leica is no longer anything more but a luxury thing for most people.



I think with naming the recent camera just "M" they again want to state that this is the final digital Leica rangefinder that you can now buy without having to worry about it becoming obsolete in a couple of years, but I don't think anyone believes in this any more.
#8
I think this chart does not correlate with your analysis:

[url="http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=LCA1.F+Interactive#symbol=lca1.f;range=5y;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;"]http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=LCA1.F+Interactive#symbol=lca1.f;range=5y;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;[/url]
#9
Leica (M) is not so much for the hobbyist, but for the artist/professional photographer who chooses it for its qualities. Comparing a discrete camera with high quality prime to a big and bulky DLSR misses the point a little.



The M8 was a bit of a let down with its smaller than 135 format sensor, but I can see the attraction to a certain kind of artist/photographer with the M9. While the M9 was/is hampered by its CCD sensor, the new M will open up new performance possibilities.



Leica's prices will always be high. Partly because of the low volume, partly because high price is one of its appeals (again, think Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley and so on).
#10
Without having used a Leica, I can't say 1st hand, but it does seem to be the tool of choice for certain niches like street. Of current cameras, it is still the smallest full frame camera, and said to be very quiet. Yes, you can get most of the way with far cheaper cameras, but if you want to go all the way, this is the only way.



Sony's full frame compact might be the start of an alternative though, but it may be some time before that happens. Until then, Leica has this niche to itself.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)