Well I for one like that there is at least one manufacturer that doesn't give a s#it about what people are saying and just concentrating on what they are good at - world class optics. If you want gimmicks, every other camera manufacturer will give you what you want and some more. Everyone on this forum screams for a FF mirror less camera. Guess who is doing the only one available?
People on this forum are spending thousands and thousands of dollars on used discontinued lenses because they are superior, and then they come complaining that Leica charges 7k USD for what I would expect to be one of the best optic constructions ever made for a consumer camera. Don't want that? Good, go buy a Zeiss, Canon, Nikon or whatever 50 mm lens of your liking, there must be hundreds to choose from. But what if you really want a no-compromise lens? No other manufacturer than Leica does one. So the one day you make enough to afford it, be happy that there is one available.
Also remember that a $20k Patek Phillippe is technically inferior to a $20 Casio. Ofc no one "needs" a Patek, Ferrari or a Leica APO lens, but we should be happy that the option exists. The world would be a boring place if no one dared to think outside the box.
JonasY wrote:
Well I for one like that there is at least one manufacturer that doesn't give a s#it about what people are saying and just concentrating on what they are good at - world class optics. If you want gimmicks, every other camera manufacturer will give you what you want and some more. Everyone on this forum screams for a FF mirror less camera. Guess who is doing the only one available?
People on this forum are spending thousands and thousands of dollars on used discontinued lenses because they are superior, and then they come complaining that Leica charges 7k USD for what I would expect to be one of the best optic constructions ever made for a consumer camera. Don't want that? Good, go buy a Zeiss, Canon, Nikon or whatever 50 mm lens of your liking, there must be hundreds to choose from. But what if you really want a no-compromise lens? No other manufacturer than Leica does one. So the one day you make enough to afford it, be happy that there is one available.
Also remember that a $20k Patek Phillippe is technically inferior to a $20 Casio. Ofc no one "needs" a Patek, Ferrari or a Leica APO lens, but we should be happy that the option exists. The world would be a boring place if no one dared to think outside the box....Show more →
+1
A lot seem to be complaining about the 50/2 AA price but this is normal for Leica and they are never going to change. The MTF charts say that this lens is better than any M lens out there which includes the Noctilux, 50 Summilux ASPH, 35 FLE, 90 CRON AA, etc. If anything this lens will definitely sell and will be backordered for a while...
Also, with Leica glass you know that your investment stays the same or in some instances, go up in price if you decide that the lens is not for you. It's great that we have that option to have the best available. You don't have to buy it, you can always opt for Zeiss, CV, Nikon, Canon, etc...
yeah, not upset by the m9-m and i'm pretty excited by the new cron. i'm not going to by either though. not sure what all the whining is about. these new products aren't what i'm looking for but they look like what i expect from leica. it's not like they're suddenly going to turn into a company that produces electronic wonders.
A lot seem to be complaining about the 50/2 AA price but this is normal for Leica and they are never going to change. The MTF charts say that this lens is better than any M lens out there which includes the Noctilux, 50 Summilux ASPH, 35 FLE, 90 CRON AA, etc. If anything this lens will definitely sell and will be backordered for a while...
Also, with Leica glass you know that your investment stays the same or in some instances, go up in price if you decide that the lens is not for you. It's great that we have that option to have the best available. You don't have to buy it, you can always opt for Zeiss, CV, Nikon, Canon, etc... ...Show more →
+2
I know if I opt to go with the M9-M as a backup, with my trade in of the older M9 body will yield virtually what I paid for. Then when the M10 does eventuate, again very little changeover other than the price difference. The M lenses I consider as an investment for many years to come!
'Cron 50 AA is shrewd marketing: standard FL, smaller size/mass than the 'lux. Of course, the price is Wagnerian, but that's Leica today. At least you get something godlike for your money! Even at f/2.8, performance is looking awesome, and f/5.6 is unreal. The key characteristic, however, is the distortion which is under very tight control. That is a benefit of a slower lens. For myself, I will stick with my Elmar and Summilux 50 classics from the Golden Age of Chrome (1960).
JonasY wrote:
Well I for one like that there is at least one manufacturer that doesn't give a s#it about what people are saying and just concentrating on what they are good at - world class optics. If you want gimmicks, every other camera manufacturer will give you what you want and some more. Everyone on this forum screams for a FF mirror less camera. Guess who is doing the only one available?
People on this forum are spending thousands and thousands of dollars on used discontinued lenses because they are superior, and then they come complaining that Leica charges 7k USD for what I would expect to be one of the best optic constructions ever made for a consumer camera. Don't want that? Good, go buy a Zeiss, Canon, Nikon or whatever 50 mm lens of your liking, there must be hundreds to choose from. But what if you really want a no-compromise lens? No other manufacturer than Leica does one. So the one day you make enough to afford it, be happy that there is one available.
Also remember that a $20k Patek Phillippe is technically inferior to a $20 Casio. Ofc no one "needs" a Patek, Ferrari or a Leica APO lens, but we should be happy that the option exists. The world would be a boring place if no one dared to think outside the box....Show more →
Although I personally would have of course been more interested in an M10 (the Mm is of no interest to me), I have to say that I fully agree with you. It's nice with at least one camera producer that does some crazy, unconventional stuff.
As for the new 50 Cron.. holy crap - both performance and price. That is without a doubt the best performing 50 mm lens ever made. I probably won't get one but still, I'm very impressed - a normal lens with a performance of a longer tele lens - it's not something you see every day. I'm really looking forward to seeing images shot with it
As for no M10 on May 10th.. well, two years ago I would have been disappointed . Today not so much. I've gotten used to the M9 to such an extent that I'm not impatient to get live view and a better screen (it would be nice, but I don't see it as critical any more). What would actually most excite me about an M10 is if they manged to get it down to an M6/MP form factor and overall feel.
May 11, 2012 at 06:53 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
mawz wrote:
Some of us are already there, that's essentially my complaint with the 50 Lux ASPH. Technically brilliant lens, but it's too perfect and bores me. I want a great lens with character, not a perfect one without.
The 50 Lux ASPH is far from perfect optically. It has loads of field curvature for instance - which gives it a distinct character. I consider it being the best prime lens ever made - although it's far from optically the best one ever made. Don't take me wrong - it's technically brilliant - you get high contrast and sharpness at the largest aperture. It is however not clinical and flat, like for instance its longer brother the 75 Cron ASPH (which I'm incidentally not too fond of because I do find it too flat and clinical).
denoir wrote:
The 50 Lux ASPH is far from perfect optically. It has loads of field curvature for instance - which gives it a distinct character. I consider it being the best prime lens ever made - although it's far from optically the best one ever made. Don't take me wrong - it's technically brilliant - you get high contrast and sharpness at the largest aperture. It is however not clinical and flat, like for instance its longer brother the 75 Cron ASPH (which I'm incidentally not too fond of because I do find it too flat and clinical).
For me, the 50 Lux ASPH is already in the clinical & flat range in terms of rendering, but that is, like most rendering choices, very much a matter of personal taste. In fact there's very few of the recent Leica lenses that I like, of the modern designs only the 28/2 and 90/2 AA really seem to work for me, I prefer the older designs which the old 50 Cron typified (and even then I'm still more a Zeiss guy than a Leica guy)
That said, I do rather enjoy your work with it, you've got a good eye and your composition style plays very well with the Lux's rendering.
Browsing the M series MTFs, the 21 f/3.4 is pretty close in terms of numbers on paper in the central image area, for only $3000. The 24 f/3.8 is also in the ballpark centrally. Of course these are not 50mm lenses...
I've rethought my stance on the 50 AA a little bit. It's still ridiculously expensive (even by Leica standards, only less so), since it is their 2nd most expensive lens. As long as they keep the old 50/2 available, it's not totally insane. It's nice to have an uber-spec'd 50/2 as long as you can always buy the 'cheaper' 50/2 (or even cheaper 50/1.4) if you don't need the uber specs. It's actually the stance I wish other manufacturers took. I don't want to have to buy a 50/1.2 from Canon just to get a decently built 50. I'd be very happy if Canon offered a 50/1.4 L or even a 50/1.8 L, even if the 50/1.8 L was $800.
That being said, the Leica 50/1.4 is technically perfect enough for me. The 50 AA might be better, but in ways I really don't find engaging.
JonasY wrote:
Also remember that a $20k Patek Phillippe is technically inferior to a $20 Casio. Ofc no one "needs" a Patek, Ferrari or a Leica APO lens, but we should be happy that the option exists. The world would be a boring place if no one dared to think outside the box.
I think you're a bit confused between producing status symbols for the top 1% and thinking outside the box.
The Leica MM is an exercise in marketing, perceptions of prestige, and producing Veblen goods (Google is your friend). The thinking is entirely inside a pretty, gilded, and bow-tied box.
Leica does make some incredibly good and impressively compact lenses and for that I give them credit, but this is just so over the top elitism I'm not sure I could buy a Leica after seeing this....
"Leica has combined with luxury fashion house Hermès to create the M9-P Edition Hermès. The camera is coated in ocre-colored calfskin leather and features a matching shoulder strap. The camera also features a redesigned, smoother top-plate and control points, designed by the automotive designer, Walter de’Silva, previously responsible for the M9 Titanium. Only 300 of the cameras will be made. A yet more exclusive series of 100 'Edition Hermès – Série Limitée Jean-Louis Dumas' kits will also be sold, in honor of the former president of Hermès. These kits will include a 28mm f/2, 50mm f/0.95 and 90mm f/2 lens, and a exclusive Hermès camera bag. The limited editions will cost $25,000 and $50,000 respectively."
michael49 wrote:
... this is just so over the top elitism I'm not sure I could buy a Leica after seeing this....
Agree 100%. The problem is not only the elitism, but just plain and simple bad quality
of their cameras. I guess M9 used the electronics from M8, now MM uses the electronics from M9.
What are those people doing all day beside looking at each other and telling themselves how great they are?
It reminds me an old dingy luxury hotel, where they charge $5000/night, but the TVs are old 80's CRTs
and the carpet stinks. But they used to be famous and they have "old charm"
Doesn't matter a Holiday Inn behind the corner has high speed internet, brand new LCDs
and a better and friendly service for $129/night....
I think you would have a point if you were forced to buy this but it's just a luxury good and it seems they can't make enough of what they make to satisfy demand so they're just going to do just fine.
One could argue even buying a $1000 item for your hobby is extreme elitism as well. The vast majority of the world can't afford that.
I do not remember which manufacturer it was that offered true Apochromatic lenses in the 70's.
They were probably as or more expensive (in constant dollars) than the new Summicron and were aimed at scientific photography. There were discussions in the enthusiast mags at the time but no one really lusted after them as they were seem as scientific instruments at their best recording in wavelengths beyond visible light.
I believe the limitations of 35mm film limited the resolving power of the lens so the incentive was not there for the hobbyists.
