I'm confused, as the two pics are a bit different. The AF assist light is in a different place, the red dot is in a different place, the second camera appears to have a front dial, and the word "Leica" is written on a different place on the lens. Plus, the first pic looks like it is missing a strap lug?? Which one is supposed to be real?
douglasf13 wrote:
I'm confused, as the two pics are a bit different. The AF assist light is in a different place, the red dot is in a different place, the second camera appears to have a front dial, and the word "Leica" is written on a different place on the lens. Plus, the first pic looks like it is missing a strap lug?? Which one is supposed to be real?
Yes - that image is a FAKE for all the obvious reasons you mention... I made it a bit clearer:
Not that I have any interest in this camera, but the leaked photos do not correspond to what Leica is partly showing in the box. Definitely the lens seems to be very flat, retractable, like the X2 lens.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Not that I have any interest in this camera, but the leaked photos do not correspond to what Leica is partly showing in the box. Definitely the lens seems to be very flat, retractable, like the X2 lens.
I think the one in the box has the lens showing straight on, so you can't perceive the length of the lens. The angling of the box throws off your visual perception.
The specifications have "improved" if the info is to be believed. 24Mp, and a F:2.8-f:4.0 zoom. But still not FF, not fast, not cheap, not small, not light. Welcome to the new Leica!
Interesting question. If it is indeed 24Mp, it has more pixels than the M type 240. Thus, LiveView requires more horspower. As it has only an LCD, being able to magnify any part of the picture is absolutely mandatory. If they are able to do it with the "Mini M", why not with the Type 240
Unles sof course it is a re-housed, rebadged Hasselblad Lunar...
CVickery wrote:
I think the one in the box has the lens showing straight on, so you can't perceive the length of the lens. The angling of the box throws off your visual perception.
Maybe, but that would be like hiding an elephant in a VW. This lens is humongous.
philber wrote:
If they are able to do it with the "Mini M", why not with the Type 240
Unles sof course it is a re-housed, rebadged Hasselblad Lunar...
The M240 is also 24mp, but, either way, I'd imagine that the sensor in this new camera will be from Sony, and I'd also imagine that the sensor readout and supporting electronics would be completely different than the M240.
The weird thing is that the fake image looks more like the image on the Leica site. The Leica lettering in the second image is too large and on a different part of the lens. They may both be fake.
The poster pretty clearly states it's his photoshop job and wish list.
Hmm, interesting! The image in that post is obviously faked (and admitted to be so). Look at some of the obvious bits... The typeface is obviously not right on the specs. The lens has a red dot and there's a lens release button. Which the other image all has "right." If it's a fake, it's a better one, at least.
Wow...taking the time to photoshop a fake camera based off of a "wish list" and that is the end result ?
As Thomas Hardys character said in the movie Inception "You mustn't be afraid to dream a bit bigger"
I'd have to think if most people were to photoshop a fake camera (which they probably wouldn't see worth the time in doing) they were certainly not have a wish list of slow zoom, non IC, no VF, aps-c sensor etc
Kind of like a list of all things I'd really wish NOT to find on the camera
douglasf13 wrote:
It probably drains more power, but, either way, the M-E is priced like it is because Leica just made an M9 with a couple of features removed.
Come on now, Leica doesn't "remove" features for a given price point, rather they simply provide a more back to basics approach for the true enthusiast who eschew such reliance upon modern features that "real" photographers don't need.
Heck, I bet Leica could make a camera with no LCD and some people would still defend it, saying how its more like film because you can't see your results until you get back home, and how its for real photographers because and not those who rely on histograms etc as a crutch yadda yadda.
Some brands can simply do no wrong in some peoples eyes.
