I'd be more confident in this camera if it was 'made in Japan' ( or China, Korea..) instead of 'made in Germany'. Electronics and Leica hadn't never been a 'happy couple'. Even the top range M-240 suffers from a dated processor which limits absurdly the Liveview functionality, for instance.
Besides, a 46/6.4 lens is almost an insult. Diffraction starts to show already at f/8 in a APS-C sensor.
IMO, a "Panaleica" Vario X with a 18-55/2.8-4 zoom, priced $1500-1700 would have been an acceptable product without tarnishing Leica's image among many advanced users.
Maybe Leica is testing the market to see how much the luxury boutique segment will swallow at no matter the price. If they're reasonably successful with this camera, I can't image what will be next..
Unfortunately we have become accustomed to the mass forum hysteria that accompanies the launch of every new Leica product. Like most things in life, it's a matter of, is this product for me or not? If this product is for you, buy it. If it's not for you, for whatever reason, including price, just move on.
well for someone who loves proper manual controls, and there's a few of us out there, it looks ok. Lots of points for the proper focusing ring on an AF lens. But same as everything else leica, it's expensive. I mean seriously, this is a deposit for a fishing boat right there, for the slowest lens south of large format...
nnnnnah.
rattymouse wrote:
Dont listen to "other people". Go to flickr and look for yourself. You will see how tack sharp such images are.
some peoples opinions i trust on such matters, others not so much. i just did go to flickr, clicked on a couple stopped down landscapes at the wide end of the zoom where i could view the image at original size. the lens looks worse than my old olympus 4/3 14-42mm kit zoom did in the corners. tack sharp it is not. annoying CA and softness in the corners (nicely sharp in the center though). it looks sharp enough at web sizes though. i'd be seriously surprised if this new leica isn't substantially better in that regard.
With all due respect, @DoubleNegative, your op ed piece is a bit conflicting. you don't want to promote hatred among the members of the community but the accompanying photo embodies otherwise: a person--a child, no less--propping his middle finger in a crowd. whatever you are trying to impart as a positive message gets muddled already with an image that's deemed offensive to a lot of people.
and let me point out: negativity and criticism are two different things; it's OK to criticize somebody, but it's NOT OK to be negative towards somebody. criticisms are what makes us strive to improve, negativity is just something that poisons the soul.
As for the new Leica that has caused havoc among several forums, I just hope Leica is reading them. again, the *criticisms* are valid, but the *negativity/animosity/hatred* isn't...hopefully, they can tell the difference and channel them towards a new tools that will make all of us aspire: to become better photographers.
joe88 wrote:
I started this thread 25 pages back, its been an entertaining read, just what we expected with a Leica thread
Indeed, Joe! We got mass hysteria, high emotions, personal attacks, Leica bashing, total desperation, nervous breakdowns, dentist bashing, name calling, just to name a few major components
dalegaspi wrote:
With all due respect, @DoubleNegative, your op ed piece is a bit conflicting. you don't want to promote hatred among the members of the community but the accompanying photo embodies otherwise: a person--a child, no less--propping his middle finger in a crowd. whatever you are trying to impart as a positive message gets muddled already with an image that's deemed offensive to a lot of people.
and let me point out: negativity and criticism are two different things; it's OK to criticize somebody, but it's NOT OK to be negative towards somebody. criticisms are what makes us strive to improve, negativity is just something that poisons the soul.
As for the new Leica that has caused havoc among several forums, I just hope Leica is reading them. again, the *criticisms* are valid, but the *negativity/animosity/hatred* isn't...hopefully, they can tell the difference and channel them towards a new tools that will make all of us aspire: to become better photographers. ...Show more →
The image is meant to represent all the mean people and what's going on.
I agree, negativity and criticism are two different things. While being critical is good, negativity is not.
As for Leica - they didn't cause this. WE did. They may have fanned the flames a little... But this is nothing new.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Indeed, Joe! We got mass hysteria, high emotions, personal attacks, Leica bashing, total desperation, nervous breakdowns, dentist bashing, name calling, just to name a few major components
wait there was dentist bashing and i missed it? i should have been reading more carefully.
sebboh wrote:
wait there was dentist bashing and i missed it? i should have been reading more carefully.
I hate dentists!!!! There ya go.
Actually, I wanted to be a dentist much of my childhood, and my Uncle, who initially got me interested in photography, is a dentist. So I'm a big liar.
dalegaspi wrote:
With all due respect, @DoubleNegative, your op ed piece is a bit conflicting. you don't want to promote hatred among the members of the community but the accompanying photo embodies otherwise: a person--a child, no less--propping his middle finger in a crowd. whatever you are trying to impart as a positive message gets muddled already with an image that's deemed offensive to a lot of people.
and let me point out: negativity and criticism are two different things; it's OK to criticize somebody, but it's NOT OK to be negative towards somebody. criticisms are what makes us strive to improve, negativity is just something that poisons the soul.
As for the new Leica that has caused havoc among several forums, I just hope Leica is reading them. again, the *criticisms* are valid, but the *negativity/animosity/hatred* isn't...hopefully, they can tell the difference and channel them towards a new tools that will make all of us aspire: to become better photographers. ...Show more →
edwardkaraa wrote:
Unfortunately we have become accustomed to the mass forum hysteria that accompanies the launch of every new Leica product. Like most things in life, it's a matter of, is this product for me or not? If this product is for you, buy it. If it's not for you, for whatever reason, including price, just move on.
What do you mean? That there's no point in participating in a discussion about a piece of equipment if I'm not gonna buy it?
Imagine it is Fuji or Sony who come up with a camera with this spec and price, there would be even more bashing (how many "RX1 is overpriced" thread out there?)
So, I am not surprised by the Leica bashing. I am surprised by the Leica defending.
Seems like there's something strange happening to many people when they own Leica equipment. Normal, rational thinking seems to mostly disappear. Left is a new kind of rationalism, where the red dot makes up for about everything. There seems to be a need/wish to stick together with other Leica owners to "defend" themselves from the "rest". Must be a pretty interesting phenomenom for a psycologist or likewise.
(I'd really like to get the new M and a few Leica lenses. I can afford it, but I think it's too much money for what it is. Maybe used later on. I can guarantee though that I'll never lose my normal, rational thinking should I get a Leica. Brands I don't care - at all - about.)
The price on this camera would be far less an issue it the lens were not one of the worst spec'ed lenses in recent memory. I just cannot fathom how f/6.4 could be acceptable to *ANYONE* seriously interested in photography.
rattymouse wrote:
The price on this camera would be far less an issue it the lens were not one of the worst spec'ed lenses in recent memory. I just cannot fathom how f/6.4 could be acceptable to *ANYONE* seriously interested in photography.
It is just inexplicable.
Light kit for landscapes stopped down I guess, a lot of people prefer a good zoom for that. But for three Gs it would take a truly spectacular lens and a really grumpy, big printing, 100% zooming, foliage loving landscape shooter to make a happy marriage.
There's also ppl like me who shoot street stopped down and prefocused and a good MF ring makes all the diff in the world, but I think we're such a small minority that it's not worth mentioning. Also in that space "IQ" is more or less irrelevant so $3k for a lens because it's better in the corners doesnt make a lot of sense.
