naturephoto1
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Leica 'M10" | |
ZhanMing12 wrote:
Alpha_Geist wrote:
ZhanMing12 wrote:
Andrew Gough wrote:
Zhanming, you are expressing the same doubts that I did in the beginning... I went to Leica because I was burned out from lugging a fast Canon system all over the world. I was tired of constant upgrades, weight (1Ds3's) and lens churn with each new sensor.
I first went into a Leica store in Paris, and the kind Gentleman loaned me a 35mm Summilux, and a M9 for the afternoon. I left my Canon kit with him and went shooting. It was refreshing, light, fun, and a return to the kind of shooting that I love to do. I came back, and the sales man had printed out all of the Canadian Leica dealers - no hard sell. When I processed the images, I realized just how special Leica lenses are, and I ordered a M9 and a few lenses.
Today, my SL is the same size as my M240 was with the GPS grip and EVF. The SL is slightly lighter than that combo, and the EVF is superb. The M10 maybe a very nice second cam, and if it has the same sensor, the images will be relatively the same. The SL with a fast M lens is a relatively small affair, much smaller than the equivalent Sony for example. The 50lux is a quarter of the size of the Sony Zeiss 50mm F1.4. You can fit a M camera, a WATE, 28mm Summicron, 50 lux, and a 90 Elmarit in a very small bag.
As Ron says, the Leica lenses are what its really all about.
When I bought my first M9, I was never really sure that anything was in focus, but somehow, the images were sharp right where they were supposed to be. I learned to trust the RF and LV, when wider than 21mm. Today, using the SL with M lenses is fast, easy, and nothing like an adapted Sony experience. The SL and M lenses were designed to work together.
Image quality, is so much more than megapixels or even DXO reports. The single biggest factor for me is the joy I get from shooting with this system, the image quality is simply superb, and I am never "fighting the cam". It just works well and gets out of the way. This allows me to concentrate only on the photography, and to get the shot that I want.
Can this be done with other systems, sure. Are they the same experience as a Leica - no. It really comes down to a bit of faith, this system has been in use for a long time, and there is a good reason for that. You need to have some faith, bite the bullet and buy one. It will be frustrating and rewarding all at once, but trust me, it will be worth it in the end.
Andrew
The Canon part is the same for me - that's the reason I starting using the NEX5 instead of a 5d classic. And I have a fairly nice setup of Leica glass - the 50mm APO Cron, the Noctilux ASPH and the 21mm/35mm Lux ASPH. I starting using M lenses on the NEX5, and now shoots the A7rII.
I agree that the SL was designed with M lenses in mind. But unless I'm shooting the Noctilux, the SL feels too big for the lens. It's nearly as heavy as the 7rII with the APO Cron attached. My ideal vision of a mirrorless Leica is a Q with the lens replaced with a M mount. The SL is probably the polar opposite of that.
All said and told, I'd probably stick with the 7rII even if the SL were $3,000. That's because while I agree that Sony has been piling on features excessively, a good amount of them are actually quite useful. Sony's DRO massively improves the quality of JPEGs while making sure that RAWs have highlight information. IBIS is probably something that you'll never see on a Leica, but being able to shoot at 1/8s or 1/4 in a pinch is great.
What I want is simply for Leica to at least put the latest imaging pipeline (e.g. great sensor, spot-on white balance, on-sensor metering with EFC) into its $7,000 bodies, and preferably also add some genuinely useful features (better peaking, unlimited self timer, electronic shutter, adjustable highlight warning). Those who want simplicity can turn all of it off. But Leica seems to content to design their cameras for a very narrow spectrum of shooting conditions. You can certainly use an M for portraiture or landscapes, but it's a subpar experience at best.
I shoot my 50mm APO Cron with AF (Techart) and face detection where the camera prioritizes a registered face  It works surprisingly well. Is it too much to ask for a 40MP digital M with live view overlay in the rangefinder?
It seems to me what you want and what Leica wants in their M cameras don't converge. That's fine and I understand where you are coming from. I disagree with you in the aspect that using the M is a subpar experience (and I wear glasses and can't use contacts). If it were subpar, then why do I enjoy using it so much? If it were subpar, then why would I continue to use it? Like people have mentioned earlier, if your notion of what you want an M to be doesn't align with Leica's offerings, then there are other excellent mirrorless cameras out there that might cater to your needs, be it a Sony, Fuji or even a different Leica (SL). I've owned multiple consumer, prosumer and professional cameras and lenses from both the big N and C brands, and often during the same time. I've slimmed my "collection" to one Fuji asp-c camera a few Leica M's. I use both systems to complement the way I shoot. I understand that I won't find the perfect camera that ticks all the check boxes for my needs as it's all mental masturbation. My enjoyment comes from knowing the rules (or limitations) of each camera I use and to utilize them to their full potential that coincides with my vision. That's why I don't solely shoot Fuji or Leica.
It is a great experience for doing many things. For street shooting and light event work I'd say unparalleled. But at Leica's price point I don't feel unjustified in expecting the M to be a better general-purpose body.
I suspect that Leica knows this. They did add video (which IMO quality-wise is completely useless for production work) to the type 240. But instead of that, why not add features that are directly relevant to what people use the M for? As I've said previously, you can always choose to turn a feature off, and the M is priced at a point where they can't possibly "overcharge" for just about anything.
The M system since its inception and the previous screw mount Leicas with interchangeable lenses were all around the idea of the rangefinder for focus and rapid photography. That is why Leica also released the Leica SL, SL2 and later Leica R cameras and system which was their SLR system with all of the capabilities of the Manual Focus and all around jack of all trades. That was a great system up until the system was discontinued and retired in 2009. There had been talk for some years of a digital Leica R solution that did not materialize and the idea seemed mothballed. That was until the release of the M240 which still offered the capabiliies of the rangefinder focusing as well as the ability of adapting R lenses, and other maker's lenses as well. At the time, Leica was touting the M240 as the R solution. But, as you have pointed out and many of us determined for ourselves, with the inability of shooting longer than 60 seconds with the shutter release, the inability of moving the focus point for the add on EVF or LCD, it's not so friendly mounting and taking off of the tripod etc., it really was not an ideal R solution so many of us just looked elsewhere including the Sony A7 series of cameras. That has now changed to some extent with the release of the new Leica SL which is very inviting to many of us and it is a real R solution. Save, the fact of the cost, the relatively large size, weight, and the limitation of the MP of the camera in particular to 24 MP. The SL and those to follow will hopefully be more to the liking of many that can afford the camera as it is a much better option for using extremely long, macro, and wide angle lenses than many of us want that are Landscape, Wildlife, and Nature photographers.
Rich
|
