advertisement


Leica T

I find the AF speed great but occasionally it will refuse to focus at the first attempt unlike my EM5 which is never flustered. Of course CDAF isn't as yet as reliable and solid on APS-C as it is on m43. Bodes well though doesn't it that the goodness from the cameras you mention will inevitably end up in the next iteration of the X100.

cliffpatte said:
I sold mine to Mark LJ after doing the update. Better, yes, but not zip perfect like the OMD-EM1 for example.

I hope Fuji get round to sticking some E-M2 and XT1 goodness into the X100 Mark III, and then give it a proper ground lens instead of a moulded one.
Click to expand...
 
I agree with Jonboi.
100%
I like simple menus. The Leica digital I have used (M*, M9 M (240), DMR) have menus about a hundred billion times better thought through than others I have used.
The "look" of the pictures is far more than just about sharpness. Unless you are mainly interested in looking at sections of pictures blown up 100% on a computer screen inadequately sharp lenses are fairly infrequently encountered nowadays. For prints up to A4 most are sharp enough. Bigger prints narrows the field but IME boke, flare resistance, lack of chromatic aberrations and colour balance all are more important than sharpness in the look of photographs.
IME Leica beat all comers overall in their lens designs in these important parameters, without getting too big and heavy (which is the easy way to make a lens good).
Leica now have 3 models at 3 price points which, it seems to me, have been thought through not to steal sales from each other.
I don't like cameras without a viewfinder so the T may well not be for me.
But it is not plastic.
It is not a rip-off.
Styled by Audi, designed by Leica in Germany made by subcontractors and by Leica themselves.
 
Robert said:
Looks more like a piece of (bad) art IMO rather than a functional quality camera.

Posers toy.
Click to expand...

In what way is it not a functional quality camera?
I certainly regret the absence of a built in viewfinder, but there are plenty of cameras which lack that. The lenses will, based on previous experience, be better than or equal to any others, the menu will almost certainly not need continuous referral to a manual so the likelihood of getting excellent pictures is much better than with most cameras, I would expect, whether you like the styling or not.

Not as much a posers camera as a top model Canon or Nikon in most hands IME, most people you may want to impress won't know what it is.
A bit like the difference between a Patek-Phillippe v a Rolex.
 
I like the fact that we have a mix of amateurs, professionals and ex professionals in the photo room these days. For me the real question is this: could a pro photographer take just the T and two lenses to a photo shoot and produce something just as good as if he was using any semi professional body and lens combo in the same price range. I strongly suspect that the T can perform well enough. The fact that it is a pretty Bijou little thing for a rich boy poseur is neither here nor there really.
 
For me, the question would be would i want to pay three and a half grand on a camera like this in the first place when it's just a tarted up Sony at twice the price. In fairness i'd not want to use this kind of camera for any kind of job full stop.
 
where do you get 3.5 grand from? I think the list in the USA for the body is about $1699 - so I'd expect it to be £1350 in the UK including VAT
 
In my Leica dealers yesterday. He said camera, lens and viewfinder is 3.5 grand, and for the moment won't be split. It could have been 2.5 but i don't think so. Regardless, way overpriced for what it is.

Just looked up the pricing, £1350 for the body, £1250 the lens plus the viewfinder on top. As i said, my dealer said he will not be splitting for the foreseeable future.
 
gary yeowell said:
In my Leica dealers yesterday. He said camera, lens and viewfinder is 3.5 grand, and for the moment won't be split. It could have been 2.5 but i don't think so. Regardless, way overpriced for what it is.
Click to expand...

Nope, body only is £1350, and that is a similar price to the X-Pro1 when it first came out, so, no it's not "way overpriced" compared directly to Fuji.

Even when you factor in the lens, it isn't so crazy - When the Fuji X series came out the primes were £700 - £900 range. Obviously they've come down in price since. So you're comparing the new Leica with 35mm equivalent lens at £2700 for the pair to an X-Pro1 with 35mm lens when it came out at around the £2200 mark. Or compare the new Leica with 35mm lens to the Sony all in one RX1 - that was nearly £3k when it first came out.

Here are the prices, courtesy of Clifton Cameras
 
Gary, your Leica dealer may not split at the moment, but you can buy the body alone at £1350 plus the M adapter for £350. If you are already a M user, you can just get on and use your existing glass.

As for is it good enough for a job? Well, that sort of depends on the job. If you’re shooting for a large poster billboard or a double spread for Vogue, maybe not. But for standard portrait, wedding, commercial and PJ work, it might well be good enough. I will admit I have not played with a full size file, but the reviews seem to suggest that the output is pretty reasonable - ok not as good as a M240, S2 or a Hassy.

Having been to David Bailey’s retrospective at the NPG recently, part of the show is taken on a mobile camera. The prints are pretty big too. A pro shooter friend of mine, who shoots jazz bands for the press now shoots on a OMD-5. No-one’s complaining, not even the bands, who pay him to go on tour with him.

As I said earlier, it’s not for me. But it looks a pretty good product. I thought this was designed ground up by Leica. They have said specifically that it is a true Leica product, not a collaboration with another camera maker.
 
cliffpatte said:
Nope, body only is £1350, and that is a similar price to the X-Pro1 when it first came out, so, no it's not "way overpriced" compared directly to Fuji.

Even when you factor in the lens, it isn't so crazy - When the Fuji X series came out the primes were £700 - £900 range. Obviously they've come down in price since. So you're comparing the new Leica with 35mm equivalent lens at £2700 for the pair to an X-Pro1 with 35mm lens when it came out at around the £2200 mark. Or compare the new Leica with 35mm lens to the Sony all in one RX1 - that was nearly £3k when it first came out.

Here are the prices, courtesy of Clifton Cameras
Click to expand...

It is an overpriced boys toy in my book.
 
topoxforddoc said:
Gary, your Leica dealer may not split at the moment, but you can buy the body alone at £1350 plus the M adapter for £350. If you are already a M user, you can just get on and use your existing glass.

As for is it good enough for a job? Well, that sort of depends on the job. If you’re shooting for a large poster billboard or a double spread for Vogue, maybe not. But for standard portrait, wedding, commercial and PJ work, it might well be good enough. I will admit I have not played with a full size file, but the reviews seem to suggest that the output is pretty reasonable - ok not as good as a M240, S2 or a Hassy.

Having been to David Bailey’s retrospective at the NPG recently, part of the show is taken on a mobile camera. The prints are pretty big too. A pro shooter friend of mine, who shoots jazz bands for the press now shoots on a OMD-5. No-one’s complaining, not even the bands, who pay him to go on tour with him.

As I said earlier, it’s not for me. But it looks a pretty good product. I thought this was designed ground up by Leica. They have said specifically that it is a true Leica product, not a collaboration with another camera maker.
Click to expand...

No one is saying it isn't a capable image maker, hell even an IPhone can do some great work, but to use one on a job? Not likely. It's for the Apple IPhone generation.
 
So the designers of modern mirrorless cameras make cameras with a similar form factor, as they don’t need to include a pentaprism or RF. I don’t think that the Leica is a NEX-7 clone (like the Panasonic and DLux cameras). Just because cameras looks similar doesn’t mean that they are rip-ofs of each other. Here are images of the OMD-5, XT-1 and DF. To the untrained eye, they look similar, but they weren’t copies of each other.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusEM5/images/intro.jpg
http://3.static.img-dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t1/images/front-black.jpg?v=2816
http://static.trustedreviews.com/94/000029ce2/9df5/Nikon-Df-product-shot-2.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top