Leica

[marton]

http://petapixel.com/2016/10/12/leicas-new-limited-edition-camera-covered-ping-pong-paddle-rubber/

That'll be $15,000 please.

[fdisilvestro]

If the cover lasts as long (I should say as short) as a Ping pong racquet, then it is a very bad idea

[drmike]

To be fair once the novelty wears off you won't actually play ping pong using the camera all that much so it should last well. You sort of feel Leica knows at least one segment of its market well

[Rob C]

Even if they'd thought of keeping it black... you'd still get a great grip, just like Trump!

Rob

[Petrus]

Ping-pong paddle rubber needs to be changed quite often, as it hardens and looses its bounce and stickiness. I wonder if the rubber on this Leica can be easily peeled off and replaced with different surface for different shooting conditions. If you take it out for a spin, defensive or aggressive shooting assignments.

[Telecaster]

Comical IMO. But meant to be displayed rather than used.

I'll admit here to owning a titanium & brown leather M6 TTL. But at least the leather is worn & darkened through years of use. (Got it from a photojournalist friend who took great joy in breaking it in.) 

-Dave-

[ripgriffith]

Comical IMO. But meant to be displayed rather than used.

I'll admit here to owning a titanium & brown leather M6 TTL. But at least the leather is worn & darkened through years of use. (Got it from a photojournalist friend who took great joy in breaking it in.) 

-Dave-

One of my all-time favorite Leicas, and one I was saddest to part with (in retrospect), was an M6 Titanium with black ostrich leather.  Granted, the titanium was just a finish, but the dark silver gray was a perfect complement to the texture and color of the ostrich leather cover.  It was matched with a 35 f1.4 Summilux.

[drmike]

Having been a little snarky about the camera if it gives the owner joy then it's worth it. I am also guilty. I don't need a Jaguar but I have one and I really should sell it but it's too lovely although being 20 years old is getting a bit unreliable. But I love driving it (just not too far) and it only cost £880

[muntanela]

If really used, it would become very dirty soon. I can't image how to clean it effectively.

[eronald]

Ping-pong paddle rubber needs to be changed quite often, as it hardens and looses its bounce and stickiness. I wonder if the rubber on this Leica can be easily peeled off and replaced with different surface for different shooting conditions. If you take it out for a spin, defensive or aggressive shooting assignments.

I know a tiny specialist shop which refits table-tennis bats. Maybe there could be a camera refitter?

Edmund

[RSL]

Really sad to see Leica leave the camera business to enter the bling business and then produce something this silly.

[Telecaster]

I'd say Leica is in the camera business and the bling business. The latter helps underwrite the former. I strongly suspect that without the baubles the company wouldn't make enough bank to produce the tools.

-Dave-

[Rob C]

I'd say Leica is in the camera business and the bling business. The latter helps underwrite the former. I strongly suspect that without the baubles the company wouldn't make enough bank to produce the tools.

-Dave-

I think you're right; price removes many, but not all woking pros who can find alternative good stuff far less OTT in price. Which leaves the amateur with the funds, and the other option, the casual rich gadget-freak who might like the funny stuff better than anything else Leica makes that is seen as a serious bit of kit. None of this is to knock the company though; if it can market funny funky stuff, go for it - folks with no money but plenty of superior opinion aren't going to pay the bills for them.

Rob

[RSL]

Their lenses still are the best available. But they never quite grasped the digital world. I used split-image rangefinder Leicas for many years, but automatic focusing in most modern digital cameras beats split-image hands down. I don't think Leica can catch up, so I guess you're right, Rob. They have to resort to producing jewelry, because they no longer can produce competitive cameras. It's sad. I'd love to have the modern equivalent of my much loved M4, but it ain't gonna happen.

[Rob C]

Their lenses still are the best available. But they never quite grasped the digital world. I used split-image rangefinder Leicas for many years, but automatic focusing in most modern digital cameras beats split-image hands down. I don't think Leica can catch up, so I guess you're right, Rob. They have to resort to producing jewelry, because they no longer can produce competitive cameras. It's sad. I'd love to have the modern equivalent of my much loved M4, but it ain't gonna happen.

Hi Russ,

I never owned a Leica, but did print from them quite often. Where, in your view, has the digitial M9-onwards range fallen down compard with the film versions?

I had imagined that with the new/replaced sensors they were good to go, or is it mainly, or even only, the lack of af (which you pointed out) that you see as the fatal flaw? Were I able to afford one without endangering the health of the banks that I use, I would probably still have to pass, I think, because of that lack of af. After a lifetime of manual focus, my personal optical system has had to admit defeat.

There is one very important additional factor for me: I do like to get a sense of DOF when I frame a shot, even if just an approximate one. Hence the reflex habit. Having been using my 2.8/180mm Nikkor wide open quite a lot recently, that's even more the case; DOF makes some shots.

Rob

[RSL]

Really sad to see silly comments such as this. Leica have been making 'special editions' alongside their utilitarian cameras for decades.

And you base this on what exactly? Your extensive use of modern Leica Lenses and the best modern lenses available from other manufacturers?

And you base this on what exactly? Your extensive use of Leica digital cameras?

Hi Keith, Yes, I agree, Leica has been making silly edition cameras alongside their routine stuff ever since they got into digital.

I still use Leica DG lenses with my four-thirds Olympus Pen-F. Used them for years on the E-P1. Alternative lenses for the four-thirds bodies I've tried aren't as good. And yes, I use the best available Nikon lenses on my Nikons.

And I base my judgment regarding Leica's current stuff partly on the lack of autofocus, but also on their absurd prices for equipment that simply doesn't beat the other top-of-the-line digital stuff on the market. They're trading on their name rather than on the superior performance of their product. It makes me sad because I remember when I paid a bit more for my Leicas than for competitive equipment, but they were enough better than their competitors to make the difference in price reasonable. That's simply no longer true.

[Zorki5]

Leica have been making 'special editions' alongside their utilitarian cameras for decades.

Making "special editions" is one thing, going Lunar is a completely different story. If you do not see the difference... Well, there's not much to discuss.

My first reaction to the OP was to ask a simple question: "Is there anything that Leica can do to become a laughing stock of the photography world, as Hasselblad became (albeit, thankfully, for a short period...) before them?"

But then I answered my question myself: "No" (so I didn't post anything). And it does seem that I was right.

[Rob C]

Rob, take it from someone who actually uses the equipment, wears specs and also has serious problems with vision - retinal TIAs and macular degeneration - the combination of rangefinder, liveview, LCD and EVF delivers flexibility and precision together with full visualisation of DOF.

P.S. The gravestone inscription could be of interest to another digital Leica M user here ;-)

Hello, Keith,

Yes, I know there's an EVF available, at very high price, and that you have access to LV etc. but that latter depends upon tripod use. The last time I used LV - the only time I can think of, in fact - was about two years ago when I made the snaps for the apartment sale effort. I didn't find it much use for focussing, really, because the old 1/3 way in was good enough (not using a tilt lens, just a 24mm stopped down quite far); the reason I used LV was to make sure I was getting everything in, as the 'prosumer' Nikons don't do 100% viewfinder coverage, unlike in the days of good film cameras from them. You made your pact with the powers of precise and carry a tripod; I made my pact with the gods of tripodless chance and that's how it goes. Having said which, those shots of yours of the blurred foreground blooms and the vases are exquisite, but I hope to do my stuff hand-held, which without af would be mission impossible, for me.

Rob

[Zorki5]

Forgive me, I'm just a Newbie.

Keith, in fact, there was not one but two reasons for me not to reply to the OP.

One I already described.

Second, it was also quite obvious what kind of answer to expect from the rarefied air of stratospheric heights where Leica photographers dwell...

Keith, I know and respect your work, seen the images you posted to this thread in other threads, and liked them (e.g. this one: http://www.keithlaban.co.uk/Boy.jpg). Well, what can I say? It just makes you calling of this abomination "a special edition" even more sad...

[Rob C]

Shit, there was I thinking liveview works quite independently of whether the camera is mounted on a tripod or not. I often use it when handholding. Nearly all my 'street' work is shot using liveview and all handheld. Far from being expensive my EVF cost the princely sum of  £125.

As I've said, I have serious visual problems and yet have only ever owned one AF camera. I don't miss it or desire it.

Yes, Keith, of course you can activate it, LV - you could do that probably in free fall with or without a parachute, in which case a tripod might actually turn out to be a hindrance; but it seems crazy to me to turn an expensive camera into nothing more than a cellphone.

320 quid for an EVF doesn't seem cheap to me - you were lucky to get a Leica one for one twenty-five! I do think you can use another maker's version, though.

;-)

Rob