The overpriced Leica

[bcooter]

I love ccd cameras and for our work believe they produce a superior look.

Most people will disagree, but to each his own.

The thing is when I'm under heavy production moving from flash to continuous to available light, rarely do I use a ccd camera, but instead a 1dx.

It gets within a certain closeness to the ccd cameras, but better put it gets the job done fast.

But Leicas, I wouldn't say they're overpriced, because they sell for what they sell for.  The upside is you rarely change a leica every 2 years, the downside is most of them are single purpose cameras.

IMO

BC

[ErikKaffehr]

Keith,

Thanks for making that point… and thanks for posting another great image.

Best regards
Erik

I regularly set out with every intention of using my M9 but almost inevitably reach for the M240.

Reasons include the greater dynamic range, the superior high ISO performance and the option to select faster auto ISO speeds, the option of using Live View and an EVF together with the ability to frame with precision, the vastly superior screen, Focus Peaking and Image Magnification with the Focus Button, more MP...

When I compare files out of camera I have a preference for the M9 colour, just, but the last time I relied on out-of-camera files was in the last century.

Leica M240, 35mm Lux. Hangdog, Morocco, February 2015.

[JV]

I regularly set out with every intention of using my M9 but almost inevitably reach for the M240.

Reasons include the greater dynamic range, the superior high ISO performance and the option to select faster auto ISO speeds, the option of using Live View and an EVF together with the ability to frame with precision, the vastly superior screen, Focus Peaking and Image Magnification with the Focus Button, more MP...

When I compare files out of camera I have a preference for the M9 colour, just, but the last time I relied on out-of-camera files was in the last century.

Keith,

Thanks for the input!

The challenge for Leica though is that all of the things you mention can probably be done as good, if not better by a Sony a7II which is about $5K cheaper...

The M9 CCD look (different from MF CCD as well IMO) and the rangefinder experience are IMO what set Leica apart with the M9.

I have to admit that I never owned a M240 though, so perhaps I should give it a try...

How do you find the rangefinder focusing with the M240?  Do you find it easier than with the M9?

Best, Joris

[Paul Roark]

I shoot mostly with my Sony a7r now instead of my M9.  One can debate the advantages of each, but one area where I don't think there is any debate is that the Leica sensor (probably mostly because of the thinner cover over it) is way better at capturing details at the edges with relatively symmetrical wide angle lenses.  The inability to use the astoundingly good Leica M wide angles has been a huge disappointment for me.  (The WATE/Tri-Elmar 16-21 works well on the Sony due to it being a retrofocus zoom design, but it's larger, heavier, and not as good wide open as the best Leica fixed focus wides.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Johnny_Johnson]

I don't believe the A7ll handles Leica M wides much if any better than the A7r. My Zeiss ZM 21/2.8 and ZM 35/2 lenses are unusable on my A7ll. So, you're right, I don't consider the A7 series to be much of a substitute for the Leica.

Later,
Johnny

[Telecaster]

The challenge for Leica though is that all of the things you mention can probably be done as good, if not better by a Sony a7II which is about $5K cheaper...

I use a wide variety of rangefinder lenses with my A7r. Ignoring the blurring/smearing issues with wide (and sometimes not so wide) lenses, using those same lenses on an actual RF camera is just a more fluid experience. This is why I ended up getting a pair of lightly used M8.2s last year, about three months after getting the A7r. Eight years or so down the road the M8's "flaws"—extended IR response, APS-H sensor—no longer bother me…they just make the cameras different to the other stuff I own & use. Nowadays I enjoy going with what a camera offers rather than pulling & kneading its files to deliver a predetermined look. Call me the anti- Peter Lik. 

I recently got to try out Zeiss' 50mm Loxia manual focus lens on an A7s. Now that was an enjoyable experience. The camera & lens talk to each other…when you turn the focus ring the camera's focusing rectangle magnifies. And since you're turning an actual focusing helical you get the feel you expect from an MF lens. If the lens allowed auto-aperture control the combo would be just about perfect.

-Dave-

[JV]

Just to be clear, I never meant to say that the Sony does it better with Leica lenses...

I keep it separated, Leica lenses on the M9, Sony lenses (still few in number...) on the A7s...

[JV]

Hi Joris,

The Sony A series cameras are many things to many people but the one thing they're not to anyone are rangefinders. I came to rangefinders late but have adopted them and love them.

I tend to choose and build a system around specific lenses. As an example my preference for the Hasselblad H system was in large part due to my appreciation of the HCD 28mm f/4.0 lens. Time has moved on and now the same can be said of my preference for the M system and in combination with the Leica Super-Elmar 21mm f/3.4 ASPH, a fantastic lens - superior to the HCD 28 - and together with the M240 has now replaced the Hassy system for the same work which is something I could have never done with an M9. The M240 is so versatile. I love it in the hand, it just feels right. By contrast when I pick up a Fuji or Sony all I want to do is put them down again.

I'm not sure what Leica have done to improve on the rangefinder in the M240 but improved it is. Apparently it's also more robust - needed to be. Of course, it's also a joy to be able to use liveview to check the rangefinder calibration!

Best
Keith

I kind of was planning to give the next iteration of the M a try...  but thanks to you I might need to give the M 240 an earlier try...

I also have the Super-Elmar-M 21mm/f3.4.  Excellent lens I agree.

Let me think about this...

Thanks, Joris.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I am not sure the Leica is overpriced. To begin with the company was on edge of economic failure for a long time, the cameras were expensive but they didn't earn enough.

Andreas Kaufmann made a major investment (65 milliion €, as far as I recall) and now they are on the go. Making relatively few cameras by and large manually hast its costs. Also Leica needs to develop some new technology like the CMOS-sensor, the Maestro processor and a cover glass to support the M-line of lenses.

A company like Sony can build an advanced camera for a fracture of the cost, not least while it is kept simple. Also Sony can dilute much of development costs over a large production.

Leica has some compacts made by Panasonic, but they are not "blinged up" cameras like some so called "Hasselblads". Those cameras have a slightly different design and a somewhat higher price tag.

I would not argue that the Leica is worth it's price, that question is up to the buyer, but a largely mechanical camera built in small series in Germany will always be a bit on the expensive side.

Best regards
Erik

[JV]

As always I'd caution to try before you buy. In my opinion the M240 offers a significant improvement in terms of versatility but that said it is still fatally flawed in that it's impossible to scroll the focus point around the frame. Apparently Leica are well aware that this is seen by many as a balls-up and are unlikely to repeat the omission on the next incarnation which will probably be announced later this year.

That said, there have been some incredible offers on new M240s recently.

Good shooting   

Keith,

From what I have read and from what you say I gather that the M 240 is the better and more versatile "rangefinder" camera.

As above-mentioned I feel that Leica really needs a state of the art built-in EVF for the next M.  Anything less is simply not going to cut it and will only appeal to the already converted.

The EVF of Leica was probably already underwhelming 2 years ago and since then the gap with Fuji, Sony, Olympus, etc has only increased.

Which files you like best is a matter of personal preference.  I can say that I like the M9 files better out of the box but I am not sure whether after post there would still be a lot of difference.

The M currently goes for $6,500 in the US.  Despite a price increase (official price now $7,450) the promotion was prolonged because apparently the inventory is not moving fast enough.  Plus the stronger dollar.

Used ones go for anywhere between $4.5K and $5.5K, used M9 $3-3.5K...

Best, Joris.

[JV]

I just spotted this article.  A challenge on the CCD versus CMOS debate:
http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/02/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-1/

[ErikKaffehr]

Thanks!

Interesting, many users say there is a lot of difference, but I see very little.

Best regards
Erik

I just spotted this article.  A challenge on the CCD versus CMOS debate:
http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/02/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-1/

[silver92b@gmail.com]

I really don't understand some people's compulsions. The OP is trolling big time or is totally feeling inferior for not having a Leica (in spite of all his protestations). Why bother telling people to move away as fast as possible from something that most people don't have and would not have unless they really liked to? Others made the automobile comparison, but even then, they posited that the less expensive one is better. I say who cares? I'm a bit of a car nut and a camera collector and amateur photographer. I will buy and drive whatever I damned well please and I can afford. I have no need to put down other people's choices. I'm not so insecure or envious to throw around this little "sour grapes" tirade. If the OP hates Leicas so much, why does he have so many? Sounds fishy to me...

[LKaven]

I really don't understand some people's compulsions. The OP is trolling big time or is totally feeling inferior for not having a Leica (in spite of all his protestations). Why bother telling people to move away as fast as possible from something that most people don't have and would not have unless they really liked to? Others made the automobile comparison, but even then, they posited that the less expensive one is better. I say who cares? I'm a bit of a car nut and a camera collector and amateur photographer. I will buy and drive whatever I damned well please and I can afford. I have no need to put down other people's choices. I'm not so insecure or envious to throw around this little "sour grapes" tirade. If the OP hates Leicas so much, why does he have so many? Sounds fishy to me...

If he has so many Leicas, why would he have feelings of being "inferior" or "sour grapes".  Seems like he's speaking from a position of knowledge and experience.

I think Leica deserves the criticism it gets.  Their design is in many ways a good one, but in other ways, not at all.  The camera feels good, and works well.  But a single focus point for manual focus?  Surely there is a better way.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

First line of OP's posting: … I have 5 Leicas and 6 Fujis …

Best regards
Erik

I really don't understand some people's compulsions. The OP is trolling big time or is totally feeling inferior for not having a Leica (in spite of all his protestations). Why bother telling people to move away as fast as possible from something that most people don't have and would not have unless they really liked to? Others made the automobile comparison, but even then, they posited that the less expensive one is better. I say who cares? I'm a bit of a car nut and a camera collector and amateur photographer. I will buy and drive whatever I damned well please and I can afford. I have no need to put down other people's choices. I'm not so insecure or envious to throw around this little "sour grapes" tirade. If the OP hates Leicas so much, why does he have so many? Sounds fishy to me...

[mezzoduomo]

How is this not just plain ol' trolling? Leica operates in the luxury market, and doing so is how they stay in business. You can be offended (or not) by the existence of luxury goods. That's okay…your choice. But to broaden it into a "Leica owners are gear fondlers" thing is silly. In my experience they're (we're) as diverse a collection of folks as any other photo-based group. Far better to do creative things with whatever gear you happen to own & use.

-Dave-

During the last reporting period (ending March 2014) Leica's camera/lens/sport optics sales rose nearly 6% to well-over $300,000,000 for the year. The company is profitable, to the tune of nearly 14% net profit. Clearly, they are doing something right, and selling more than a few cameras to a few Ferrari owners.

Nikon? Canon?  Not so much good news. In fact, they are experiencing broadly falling sales. Big numbers, but smaller than last year, which was smaller than the year before that.
Fuji? Worldwide camera sales up about 8% in the year ended March 2014, and the 'imaging solutions' business was nicely profitable vs. a loss in 2013.