Looked again. I'm not so sure now, but it looks like there is a distinct change in contrast where a finder window would be, as if its glass in that spot. I HOPE so, because the zoom mirrorless with the slow lens is just too disapointing.
Leica brings out emotion, good and bad.
The people that love them and can afford them will buy them, regardless of anything said, any review.
The people that think an electronic camera is some kind of blasphemy, or feel a Red Dot isn't worth the money won't.
I personally cannot walk by a Leica counter and not want to buy almost everything. The S, The R, most M, I dig em.
The problem is they don't do most of what I need, but damn, it's so hard not to buy.
Can you easily tether an S? If not, that's just nuts considering the price, the size of the camera.
I don't know anyone that can shoot a commercial project without the client's wanting to see every image.
Why didn't Leica make some type of real Digital R? When you think Leica you think 35mm and I believe had the R had autofocus, they would have sold boatloads of them, or at least a lot more than they did.
I think the R is the most beautiful 35mm camera I've seen.
As I mentioned I just bought a 4/3's gh3 and a box of lenses. It's not a beautiful camera, but it is a camera that does just about everything.
For the GH I bought the M to Pana adapter and couldn't wait to see it with Leica lenses and honestly they're not really disappointing, but not over the moon better, or as good as the 4/3's 2.8 zooms.
Finally with the 90 I could actually see the framing and focus, and it works great on the 4:3's platform, but there is ca, and it's not as pretty or consisently sharp as the Panasonic 2.8 zooms with o.s..
BTW: I've compared the gh3 to my last year's 1ds3's and I can see virtually no difference in quality at comparable iso, image quality, which really surprised me as I expect a sensor 1/2 the size to have a more limited result.
Maybe I'm reading into it because it's new, but I must admit so far I'm surprised with this small format.
But back to Leica.
I think they've put themselves into a rock and a hard place. Like Porsche that wouldn't introduce any car except rear engine, without feeling the heat of traditionalists.
Then they finally broke loose offered an SUV and it became their best seller.
I have a friend that's a celeb that loves everything Leica, carries it around the world and comes back with about 50% in focus.
His partner takes a 5d something and comes back with 80% in focus.
Leica should ask him if he wants an interchangeable lens camera with autofocus that is a full frame leica, not a mini, nano whatever.
Anyway.
In regards to what Leica charges, I've never understood that complaint.
They charge what they can get and I'm all for charging what you can get.
I mean what photographic brand name draws the high end attention of Leica?
When we have all of our cameras on set and working, nobody, client's, talent, crew notices the dslrs. The only thing clients mention is the Red 1 but everybody looks over at my old M8 and picks it up and looks through it.
I don't know what they expect to see, but probably something special.
Leica just draws people in.
You take a Fuji x1pro, toss it over your shoulder and everybody will ask, is that a leica?
IMO
BC
