Value of Leica M240 and future models

[achrisproduction]

Check out the Fuji X100s.  Its the closest to an M.  Makes beautiful files.  Has a shutter dial, and an aperture ring.

I love the X100S, I use it more than my M240 M9-P and MM!

[MoreOrLess]

I'd say actually charging as much as they do likely leaves Leica much less vulnerable to Sony, had they been say offering a cheap digital M with more standard build and an EVF the loss of business would likely be much greater.

I'd argue that a bigger threat to them might be this rumoured new Nikon "retro" body, it sounds like it might offer a more similar(although obviously SLR) expereince to an M.

What more you could I'd say argue that the Sony will potentially increase the market for Leica's lens sales where as the Nikon will not.

[FMueller]

If the people asking you this question are thinking that you can use your Leica lenses on the A7r it is unlikely that the wide angle Leica or other M mount wide lenses will work well with the A7r.

Ray angle is a real issue that Leica addresses, even if imperfectly.

I've ordered an A7r and I also I have an M9 with wides that I love (e.g. 21 Super Elmar, 28 Elmarit) but I am not expecting them to work well on the Sony

After Sony announced the A7 and A7R I have a lot of people coming up to me asking why am I still keeping the M240, is it because it looks cool, its a Leica or its expensive.  I guess I just enjoy the rangefinder experience.  (not that they can understand)  but I am already wondering at the same time what would be left for Leica to attract new users other than selling RangeFinder experience? 

[achrisproduction]

If the people asking you this question are thinking that you can use your Leica lenses on the A7r it is unlikely that the wide angle Leica or other M mount wide lenses will work well with the A7r.

Ray angle is a real issue that Leica addresses, even if imperfectly.

I've ordered an A7r and I also I have an M9 with wides that I love (e.g. 21 Super Elmar, 28 Elmarit) but I am not expecting them to work well on the Sony

yea anything below 35mm will not work with the A7 and A7R. 

[bcooter]

Nothing wrong with a 5d2!  Except for the inconsistent AF I really liked it.   In any case, I have two M9s, both used.  I bought them cheap. 

I think the 5d2 shoots a beautiful file.  I tested a 5d3 and it was too smooth, too I dunno digital and though the focus can be challanged on the 2, it's a great buy, good camera, probably best deal in the Canon world.


IMO

BC

[TMARK]

The 1ds3 is a great camera as well, has a nice big VF, super solid.  But it is a hog of a camera. 

I compare the 5d2 to the D800, and I like the files from the Canon better.  Yes, not as flexible in post, and they fall apart quickly, and the Nikon is better built, but with an the 50 1.2 and the 85 1.2, as well as the Zeiss lenses, they have a very nice feel to them.  Certainly not CCD, but for skin tones, the 5d2 beats the Nikon.  The Canon is up there with the Fuji x100 on color.  Where the Nikon shines is DR and tonality, especially for B&W.

I agree about the 5d3 being too smooth.  It is a little 1 series, except for the finder.  I had one for a month.  I had to decide if I was going to keep it or submit it as an expense and hand it over to the studio.  I handed it in, with no regrets.

I think the 5d2 shoots a beautiful file.  I tested a 5d3 and it was too smooth, too I dunno digital and though the focus can be challanged on the 2, it's a great buy, good camera, probably best deal in the Canon world.


IMO

BC

[achrisproduction]

I think the 5d2 shoots a beautiful file.  I tested a 5d3 and it was too smooth, too I dunno digital and though the focus can be challanged on the 2, it's a great buy, good camera, probably best deal in the Canon world.


IMO

BC

I like the file from 5D Mark I the most if Canon bodies wise. 

[allegretto]

sorry fellows, the RX-1 has both a shutter speed dial AND an aperture ring. Why do I still hear this?

is someone actually comparing 45 yr old cameras for depreciation?

how many still use M-4's? Not that I'm immune. I also had an M4 with a 35 in 60's and 70's. Came back for an m8 and M9.

M8 was not that good  a camera IMHO, M9 was a significant improvement

[Iluvmycam]

I've only looked at the cam photos at BH. But from what I can see the Sony does not have a shutter dial like a Leica or Fuji X.  Looks to me it has a program dial and the shutter speeds have to be adjusted with a seperate dial.  

Another downfall for Sony is it has no aperture ring on the lenses and no distance markings on the lens either for zone focus. Screw Sony, these are not pro street cams in any way whatsoever. They were designed by some wizbang camera fondling kid that does not know much about street photography. You can see it in the design.

I prefer a rangefinder when all is said and done. Due to Leicas crazy prices I had to give them up and I sold off all my Leica glass. I went over to the Fuji X. While it has it shortcomings, it works fine for me as a zone focus street cam.

My next book was 90% shot with a Fuji X 10% with a M43. (100% of the pix at link are with a Fuji X.) I'm happy as hell with Fuji X. Just wish it was a true Leica knockoff as the Fuji has poor AF and has terrible manual focus. But shooting like I do, ANY AF would not work.

http://ifreeztime.tumblr.com/

(nude warning)

[ripgriffith]

I compared the Leica M type 240 with the D4 because a similar comparison in 1968 would have been the FTn vs. the M4.  The FTn was motor drive capable, had interchangable viewscreens and viewfinders and a built-in light meter, none of which was available for the M4.  The FTn's spec sheet had much more than the M4's, and as you pointed out the D4's spec sheet has much more than the M240's spec sheet.  A closer match for the M4's spec sheet would have been the Nikkormat FS which IIRC was much less expensive than the M4.

If you talk about spec sheets, then you really just don't get Leica.

[Iluvmycam]

If you talk about spec sheets, then you really just don't get Leica.

These high profile DSLR are no good for street work. OK, you can use it. But I could never get a shot like with with one.

http://www.artslant.com/ew/works/show/721151-the-lost-princess

Anyone that says get a big Nikon instead of a Leica for street work shows me they know nothing about serious street shooting. If they don't mind confrontations then go ahead with a big DSLR. But people are paranoid nowadays and don't like being photographed.

If I was shooting a big DSLR the parents would be all over me for shooting kids like I do. Nowadays your a pedaphile if you shoot kids.

You landscape photogs, OK, get a view cam if you like. But if your serious street you need a stealthy cam.