If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:18:30 GMT, Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
"Max Perl" wrote Leica is good at mechanical work..... but not very good at electronics?.... so hopefully they have got a partner to design and produce the electronic part of the camera. Panasonic? The sensor is apparantly from Kodak. Scanning through the preview on DPReview, there doesn't seem to be a mention of who made the processor unit. -dms |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
There are very few true dogs in camera land. 99% of the cameras work better than 99% of the photographers using them. BTW this is total nonsense and you should know it. For the vast majority of photo their camera is a bit limiting factor on how good their photos look. If you are one of those people how is happy going out and finding what you think is an interesting looking staircase and photographing it to make it look artistic then sure any crap camera will work. But most people have the subject they want to photograph in mind when they set out to get a photo, whether it be sport, landscape or photos of people. Take a look at a bunch of photos form someone who was using a cheap camera and much of what you are going to see is ugly, and it is not all if any the fault of the person taking the photo. One of the big advantages that a good camera gives you is being able to shoot using available light and avoiding the really bad photos one gets when using the on camera flash. The test of a good camera is not can you get a good photo from it, the test of a good camera is what range of conditions can you get a good photo with it. Give an average photographer a 5D and have them shoot a bunch of photos and then give that same photographer a point and shot film camera loaded with ISO 400 print film using a lens that does not go faster then f/5.6 and let them take another set of photos, many photos from the second set will look like crap. Maybe the photos from the 5D will not hang on the walls of a museum, but how many photographer are shooting for their photos to hand on a museum wall? But that is not the point, the same photographer using a better camera will get better photos. Scott |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
"Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote:
A Leica is just a nice thing to have, it is beautifully built, nice to hold, makes a nice sound ... but it takes the same picture. Takes the same picture? That isn't the case. What is probably true is that you cannot tell much difference between a Leica M lens *at f/8* and a Canon, Nikon, Minolta or Pentax lens at f/8. But compare the lenses wide open and there is a world of difference between the results; several of the current range of Leica M lenses actually perform at their best wide open. For example, the Leica M 24mm f/2.8 ASPH has a higher resolving power at f/2.8-4.0 than any other brand of commercially available 24mm lens at *any* aperture. The 21mm f/2.8, 35mm f/1.4 and f/2, 50mm f/1.0 and f/1.4, 75mm f/2, 90mm f/2 and 135mm f/3.4 (all ASPH lenses) are also superlative performers when used wide open. With most brands of lens there is an imperative to use the lens at its "sweet spot" wherever possible, because optical performance drops away very rapidly as you open up beyond f/8 or so. But with modern Leica M glass, you can effectively shoot at whatever aperture you need and get outstanding results. Note that these comments do not apply equally to Leica R glass, especially in focal lengths of less than 50mm. Despite that, Leica R wide angle lenses are still significantly superior in optical performance to those from Canon, for example, which explains the extreme popularity of Leica R to Canon EF mount adapters. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
"Scott W" wrote:
The problem I see Leica having with this camera is that they are missing the main selling point of a Leica. In the past many people considered their cameras the best 35mm cameras available. But it is the photos you care about and not the journey then there are much better camera. And how many photographers are going to use a camera that cost top dollar but does not produce top quality images? Is it worth that amount of money to many people for the feel and sound of the shutter (wish they messed up on the M8 anyway)? People who think that Leica users place such a high priority on looks, feel and sound are deluding themselves. The #1 reason for using a Leica M rangefinder is the optical performance of the lenses, which is simply outstanding, especially when used wide open. The #2 reason is the rangefinder focusing, which is extremely fast and accurate. You say there are "much better cameras". If you are shooting sport or wildlife, I would agree; the rangefinder is not the best camera for these tasks. But for those genres of photography that suit a rangefinder camera, there is no better tool. There are certainly no better lenses, and very few that even come close. You don't even have to pay Leica prices; the Zeiss Ikon costs half the price of a Leica M7 or MP body, and the Voigtländer Bessa R2A/M or R3A/M costs about half the price of a Zeiss Ikon. They all have Leica M mount and they all accept the superlative Leica M glass. Leica M rangefinders are not for everyone. They are clearly not for you, so why not just accept that and move on? Please don't criticise something that you obviously don't understand. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
Chris Loffredo wrote:
Is Leica too expensive? New stuff probably (and the M8 definitely! I have to disagree. ;-) I was very pleasantly surprised by the price of the M8. It was at least GBP 500 (~US $900) less than I expected, and I am looking forward to receiving mine. The premium over the film M7 is about 50%, which is on the low side when comparing digital SLR camera prices with their film cousins. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
"Max Perl" wrote:
Leica is good at mechanical work.....but not very good at electronics?....so hopefully they have got a partner to design and produce the electronic part of the camera. Is it possible to find a working R4 today?? .....I guess that most SL2's still working. Plenty of working R4 bodies available - just look on eBay! And plenty of Minolta parts bodies available too. ;-) The SL2s will probably still work after a 23rd century nuclear holocaust - they were simply *too* well made. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
Daniel Silevitch wrote:
The sensor is apparantly from Kodak. Scanning through the preview on DPReview, there doesn't seem to be a mention of who made the processor unit. Leica have sensibly avoided Imacon, who let Leica down very badly with the Digital Modul-R (the DMR is a fine unit but the delivery rate has been painfully slow). The M8 electronics were designed by a respected German company, but I am sorry I cannot recall the name. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
"Kinon O'Cann" wrote in message news:UYdQg.1$1B.0@bos- Then again, to put things in perspective a Patek Phillipe men's watch STARTS at $12000, but a Leica isn't made of gold. An excellent analogy......There are dozens (perhaps hundreds) of watches on the market that can (and do) tell time as well as a Patek Phillipe. So, the owners of such a watch are wearing jewelry, and not time keepers. - Much the same thing might be said of the owners of Leicas. It may capture images as well or better than anything else on the market, but to pay $5K for one, and over $1k per lens, is a bit of overkill for the minute, mostly unobservable difference, don't you think? So, the Leica owners are basically carrying jewelry, rather than cameras. And, in doing so, they give up one important thing. They can no longer blame their equipment for their bad photos....:^) |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
"jeremy" wrote in message news:LRfQg.26$Kh.1@trnddc05... "Rich" wrote in message ups.com... Kinon O'Cann wrote: This question has been asked many, many times, and long before the first digital camera was produced. Leica builds a premium quality camera for a small but dedicated group of shooters. The materials used and quality of construction is absolutely unmatched. Simply put, Leicas aren't for everyone. In the end, the decision is simple: it's up to you whether or not it's worth the money. Best lenses on the planet, too. At about 650 grams, it costs $352 per oz. 1 oz of silver costs $12.00. So, it costs less to mine and process and refine the equivalent amount of silver out of 29 tons of rock than the Leica is worth. The Leica, by weight is about 1/2 the price of gold. Then again, something NASA might send into orbit that size might cost a few million $'s. A 16 meg medical grade CCD (if they exist) would probably cost about $100,000. It's all relative. There comes a point where the cost of the equipment is too high to justify actually *using it.* Even Erwin Puts has recently acknowledged that photographers, except for a small band of dedicated ones, long ago abandoned the precision rangefinder in favor of Japanese SLRs. I've read about several informal "blind" tests where the participants were unable to determine which camera took which photograph. Bob Monaghan did one such test. So how much is Leica's legendary (or should I say, "mythical") margin of superiority worth? Is there any photo taken with Leica equipment that couldn't have been taken with a Nikon or even a Minolta? Probably not, but one still might justify owning a Leica based on reliability, if one were accustomed to traveling to sufficiently remote locations in order to take one's pictures. But for most of us "city" types, spending $10 grand for an outfit when one can get just as good pictures with $2 grand or less is a complete waste of money that could be increasing in value if put into the right investments........ |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?
Nicholas O. Lindan wrote: [Gag reflex off] It isn't about the destination but the journey. [Gag reflex on] A Leica is just a nice thing to have, it is beautifully built, nice to hold, makes a nice sound ... but it takes the same picture. Before I decided on purchasing a new camera system I had two choices. I could get a Hasselblad or a Leica M. I looked at the pros on cons of both systems. The final determination was that the Leica, though well made had too many reported QC problems from users (the frame counter that stopped working for example) and frankly, it did exactly what my Nikon was able to do - take photos with 35mm film. The pictures would look slightly different (contrast, sharpness, etc.), but basically it would be still taken on 24mmx36mm film. I got a Konica Hexar with silent mode to make up for quiet operation. Yes, the Leica was quiet, but it wasn't as quiet as the Hexar. The only option over the Hexar was that the Leica had interchangable f/1.4 aperture lenses. I decided on the Hasselblad and haven't regretted it. The large negative and the quality of the equipment was really good. The pictures definitely looked different when enlarged compared with 35mm. Now it appears that Leica folks will be faced with the same situation I faced a decade ago. Do they spend $5645 for a Leica M8 or $4500+ for a Canon or Nikon SLR that will basically get them the same 10MP picture (yes, the Canon and Nikon have more pixels...I know)? In fact the same folks can spend $2000 for a Nikon D200 or one of those new Canon 10MP cameras if they want a fair comparison. The whole idea is that you can basically get the same thing with the same quality or sometime better at a cheaper price. The silence of the Leica shutter might be the determining factor for some, others will be the lenses that they may already own, others will be the operation and maybe even the Leica heft, but they really need to ask themselves if all those are worth the price of admission. For me I think I'll just buy another lens for my "obsolete" Hasselblad. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive? | Chris Loffredo | Digital Photography | 281 | October 16th 06 09:30 PM |
Canon digital bodies and Nikon lenses | Joseph Chamberlain, DDS | Digital SLR Cameras | 128 | November 20th 05 01:01 AM |
Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon | Skip M | Digital Photography | 204 | October 28th 05 12:15 PM |
Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon | Skip M | 35mm Photo Equipment | 202 | October 28th 05 12:15 PM |
FA: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1 Digital camera with Leica 12X optical zoom lens | Marvin Culpepper | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | October 15th 04 01:05 AM |