Entertainment photographer for Corbis Images / AP Images, Nikon Digital Field Guide & Concert and Live Music Photography author, Gretsch guitar strangler.
Aaron801: I look at it this way: a large part of the appeal of this camera is the level of quality, right? That extra quality is presumably something that's attractive because it means that the camera will outlast an ordinary digital camera. But... since it's digital (and not film camera) and since the tech for these things is evolving so quickly that rather than being some sort of heirloom that your kids and grand kids are likely to keep and use, it's much more likely that this thing will be a doorstop in 8 years time (and probably less than that). The extra level of quality that this thing is made with is then really not all that useful, no? I'm not advocating buying cheap, disposable level gear, but it makes more sense to me to buy digital cameras that are well made enough to last just past the point where you might upgrade them but not decades into the future. As an investment, it seems about as smart as it would have been to buy some sort of diamond encrusted, platinum cased LED watch...
Obviously you haven't used any of these cameras. And I don't care to convince anybody into buying a Leica. I don't give a flying füçk what kind of camera somebody else uses. But I can tell you from experience that Leica produces cameras that a very capable especially in the right hands.
You can have an opinion that differs, but since you have no real experience using any of the cameras, then what does your opinion really mean? Nothing you just come to forums and spout conjecture. So you go ahead with that. I've made my point and I don't really want to argue with a knucklehead on the internet.
smafdy: I wonder how much a photog using one of these would have to charge, and how many shoots they'd have to do, in order to get an ROI. The end users of the images must be loaded — they, after all, have to foot the cost of the camera, the photographer, and profit margin.
IMO, most of these will be sold to non-pros who can afford them — bankers and such.
@smafdy: It doesn't matter who. I ain't got time to do the research. Since there are high-end photoshoots happening just rest assured they are there. "Sparky"
@Rocky Mtn Oyster: I never said I was a high end product photographer. But I know enough about the industry to know there are people making a hell of a lot more than anyone that hangs out on camera forums. And for whatever it's worth my website is for the promotion of the books that I write. Over 24 of them translated into many different languages. That means royalty checks son. I ain't rich, but I'm doing just fine.
@RStyga: The image quality of the Leica sensor even on the M8 is spectacular in normal shooting conditions. It's got a fantastic DR at base ISO and the images are incredibly sharp. I did some product shots of an extremely detailed microphone with the M8 and a 9cm Elmar from 1942 that were so sharp people were asking if I took it with my D800.
Photography is my profession. I have a number of DSLRs. I use them for work. They produce technically superior images (in certain circumstances). I wanted a Leica. I wanted a camera that was more challenging and engaging to use than a DSLR, which I have come to regard as a point and shoot camera. I have been using my Leicas as work cameras more and more because I can get just as good of an image from my M9-P as I can my D4 if I shoot it right.
Money in my bank account doesn't give me joy. Taking photos with my Leica gives me immense satisfaction and pleasure. Something my DSLR doesn't do and something I couldn't get with the XPro-1 or X100s.
PowerG9atBlackForest: Omitting the icon (other companies desperately do want one) is some form of self-destruction, another sign of schizophrenia at Leica?
I'm actually curious as to how many more Leica cameras are stolen than regular cameras. People are always spouting off this nonsense about thieves being attracted to Leica cameras.
Is there any evidence to support this? I have 3 Leicas and not ONCE has anyone tried to steal it. You can bet that if theft was such a common occurrence among Leica owners you'd be reading about it in the forums from ACTUAL Leica owners and not people that are trying to belittle Leica by making fun of the red dot.
Please show me some empirical evidence that Leica cameras are stolen more than even ONE other camera brand!
How many pro photographers do you know that shoot HIGH-END products? For for extremely powerful ad agencies? Try looking into ad agencies like Wieden + Kennedy, Droga5, and Grey. They work with the top companies in the world and you can bet their photographers are making 6 figures easily. Do you know anyone that works for them? I doubt it.
Now you get into a pi$$ing match stating you make more money than me? My entire income is also based on photography. So what? This isn't an issue about my income or yours (and I doubt your photography commands a 5 figure budget). I'm never going to be in the market for this camera. I don't shoot high-end products. So put your dîck back in your pants.
Sdaniella: hmm, necessary tripod required even in good light ... for stills
not for me
Then why bother even commenting on it? Go look at a D4s.
Some of you people are so low-end that you're literally out of touch with the REAL professional photography world. It's really quite pathetic that you think that just because YOU will never afford it for professional because you lack the talent, drive, contacts, or whatever, that there aren't thousands of photographers around the world working for a day rate that compares to your annual salary.
There are lots of high-end product photographers that can easily afford a camera like this. What kind of cameras do you think they use to photograph things like luxury automobiles? Not a $3000 DSLR you can bet. Of course the end users are loaded.
What on earth would a BANKER do with a camera like this?
JBurnett: I've always wondered what has prevented other companies from producing a full-frame M-mount camera, maybe with a built-in EVF where the rangefinder is. Body only. No auto-focus to worry about -- maybe focus-peaking with the EVF. No IBIS to worry about. Price it like the Sony A7 body. Maybe pair with a Voigtlander 35 or 50 to create a (relatively) inexpensive kit.
Would there be a market?
The next loudest camera in the room was believe it or not a Canon Rebel. It's not just the mirror slap but it has that horrible zipping sound when the shutter resets. Nails on a chalkboard.
(I have a theory that the dirt from the D600 mirror box was actually an experimental sound dampening material that was flaking off. Just a theory of course...)
jrivasmdobg: looks like they are copying the FUJI XPRO 1!
The black paint M3 came out in 1955. Who's copying who?
"But the A7R is way too audible for use in many places."
I was shooting an acoustic gig the other night and someone came up behind me with one of those things and holy crap! It sounded like someone had one of those motion picture clapboards going on. My Nikon Df is nearly silent. Say what you will about the Df, but Nikon put a damn fine shutter box in that thing.
The RD-1 was/is a very cool camera (love the shutter re-cock lever), but it was too far ahead of it's time (or maybe too retro for that particular time in digital imaging). It'd be nice to see Epson revive it, but I don't see it happening.
@donCortizone: The probability is very high that it will never exist.
I don't know how many times I've had to say this, but I'm by no stretch of the imagination a rich person. I wanted a Leica so I quit doing a lot of unnecessary things like drinking, smoking, and eating out. I saved up enough money to buy an M9-P and a few lenses in about a year. Then I used the camera on paying gigs and I made that money back.
Not only did I get healthier I now have the camera I want.
You can also get an M8. I have one of those too. It's great if you're not into counting mega-pickles and shooting black cats in coal mines. You can get one used anywhere from $1000-1500 these days.
Omexis: One thing that I don't get, with all that resolution why put a 3” 460 x 320 screen on the back?
You obviously aren't a high-end professional photographer. This isn't the camera for you.
Because anyone using this camera is most likely shooting tethered. You don't chimp the LCD on a camera like this.
JDThomas: Ohhh! Let me be the first to complain about how expensive this camera is! Only dumb rich people can buy this camera!
@JaCs: My takeaway is that the processing is done in camera. Also it's not the same as simply stitching images together because it captures RGB at every pixel for more faithful color reproduction.
Sure both ideas aren't new, but combining the two ideas is a new concept.
Did you not read the part where Leica has ALWAYS offered a dot-less camera? It's an OPTION. They already set precedence in the digital age with the black dot M8.2 and the dot-less M9-P.
A Leica without a dot is still a Leica. Just today at a coffee shop some girl asked if my DOT-LESS M9-P was a Leica. She wasn't even a photographer, but she recognized the brand even without the dot.
In any case, Leica did NOT give up the dot. The M-240 still has the red-dot. This plain version is an option for those of us who prefer the more sublime and classic appearance of an M4 type camera.
@JaCs: There used to be a thing called "get it right in camera" that professional photographers did. Especially when using a Hassy to shoot products on chromes. If you can get your work done in camera it saves the time and expense of paying someone to do it.
@Damien: I was hot on the heels of laughing at all the people crying about the Leica price when this popped up. It just seemed logical to continue the price-hating.
@tabloid: I forgot to add </end sarcasm>
Ohhh! Let me be the first to complain about how expensive this camera is! Only dumb rich people can buy this camera!
Leica has offered a "dot-less" camera throughout it's full 89 year span of camera manufacturing. This isn't something new. This camera is designed to look like the venerable M4, which had NO RED DOT!!!