Leica, what's all the fuss about?

[sothoth]

btw... those 4 Canon primes... are for sale too.

What primes are you selling?

I'd ask about the leica primes but I prefer the EOS ones.

 

[sothoth]

You don't need to pay the high price for a Leica!

Leica M8: ~$4000 (Amazon)
Leica M7: ~$5500 (Amazon)

Hasselblad 500 c/m outfit (80mm): ~$1200 (KEH)
Canon A2: ~$200 (KEH)
Canon 400D: ~$800 (KEH)
Canon 40D: ~$1400 (Amazon)
Pentax K1000: ~$100 (ebay/KEH)

So I agree you don't need to buy a Leica. At least with the ferarri v toyota comparison, you could easily come up with a list of things the toyota doesn't have and say what the ferarri can do that the toyota can't. Granted, the price difference is huge, but then again, you're getting a LOT more car. Is it worth $250,000 for the ferarri? Not to me, it's too expensive. I'll stick with a Toyota, and maybe go up to the lexus when I'm filthy rich. I'll also stick with my non-Leica cameras, I don't see the justification for that much money for what it is.

I'M not saying it's bad, trust me, it's just not worth it to me.

 

[usayit]

Hasselblad 500 c/m outfit (80mm): ~$1200 (KEH)
Canon A2: ~$200 (KEH)
Canon 400D: ~$800 (KEH)
Canon 40D: ~$1400 (Amazon)
Pentax K1000: ~$100 (ebay/KEH)

The part you missed after that first sentence started with "If you want to enjoy a rangefinder,...".

Just to be clear... I wasn't justifying the cost of Leica ("Expensive?? very much so!... we all choose our own vices..") nor was I stating that Leica is better ("shooting with a leica doesn't equate to better photos"). I was simply stating why SOME people find it worth the price of admission and why Leica has a "cult" status.

Talking about "worth" is such a personal thing... pointless. Warren Buffett still lives in his 1958 home he purchased in for $38k and certainly this billionaire still holds his home as highly valuable while other celebs worth much less will spend millions on a mansion. Me? If I had Mr. Buffett's cash, I definitely move to something with another bathroom, bedroom, and larger than a 50x100 lot.

One reason why I avoid talking about my equipment to strangers is because it almost always degrades into me defending my decision for such a large expense. Its kinda like a pissing contest when I don't need to go...

It seems that it is unavoidable.

I repeat... there is no such thing as Leica Magic dust..

Please see here for the lenses for sale:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=104085

 

[sothoth]

I repeat... there is no such thing as Leica Magic dust..

Just so you know I was actually agreeing with you about how "you don't need to spend that much for a leica."

If someone has the money and wants to pay for a Leica, I don't understand it, but like you, probably lots of people told me I had a screw loose for buying a Hasselblad and one lens. So... to each his/her own.

If there was Leica magic dust, could I buy some?

 

[usayit]

Of course.....

It comes free with your purchase of those 4 Canon primes..

(It would be so cool to start off the new year with a brand new 50mm Summarit)




Hassy?? OMG you can do so much more for less with a Pentax 645 or 67. << joking

 

[skieur]

To add to the confusion, companies have made cameras and lenses to be branded by other companies. In the Minolta\Leica partnership, Minolta made a couple of cameras for Leica and Leica made a couple of cameras for Minolta. Tokina apparently also made some lenses for Leica.

In the Leica/Panasonic partnership, the following question has arisen. What is the difference between a Panasonic camera sporting a Leica lens and the identical design Leica camera sporting a leica lens? Cost certainly, but which should one buy?

One company representative said that the specifications and standards make the difference. If Leica produces a lens to Panasonic specifications then it is different from producing a lens to their own specifications and standards. Even though both lenses have the Leica name, they have been produced to different standards.

The result is that between what look like identical cameras and lenses from Panasonic and Leica, the red dot really does make a difference in the quality of both the lens and camera.

skieur

 

[sothoth]

Hassy?? OMG you can do so much more for less with a Pentax 645 or 67. << joking

Actually, you may be joking, but it's also a reasonable point. I would love to have the 50mm but I'm too poor right now. Good luck, and make sure you advertise the dust as a "buy 4, get the dust free." Good marketing!

 

[OregonAmy]

The result is that between what look like identical cameras and lenses from Panasonic and Leica, the red dot really does make a difference in the quality of both the lens and camera.

Thanks for bringing that up; I was going to ask about lens differences between the Leica cameras and the Panasonic cameras with Leica lenses. I have had one of the latter (DMC-FZ10) for years and love it, and am curious about Leica cameras. Thanks! :thumbup:

 

[shorty6049]

okay, sorry, i guess i didnt mean DISLIKE, but just the price really turns me off, no matter how compact they are. but let me get this straigt. The leica r-d1 is a digital with a film advance lever? interesting

 

[usayit]

R-D1 was the first Digital Rangefinder M-mount that shocked everyone since Leica was saying it couldn't be done. What was more shocking was who made it.... Epson. Epson chose to design the camera based on the Voigtlander Bessa and keep it as close to an analog rangefinder as possible. This design choice included keeping the shutter mechanism tied to the film advanced lever just like in traditional film cameras.

Here is mine:

Notice the dial? It has analog indicators for # frames left, battery power, Image quality (RAW versus JPG), and White balance. The back display was also designed to completely flip inward hiding the LCD. This made the camera completely indistinguishable from a film camera. In fact, I usually leave the LCD flipped inward and shoot as if I were using film.

The camera listed $3000 new but was difficult to find in the US. Mine was a refurb direct from Epson for under $1500. The refurbs would only last a few hours and were available in spurts. I stayed up late and checked their Epson website early in the morning for weeks just for a chance to get in an order.

It is a wonderful camera!! Brilliant UI. There is a cult building around this camera too... (lots of R-d1 versus M8 threads out there). Many are holding their breath that Epson will release the R-D2.... I'm afraid their wish will most likely fall short.... The initial R-D1 sales were so horrible that it left a bad taste at Epson. It is so bad that users are running into trouble getting service from Epson.

When the refurbs hit the market it reignited a whole niche market of people just waiting for a digital rangefinder (some would say kicked Leica into finally making the M8). The word is that the refurbs essentially outsold quicker than when the R-D1 was market brand new... strange isn't it? Seems to me that people wanted a DRF but just couldn't see spending $3000 on an "Epson".

There is now a rumor that Nikon is stepping up to the plate with a Digital rangefinder. This is believable since Nikon made a wonderful line of rangefinders costing as much as many Leicas. They also have more resources than Leica in terms of digital.

Me? Where is my digital 645.. PENTAX???

 

[shorty6049]

why was leica saying it couldnt be done? just because of size limitations or something?

 

[usayit]

Leica initially stated that a digital M-mount rangefinder was not feasible given the current state of technology. They specifically mentioned that the lens to film plane was too close.

I also suspect that they had to really figure out how to fit everything into the M-package..

I also suspect that they really didn't have the need to rush to market at the time. Most Leica M-mount shooters were very loyal continuing down the film path or resorting to the R8/9 with Digital back. When Epson released in Early 04, they stepped on the gas and released the M8 in late 06.

I personally think that Leica is too laid back in terms of business and whether or not they continue down this path into bankruptcy is remained to be seen.