Old 03-12-2013   #41
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by upceci View Post
People need positive reviews in order to reinforce their decision to buy a product, which they had decided to buy before hand, Huff's reviews are perfectly tailored to this group of consumers in camera market.

Huff is a perfect example of an internet trend where people are more interested in justifying their own irrational desires to buy a product by a second opinion rather than actually looking to reviews in order to make up their mind.


And a Leica camera will sell because it is a Leica camera not because Huff, who does not know how to use a camera if his life dependent on says so or not.

Lets cut down all the huff and puff and just buy the camera and justify the cost with some decent work.
I agree with all of the above, except that I think it's a bit harsh to say that Steve Huff does not know how to use a camera. I don't have much of an opinion one way or another on his work, except to say that if he can't take good photos, 99% of us lot here can't either.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #42
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
And if you're willing ot put up with the slow, under engineered M9 because it's so magical well, Hasselblad is selling their H4D-31 for $7500 with an 80 and if you can't get yer magic off that thing well then yer doing it wrong.
Or the Pentax 645D... Currently $8800 with the 43mm-eq 55/2.8 included.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #43
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,382
You guys must all be Hercules. Why on earth would I buy an oversize medium format brick with lenses to match when there is a lovely compact full-frame 135 system on the market?
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #44
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 52
Posts: 6,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
You guys must all be Hercules. Why on earth would I buy an oversize medium format brick with lenses to match when there is a lovely compact full-frame 135 system on the market?
You guys must be Saudi Princes. Why on earth would you buy a $7ooo Camera when there are $2ooo ones that performs the same or better?
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #45
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 53
Posts: 4,310
I don't read that as a contradiction. I believe he's saying the M has more DR than the M9/M-E, but that, like other digitals, it loses DR at higher ISOs.

Agreed about the lack of high ISO shots in craptacular lighting (I think that's probably why his assessment of noise compared to the RX1, etc. is different from Reid, et al.).

*BTW, if someone from Leica is monitoring this thread, I hereby volunteer to be the official craptactular lighting tester for all future M digitals as I only use digital in terrible lighting (good light calls for film).*

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsang View Post
That statement above, to me, sort of contradicts a statement made earlier in the review:

So which is it? do we lose DR with the new M or do we gain DR with the new M?


There's a few other statements in his review that are a bit "odd" but overall he
Regarding his high ISO shots - I still have yet to see some that are in dimly lit, really craptacular lighting. That's where you'll be able to tell just how bad (or good) the camera is. If the ISO3200 is usable without banding in those situations, then I'm all for this new CMOS sensor.

Cheers,
Dave
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.
--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery

My Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Shame...
Old 03-12-2013   #46
T&E
Registered User
 
T&E is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6
Shame...

Judging from the samples I've seen, it just doesn't have "the look" we've come to know and love from Leica.

Also, the lone "M" looks awkward...

I'd take a M6 w/35mm summicron over this any day of the week.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #47
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by f16sunshine View Post
You guys must be Saudi Princes. Why on earth would you buy a $7ooo Camera when there are $2ooo ones that performs the same or better?
Hahaha I mean I'm not suggesting a Leica is the same as a Hasselblad but people make so many excuses for CCDs and the 'look' or whatever. I'm just saying if all that matters is that then go big or go home. It's like the same money. To me the M240 is an ideal version of a digital Leica. Faster lenses performing better in low light, sealed against rain and dust,. less lag, longer shooting times on one battery. For a reportage camera these are important improvements. If these features are NOT important to you then I might wonder why you're even bother to use a Leica at all. A film Hasselblad will get you 'back to basics.' Some notion of CCD magic or "pop" to me would be secondary considerations to the best appications of the camera design.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #48
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
 
dcsang's Avatar
 
dcsang is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Toronto Canada
Age: 54
Posts: 4,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by furcafe View Post
I don't read that as a contradiction. I believe he's saying the M has more DR than the M9/M-E, but that, like other digitals, it loses DR at higher ISOs.

Agreed about the lack of high ISO shots in craptacular lighting (I think that's probably why his assessment of noise compared to the RX1, etc. is different from Reid, et al.).

*BTW, if someone from Leica is monitoring this thread, I hereby volunteer to be the official craptactular lighting tester for all future M digitals as I only use digital in terrible lighting (good light calls for film).*
Ahhhh.. ya.. I can see that now.

And yes.. I just want those awful lighting situations we can all find ourselves in to be shown - I mean, really.. did you see the high ISO samples over here?
http://leica.bresson.no/2013/03/08/f...mian-heinisch/

I don't buy those at all. Put the camera in a seedy dimly lit bar. Not outdoors, at night, in Las Vegas or Singapore where exterior lighting can mean "High ISO" usage of ISO800.

Cheers,
Dave
__________________
I own a Leica and I am NOT a dentist (I don't even portray one on TV!!!)

I have an idea what I'm looking for but it only becomes real once I see it - Constantine Manos

ITS THE MAGIC I SEE IN THE Light, Texture, & Tone
that Intoxicates Me - Helen Hill

My Flickr - it's where I post my RF and P&S shtuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #49
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsang View Post
Ahhhh.. ya.. I can see that now.

And yes.. I just want those awful lighting situations we can all find ourselves in to be shown - I mean, really.. did you see the high ISO samples over here?
http://leica.bresson.no/2013/03/08/f...mian-heinisch/

I don't buy those at all. Put the camera in a seedy dimly lit bar. Not outdoors, at night, in Las Vegas or Singapore where exterior lighting can mean "High ISO" usage of ISO800.

Cheers,
Dave
Yes high iso looks good when there are no shadows!
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #50
Nigel Meaby
Registered User
 
Nigel Meaby is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Bournemouth, England.
Age: 50
Posts: 897
It's not much but these are worth a look for high ISO http://www.farines-photo.com/wp/?p=697
__________________
My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #51
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,402
I would just calm down and continue enjoying your Leica equipment.
Photography can be done well with many types of cameras.
Next year, we may see the M330 model, with turbo film advance and improved mileage and "even better colors" that beat Velvia and .....

This is really a fun killer for me.
It makes me want to pick up my Standard Leica and take some photos.
__________________
- Raid
________________

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #52
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
Hahaha I mean I'm not suggesting a Leica is the same as a Hasselblad but people make so many excuses for CCDs and the 'look' or whatever. I'm just saying if all that matters is that then go big or go home. It's like the same money. To me the M240 is an ideal version of a digital Leica. Faster lenses performing better in low light, sealed against rain and dust,. less lag, longer shooting times on one battery. For a reportage camera these are important improvements. If these features are NOT important to you then I might wonder why you're even bother to use a Leica at all. A film Hasselblad will get you 'back to basics.' Some notion of CCD magic or "pop" to me would be secondary considerations to the best appications of the camera design.
Absolutely. People are comparing the very first images out of the M240 (for which essentially no one has established good color profiles or workflow) to images from the M9/ME (for which the workflow is well-established).

It is premature to dwell on subtleties of color cast, contrast, etc. These parameters are far too sensitive to post-processing routines to draw any conclusions about the sensor's overall capabilities.

The 240 is going to make great images. The images won't be technically much different than from than a 6D with a good lenses but, then, that's been true of Leica M's vs. SLRs since the introduction of the Nikon F.

It's just as silly to think that you're spending money for some special characteristics inherent in a Leica sensor as it would have been to think that Tri-X behaves differently in an M vs. an F3. The sensors in those cameras were identical, and everyone knew it, but some people still preferred an M4 or M6 (me among them).

If you buy an M9 or an ME or an M240, you are paying for a certain, slightly eccentric user interface, and for the ability to use M-mount glass, not for a magic sensor.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #53
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
You guys must all be Hercules. Why on earth would I buy an oversize medium format brick with lenses to match when there is a lovely compact full-frame 135 system on the market?
That's precisely why I currently use an X-E1. It's about half the weight of a digital M and 1/7 the price. And any incremental difference in image quality is utterly swamped by the fact that I generally shoot handheld, not on a tripod. If I want better IQ, I'll shoot medium format.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #54
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
 
dcsang's Avatar
 
dcsang is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Toronto Canada
Age: 54
Posts: 4,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
That's precisely why I currently use an X-E1. It's about half the weight of a digital M and 1/7 the price. And any incremental difference in image quality is utterly swamped by the fact that I generally shoot handheld, not on a tripod. If I want better IQ, I'll shoot medium format.
Alright... NOW we're getting somewhere


Cheers,
Dave
__________________
I own a Leica and I am NOT a dentist (I don't even portray one on TV!!!)

I have an idea what I'm looking for but it only becomes real once I see it - Constantine Manos

ITS THE MAGIC I SEE IN THE Light, Texture, & Tone
that Intoxicates Me - Helen Hill

My Flickr - it's where I post my RF and P&S shtuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #55
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 65
Posts: 3,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsang View Post
And yes.. I just want those awful lighting situations we can all find ourselves in to be shown .... Put the camera in a seedy dimly lit bar.

Cheers,
Dave
Agree. I shoot a lot in dives. I plan to try the monochrom and, if/when I have refilled my savings, the M240 for this kind of work. Typical reviewer images and internet high iso "test" files don't help me much. Far far better lighting than what I have at the clubs I inhabit.
__________________
--Mike

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #56
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,186
So, did he say "Best.Camera.Ever." ??? I can't bring myself to read it. No offense to him, but I'm not interested in spending this kind of cash on cameras anymore so its better to ignore it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #57
upceci
-
 
upceci is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsang View Post
Alright... NOW we're getting somewhere

Cheers,
Dave
I'm sure people in fuji are doing exactly the same thing as Colbert, watching Leica M240 being compared to their $1000+ cameras and losing in most cases.

Fuji killed Leica.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #58
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
Serious reviews should never be written by individuals who are obviously smitten by the brand they are reviewing IMO.

I like Steve Huff and I like his site but a review of any product shouldn't/needn't be accompanied by it's documented unboxing ... but it's his choice to do it that way because that's who he is ... and good luck to him.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #59
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by upceci View Post
I'm sure people in fuji are doing exactly the same thing as Colbert, watching Leica M240 being compared to their $1000+ cameras and losing in most cases.

Fuji killed Leica.
I do find this funny sorry but they are apples and oranges. If Fuji killed Leica don't tell all those on waiting lists for the M and still waiting for the MM. FF is a big reason I went Leica. I have a very good bud has a Fuji and an M9 and likes his M9 A LOT better. Nice to have choices.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #60
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by upceci View Post
Fuji killed Leica.
While I'm a Fuji fan, this simply is not true. There is a huge part of Leica's fanbase that aren't into the Fuji due to it not having a RF, not having true manual focus lenses (in most cases), and for not being as elegant. Leica does not compete with Fuji in the same way other manufacturers have to.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #61
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalintrigue View Post
They serve different market segments.

Technologically, APS-C is the new full frame. I can't see spending $7k on a camera. If it enabled me to make money, that would be one thing. I've bought $150,000 tools before, because they enabled profits. But I can't justify $7k as a hobbyist, when the Fuji provides images that are indistinguishable (from gear costing tens of thousands) when printed and hung on my wall. Walk out the door and take a few shots with an M, and it's already depreciated more than the entire cost of an X-E1 body.
It aint the new FF to me and never will be. I see in a 35mm FoV on FF. I spent a lot of $$$ on the 35 lux because thats important to me. I don't want to spend even more a 21 lux to give me about the same FoV I can get with my 35 lux on my MM. And I think if you have an M now and took a few images with it you might be able to get even more than what you paid for it maybe the cost of the Fuji in profit because there those out there that don't want to wait. So if like the Fuji rock on. Trying to rationalize cost is insane.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #62
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalintrigue View Post
OK, call me insane then.

I'm not criticizing anyone's choice here, I'm just justifying mine.

And the market has spoken with regards to the new full frame. Tell me how many APS-C cameras have been sold in the last 4 years vs. full frame.
Threes Company was the highest rated show on TV. Popular doesn't mean good. The reason I chose Leica was the lack of things the herd gravitates towards. I spent almost 8K on a camera that is B&W only. And I love it. The best 8K i've ever spent. Most want a camera that does everything for them. Thats clearly not me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #63
Jubb Jubb
Registered User
 
Jubb Jubb is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 471
each to their own.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #64
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubb Jubb View Post
each to their own.

That never works around here!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #65
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalintrigue View Post
Whatever dude. Like it or not, there are far more people shooting APS-C, and it's quite easy to see why. The incremental difference in performance is minimal, but the cost differential is large. There are plenty of people that want that last little bit of performance and are willing to spend the bucks. There are many more multiples of people that don't think it's worth it.
Again I couldn't care less what others shoot. The reality is Leica moved to FF.

Nikons top professional camera moved to FF. Canons been FF. FF is not going anywhere.

Less performance in what way? I want a range finder that is FF has more DR and is dedicated B&W. There is only one of those. The funny part is there is still a waiting list for it. I waited 6 months for mine so I must not be alone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #66
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
 
dcsang's Avatar
 
dcsang is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Toronto Canada
Age: 54
Posts: 4,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by airfrogusmc View Post
Threes Company was the highest rated show on TV. Popular doesn't mean good. The reason I chose Leica was the lack of things the herd gravitates towards. I spent almost 8K on a camera that is B&W only. And I love it. The best 8K i've ever spent. Most want a camera that does everything for them. Thats clearly not me.
I agree with the "Threes Company" statement - heck, the only redeeming character on that show was Mr Furley. . .

(my opinion mind you . . )

But ya know, part of the reason I shoot Leica is because I started on a rangefinder as a boy - a Konica Auto S3 - and right now, having tried the other rangefinders, I found I preferred how Leica felt in my hand. Everyone's different though - horses for courses and all that. I haven't spent 8K yet on a camera but I gotta wonder. . . Do you love the camera because you spent 8K on it or would you have loved the camera regardless of how much it was or what brand it was?

The reason I ask that question relates back to your comment on "the herd".

Just seems to me that if you really did enjoy the camera for what it was; just a tool, then you wouldn't care what "the herd" were doing or where they were headed and there would be no need to mention the cost of a camera. It is what it is - just a box to take photos.

I chose Leica because it was the right camera for me and not because it was different than what others wanted/had/desired.

Cheers,
Dave
__________________
I own a Leica and I am NOT a dentist (I don't even portray one on TV!!!)

I have an idea what I'm looking for but it only becomes real once I see it - Constantine Manos

ITS THE MAGIC I SEE IN THE Light, Texture, & Tone
that Intoxicates Me - Helen Hill

My Flickr - it's where I post my RF and P&S shtuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #67
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsang View Post
Do you love the camera because you spent 8K on it or would you have loved the camera regardless of how much it was or what brand it was?

That is a really telling statement IMO Dave!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #68
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
I spent 8K because it works perfectly with my vision. If it cost 10 cents it wouldn't matter. Its what works for me and thats all I care about. Shoot what you want but to say the Fuji killed Leica or to imply that APS-C is the new full frame and its the right choice because it popular I will take exception to. The herd has never been driven my vision or what I shoot with.

I shot with 500 C/Ms for decades. I shot a lot with Leica Ms a long time ago and all kinds of large format cameras. Deardorffs and Horsemans. For mew and where I'm at now what I shoot with fits me and my vision. If it didn't I wouldn't shoot with it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #69
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by airfrogusmc View Post
I want a range finder that is FF has more DR and is dedicated B&W.
I assume you're talking about the Monochrom. It has the same dynamic range as the M9, because it has the same underlying sensor. Only difference is lack of a Beyer filter, and Beyer filters do not decrease dynamic range (in fact, if correctly interpreted by your RAW developer, Beyer filters can significantly increase DR). If DR is what you're after, you'll do better with an Olympus EM5, a Pentax K5II, or, I'd guess, an M240.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #70
segedi
RFicianado
 
segedi's Avatar
 
segedi is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by noimmunity View Post
Color cast issues aside, do you not see greater gradations of color around the eyes in the M-E image?

Further, do you not feel that the two shots are exposed differently? In both sets of comp shots the M-E looks 1/2 stop brighter than the M.
I see finer gradations, perhaps more tonality in the new M image. It's a bit deceiving though as the shot isn't identical. There is a shadow on the M-E version under the eye on the right. That combined with the yellow tones mixing with the skin tone gives a different look. And not a better one in my opinion.

And there are differences in the exposure. Differences in metering maybe. If you look at the new M image, top left corner there looks to be more vignetting as well. I don't think it's as well corrected as the M-E, but firmware should take care of that.

Overall, the differences might not make much of a difference. But, there are other advantages to the new M over the M-E which should sway anyone wanting to drop a lot of money to buy the latest offering.
__________________
-----------------------

Segedi.com

Flickr

Twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #71
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
I assume you're talking about the Monochrom. It has the same dynamic range as the M9, because it has the same underlying sensor. Only difference is lack of a Beyer filter, and Beyer filters do not decrease dynamic range (in fact, if correctly interpreted by your RAW developer, Beyer filters can significantly increase DR). If DR is what you're after, you'll do better with an Olympus EM5, a Pentax K5II, or, I'd guess, an M240.
I can pull so much more usable info out of the shadows than I ever could from the M9 oh and I forgot to mention killer 6400 ISO from the MM
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #72
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalintrigue View Post
As I stated, Fuji and Leica serve two different market segments. Your choice is right for you, of course.

As far as "implying" that APS-C is the new full frame, I didn't do that. I flat-out stated it.

Also didn't say it was the "right choice because it was popular."
Actually if you look at the trends from Leica, Canon and Nikon they are all moving to more and more FF models. You did bring up popularity?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #73
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 65
Posts: 3,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsang View Post
Do you love the camera because you spent 8K on it or would you have loved the camera regardless of how much it was or what brand it was?
These alternatives aren't mutually exclusive. If I saved and sacrificed to buy it for $8K, I would tend to like it, yes. And at the same time, I would tend to like it because it's a fine camera at any price, no matter the brand or whatever.
__________________
--Mike

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #74
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCTuomey View Post
These alternatives aren't mutually exclusive. If I saved and sacrificed to buy it for $8K, I would tend to like it, yes. And at the same time, I would tend to like it because it's a fine camera at any price, no matter the brand or whatever.
I totally agree.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #75
bwcolor
Registered User
 
bwcolor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 2,359
If I were single, I would purchase the 240 in a second and wait an eternity for delivery.

As it is, I've an X100S on order and will keep my eyes open to other Fuji and Sony offerings. I am tempted to sell equipment to fund purchase, but I'm so attached to my film cameras. By the time I decide to go ahead, the next Leica iteration will be here. Enjoy your new M 240s. I'll certainly enjoy the images from many of you much more skilled/talented than I. This new Leica looks to be a real winner for Leica and the end user. APS-C is the prosumer sweet spot in today's market, but FF is making a real impact in the enthusiast market. For the mass market, people are using their cellphones. Maybe having a limited high-end niche isn't such a bad marketing strategy.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #76
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by airfrogusmc View Post
I can pull so much more usable info out of the shadows than I ever could from the M9 oh and I forgot to mention killer 6400 ISO from the MM
Sensitivity ≠ dynamic range.

Proof: put an ND8 filter on the front of a Monochrom. Sensitivity changes; DR does not.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #77
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
Sensitivity ≠ dynamic range.

Proof: put an ND8 filter on the front of a Monochrom. Sensitivity changes; DR does not.
But I can pull info out of the shadows that the noise would have kept me from doing with the M9.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #78
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,844
But at one time APS-C was what everyone had except Canon. Now Nikon Canon and Leica M have all moved to FF with their top models and Canon and Nikon are producing more and more FF models every time they announce new cameras.

When I first went digital Canon was the only FF camera in the game.

So if APS-C was the norm in the beginning and more and more FF cameras are being produced now than ever wheres the logic to that statement?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #79
Jubb Jubb
Registered User
 
Jubb Jubb is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalintrigue View Post
Just look at how often Leica introduces a new model...it's been 3 1/2 years between the M9 and the M. Or, how about the time frame between the D700 and the D800.

How many APS-C models have all the camera manufacturers introduced during those periods? It's an incredible pace.
You do know this isn't necessarily a good thing right? Sure technology advances and things get better. But at the cost of cameras now, they lose their value a lot quicker than your standard Leica.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-12-2013   #80
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
If auto manufacturers took the same approach to development that Leica demonstrates we'd be driving cars with no crumple zones, side valve engines with carburetors, points and coil ignition, drum brakes ... and a computer to manage it all!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:51.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.