Bryan Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 Leica mirrorless SLR style camera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southpole Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 ouch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 Very nice, but it would take an awful lot of Brazilian distributor sales to pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidl Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 If my boat ever comes in http://cameras.reviewed.com/content/leica-s-type-007-first-impressions-review Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted August 27, 2015 Author Share Posted August 27, 2015 If my boat ever comes in http://cameras.reviewed.com/content/leica-s-type-007-first-impressions-review One heavy camera, suspect it might sink your boat, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidl Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 If my boat ever comes in http://cameras.reviewed.com/content/leica-s-type-007-first-impressions-review One heavy camera, suspect it might sink your boat, To Quote Bob Dylan, as I often do "Well my ship’s been split to splinters and it’s sinkin' fast" From Mississippi However that's not completely negative as the lyric goes on to say."I’m drownin’ in the poison, got no future, got no past But my heart is not weary, it’s light and it’s free I’ve got nothin’ but affection for all those who’ve sailed with me" Obviously it's a slow Thursday morning in retirement land Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Mayall Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Just another expensive toy to tempt the unsuspecting photographer into thinking that it will take oustanding saleable images because it has the Leica badge and it costs so much. Not for this old dog, been there done that over the years. My cheap Lumix shoots good enough quality for stock sales, leaving money in the bank. Sorry Leica you won't be getting my money for your latest offering. Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 If my boat ever comes in http://cameras.reviewed.com/content/leica-s-type-007-first-impressions-review One heavy camera, suspect it might sink your boat, To Quote Bob Dylan, as I often do "Well my ship’s been split to splinters and it’s sinkin' fast" From Mississippi However that's not completely negative as the lyric goes on to say."I’m drownin’ in the poison, got no future, got no past But my heart is not weary, it’s light and it’s free I’ve got nothin’ but affection for all those who’ve sailed with me" Obviously it's a slow Thursday morning in retirement land . . . "man, you must be puttin' me on" . . . dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Just another expensive toy to tempt the unsuspecting photographer into thinking that it will take oustanding saleable images because it has the Leica badge and it costs so much. Not for this old dog, been there done that over the years. My cheap Lumix shoots good enough quality for stock sales, leaving money in the bank. Sorry Leica you won't be getting my money for your latest offering. Paul. I always wonder who actually buys overpriced toys like these. Oil Sheikhs who have everything? Overpaid movie stars? Certainly not photographers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armstrong Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Just another expensive toy to tempt the unsuspecting photographer into thinking that it will take oustanding saleable images because it has the Leica badge and it costs so much. Not for this old dog, been there done that over the years. My cheap Lumix shoots good enough quality for stock sales, leaving money in the bank. Sorry Leica you won't be getting my money for your latest offering. Paul. I always wonder who actually buys overpriced toys like these. Oil Sheikhs who have everything? Overpaid movie stars? Certainly not photographers. I got to use a Leica Q recently for a decent amount of time. The image quality was superb. Razor sharp across the frame. Also produces amazing images at 1.7. There is something to do with the contrast that I haven't seen in other cameras. In my eyes it was noticeably better than the Nikon FF with pro glass that I've used. Whether or not it's value for money or it's performance per £ is one matter. People may buy them because of the badge..but they still are fantastic cameras to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Just another expensive toy to tempt the unsuspecting photographer into thinking that it will take oustanding saleable images because it has the Leica badge and it costs so much. Not for this old dog, been there done that over the years. My cheap Lumix shoots good enough quality for stock sales, leaving money in the bank. Sorry Leica you won't be getting my money for your latest offering. Paul. I always wonder who actually buys overpriced toys like these. Oil Sheikhs who have everything? Overpaid movie stars? Certainly not photographers. I got to use a Leica Q recently for a decent amount of time. The image quality was superb. Razor sharp across the frame. Also produces amazing images at 1.7. There is something to do with the contrast that I haven't seen in other cameras. In my eyes it was noticeably better than the Nikon FF with pro glass that I've used. Whether or not it's value for money or it's performance per £ is one matter. People may buy them because of the badge..but they still are fantastic cameras to use. No doubt they are fantastic. Should be for the price. However, I wouldn't want to walk around with one in some of the places I've travelled to. Not much chance of that, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armstrong Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Just another expensive toy to tempt the unsuspecting photographer into thinking that it will take oustanding saleable images because it has the Leica badge and it costs so much. Not for this old dog, been there done that over the years. My cheap Lumix shoots good enough quality for stock sales, leaving money in the bank. Sorry Leica you won't be getting my money for your latest offering. Paul. I always wonder who actually buys overpriced toys like these. Oil Sheikhs who have everything? Overpaid movie stars? Certainly not photographers. I got to use a Leica Q recently for a decent amount of time. The image quality was superb. Razor sharp across the frame. Also produces amazing images at 1.7. There is something to do with the contrast that I haven't seen in other cameras. In my eyes it was noticeably better than the Nikon FF with pro glass that I've used. Whether or not it's value for money or it's performance per £ is one matter. People may buy them because of the badge..but they still are fantastic cameras to use. No doubt they are fantastic. Should be for the price. However, I wouldn't want to walk around with one in some of the places I've travelled to. Not much chance of that, though. That's how you know whether someone is using it was a working tool or not...if they are prepared to stick black tape all over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyn Llun Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 The Leica highlighted here is an gimmick and I don't know why they have bothered. Some marketing guy must have identified a niche I guess. Having said that, I have been using Leicas for well over fifty years now and they have earned their keep thousands of times over. I does depend on what you use them for and what you sell your images for. Individual prints taken with my various Leicas over the years now sell for enough that I only need to sell two or three to buy, if I needed it which I don't, a new Leica lens. Four or five prints would buy a new digi M but I already have two so don't need one of those either. Leica lenses I struggled and starved to buy forty or fifty years ago - and they were second-hand then, are still in use today and still wonderful. I certainly use them as hard-working tools and they are absolutely not treated as jewelry. I have done the black tape trick in the past! There are still remnants of the adhesive on one body! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnie5 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 I found enlightening article on who buys Leica's. http://www.techradar.com/us/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/who-buys-leica-cameras-1081628 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Coombs Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Even if I had that kind of money I think I'd pass. I've just bought a pair of old Nikkormats for 45 quid a piece. Going back to film for a while! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 If you do have money to burn, don't burn it yourself. You might singe your fingers. Send it to me, and I'll burn it for you. Or get rid of it someway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Clarke Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I got praised by an old chap at Silverstone Circuit a few months ago when he saw me using my old Leica. He was most disappointed (and apologetic) when he realized that 'my Leica' was actually my Fuji XE1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 It seems there are still some options left for those of us who don't have cash to burn. Here's an interesting comparison of a vintage Minolta MF lens from the 1960's with a pricey Zeiss offering (on the Sony A7). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted September 4, 2015 Author Share Posted September 4, 2015 It seems there are still some options left for those of us who don't have cash to burn. Here's an interesting comparison of a vintage Minolta MF lens from the 1960's with a pricey Zeiss offering (on the Sony A7). Thanks for that John, I found it useful. Not sure why he feels the older lenses are better suited to FF use though, on the smaller sensor you are using only the centre of the image circle. Maybe he is referring to the 1.5 crop factor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 It seems there are still some options left for those of us who don't have cash to burn. Here's an interesting comparison of a vintage Minolta MF lens from the 1960's with a pricey Zeiss offering (on the Sony A7). Thanks for that John, I found it useful. Not sure why he feels the older lenses are better suited to FF use though, on the smaller sensor you are using only the centre of the image circle. Maybe he is referring to the 1.5 crop factor? Most likely the crop factor. He seems to be mainly a landscape photographer, so he needs the wider view. You're probably correct about taking advantage of the optical "sweet spot" with smaller sensors. I'm getting some nice results from my old MF Minolta prime lenses (28mm and 45mm) on my NEX cameras, but I don't have a FF camera to compare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.