Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Leica M240
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2013 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really don't understand the appeal of a Leica at the price point they are, and to be honest, if others made a FF MILC, I bet Leica would see their sales fall.

At the end of the day, I just don't think the product, if assessed rationally, is worth the price. If another manufacturer had released the M9 or the Mono it wouldn't have had the same positive reviews, but because it's a Leica...


PostPosted: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't understand the appeal of using manual focus lenses on mirrorless cameras. I bought an EP2 with the VF-2 early on. I tried to like it. Too much lag, and could not see outside the lens field-of-view as you can with an optical viewfinder. As far as prices, I could have bought a Nikon D4 to use with many (over 100) Nikon lenses. I stopped buying Nikon digital cameras when they started encrypting fields in the .nef files with the introduction of the D2x and hiding behind the DMCA. The Nikon S3-2000 is the last Nikon that I have, the first being a Nikon M. Spineless weasels that take their "IP" way too seriously. Canon- they can't use FD and FL lenses. I have an F1, EF, and FTb and a pair of Canon 7's and Canon P's.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 15, 2013 9:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Try a NEX, the 7x and 14x zoom assist is wonderful. As much as I love rangefinders, there really is nothing to compare to 14x zoom for accurate focusing.

You have to ask, with Fuji's X-Pro1 having a hybrid RF/EVF, if they made a full frame version of it, how much would it be? It would be comparable in ability to the Leica, probably better as the X-trans sensor technology is wonderful. I expect it would be around half the price of the Leica, so how much is Leica charging for the red dot?

With no competition in the FF MILC market, Leica can charge what they want pretty much. Let's hope that changes soon and we see more FF cameras.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 1:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
It will be interesting to see what effect the Sony FF MILC has on Leica, especially as it is likely that the Sony plus a copy of Silver EFEX will be half the price of a Leica mono.
Shouldn't there be a difference between a solution using offset microlenses on a CCD sensor vs a CMOS sensor geared toward modern day digital lenses? This is Leica's niche - their market are folk who want the very best manual focus experience and results. I suspect there will be little effect.

Besides Sony won't give two hoots about manual focus fans. They are aiming squarely at Nikon and Canon.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 1:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll reserve judgment until I see some output from the new Sony FF.

The NEX is a very versatile platform, you can use just about any mount on it.

If Sony's FF MILC is a success, then hopefully we will see some other makers step into the FF MILC market. Nikon might put their 24 or 36mp FF sensors in a MILC, or Fuji might make a FF version of their X-trans sensor, which is probably the best sensor technology on the market, Samsung might make a FF NX, Ricoh might make a FF module for the GXR.

This would be very good for us shooters. As long as Leica is the only FF MILC player, they will continue to charge ridiculous prices, surely everyone will agree that pressure on Leica to charge a more reasonable price due to competition is a good thing?


PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 6:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
As long as Leica is the only FF MILC player, they will continue to charge ridiculous prices, surely everyone will agree that pressure on Leica to charge a more reasonable price due to competition is a good thing?
I don't believe that Leica will feel any pressure whatsoever. Their sensors are designed from the beginning to work well with film era lenses. No other camera manufacturer are interested in this niche market. Fuji, Sony, Sigma, etc wants a slice of Nikon's and Canon's market (Toyota). Not Leica's (Porche).

I'm sure ff camera's from these manufacturers will work well with SLR and rangefinder lenses, but if you want the best (and the little red dot ofcause), pay the price.

Note: never owned or handled a Leica in my life, but I can understand the brand positioning of Leica and I feel they have little to fear. They'll probably profit heavily from Leica lens sales to owners of new ff camera's. And some of these owners may even get that GAS feeling to 'upgrade' to the Real Thing(tm) leading to a new generation of Leica owners.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not sure you do get the best with Leica. That was largely not true in the film days and it might not be now either. Porsche certainly don't make the best cars and never did, but there is plenty of competition to them so they have to at least try to keep their pricing competitive and their engineering on par with the other marquee makers.

Yes, you do get the best FF MILC because it's the only one and yes, you do get the best mono MILC because it's the only one, but if they weren't the only exemplars, then would they be so highly regarded?

I just wonder how much you are paying solely for the red dot. I admit Leica do give you several good points, but value for money surely isn't one of them.

I'm far from convinced that Leica's sensor is any more suited to old lenses than others, has anyone done any testing on this point? There's Sigma's Foveon sensor, the Fuji X-trans and Ricoh's bayer-less GXR A12 module, as well as the 'standard' types from other makers, and it would be very interesting to see some investigation of which works best with old lenses. I suspect the differences are rather small.

The Zeiss Ikon 35mm RF camera made Leica look under-featured and over-priced in the film market, so I'd love to see someone do the same in the digital realm, imagine a FF body from the Cosina stable (from where the ZI, Contax G, Konica Hexar and others all came) with the latest 36mp FF sensor, at half the price of the Leica offering. That would be hard to ignore.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 3:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I just wonder how much you are paying solely for the red dot. I admit Leica do give you several good points, but value for money surely isn't one of them.
Agreed. But I feel this is very much a subjective call.

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I'm far from convinced that Leica's sensor is any more suited to old lenses than others, has anyone done any testing on this point?
I'm only aware of limited testing of the NEX-VG900 which apparently has a fairly thick AA layer ontop of the sensor, so usefulness of the test is kinda unknown. I'm aware of edge issues with the NEX7 using wideangle rf lenses. These may be more pronounced on a ff sensor, although perhaps the larger photosites would resolve the issues. But like you said, best to reserve judgement until its been tested.

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The Zeiss Ikon 35mm RF camera made Leica look under-featured and over-priced in the film market, so I'd love to see someone do the same in the digital realm, imagine a FF body from the Cosina stable (from where the ZI, Contax G, Konica Hexar and others all came) with the latest 36mp FF sensor, at half the price of the Leica offering. That would be hard to ignore.
Cosina has already tried. The Epson R-D1 sorta failed. Its successors are only available in Japan. Leica's profit margins are not high. Apple earns more on each of their devices (200-300%) as a percentage than Leica does (30%). So, not much margin for the 'red dot'. And Leica has a far smaller volume on which to earn back its R/D costs.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian said
The Zeiss Ikon 35mm RF camera made Leica look under-featured and over-priced in the film market, so I'd love to see someone do the same in the digital realm, imagine a FF body from the Cosina stable (from where the ZI, Contax G, Konica Hexar and others all came) with the latest 36mp FF sensor, at half the price of the Leica offering. That would be hard to ignore.

It's difficult to disagree that the Z-I 35mm RF camera seemingly had some advantages over the contemporary Leica counterparts (I've never actually seen one) but it's nevertheless true that commerically it was hardly a success. To some extent that must have been due to the rapidly declining market for film cameras and, presumably, the reluctance by Zeiss to order more cameras from Cosina. But customers continue to buy the "under-featured and over-priced" M7 and MP in quantities sufficient for Leica to keep them in the catalogue. The underlying issue is whether there is enough demand for a Leica ME or M240 type camera to persuade any maker to design one and bring it to market.

The demand for cameras with optical rangefinders declined steadily from the 1960s onwards until it eventually bottomed out at a level that provided only small market. Such things are complex optical systems in themselves and the "digital demand" for more precise levels of accuracy in focusing at closer distances imposes increasingly costly burdens on manufacturing both the body and the lenses. Anecdotal evidence from Leica User Forum suggests that even Leica Camera has problems maintaining sufficiently close tolerances, leading to the conclusion that hand-finishing or adjustment still can't be eliminated. For that, a maker needs skilled operatives and to be willing to take the time needed, both of which are expensive. I don't see how - given a restricted level of demand and the accompanying high production costs - that any new maker is likely to enter the marketplace. Which is a pity.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great points there guys, cheers, I'm learning things. i didn't know the RD-1 had any successors, the RD-1 was 6mp, right? What sensor did they put in the later ones?

That's good info about Leica's profit margin, thanks for that.

I think the VG900 has that thick AA filter because moire is a big problem in video, probably the same sensor in a stills camera, they could put a thinner AA filter on it.

I haven't tried a Fuji X-Pro1, but I would love to, to see how it's hybrid VF/EVF works, being a huge fan of RF cams, I would dearly love a digital one, but I'm not wealthy enough, or likely to be, to afford a Leica, hence I would love to see competition in the market as competition always has a downward push on pricing.

I suppose the best hope would be a collaboration between Cosina and one of the big electronics corporation - Sony, Samsung, Panasonic et al. Then we could have a Cosina RF body with a modern FF sensor in it, like the RD-1 but upto date and better. Smile


PostPosted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, the rumor is that the new NEX ff will be sold for 3300 - 3500 euro Surprised

http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/sony-goes-full-frame-mirrorless-first-lens-specs-leaked/