Jump to content

Great new Review of the Leica T

jonoslack
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest badbob

Guest badbob

Posted
Posted

The review is very heavy on hype - some of it entertaining, most of it uninformative, although the photos are very nice. Case in point (and no pun intended): If the camera body is so beautiful (as it is), why do so many puff pieces like this show it wrapped in a shooting-ready case?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
jonoslack

jonoslack

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The review is very heavy on hype - some of it entertaining, most of it uninformative, although the photos are very nice. Case in point (and no pun intended): If the camera body is so beautiful (as it is), why do so many puff pieces like this show it wrapped in a shooting-ready case?

 

Couldn't agree more about wrapping it up . . .

However - if you look at the other articles on the site, he writes about things he thinks are a design success, so perhaps 'review' is rather the wrong word (I'm always very careful not to call my stuff 'reviews') . On the other hand I wouldn't call it a 'puff piece' and I don't see much 'hype' either. He likes it, and nicely delineates it's good points.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest badbob

Guest badbob

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My take on the "new Leica" began in 2009 when they introduced the S, the X1, and the M9 all at once, although actual delivery was spotty. These 3 items were all breakthroughs in their time, and having 3 class-leading items for such a small conservative company was pretty amazing.

 

The new X Vario got a huge amount of criticism, yet so many of the critics couldn't understand how much of a bargain it was at $2850 USD, compared to buying the equivalent in the next step up (i.e. M9 with 2 lenses at each end of the XV zoom range).

 

There's been another large wave of criticism of the T, but again the critics couldn't understand that with a MSRP price only 26 percent higher than the X Vario (i.e. the T and 18-56 lens), you gain an interchangeable lens and other advantages.

 

While the reviewer here wasn't as harsh as the others, and did a lot of gushing over aesthetics, I think he lost a lot of readers by not explaining what a bargain it is, compared to the alternatives of in-house-made Leicas. The notes about the slow user interface have been stated by many critics, but again, I think those were out of proper perspective, comparing to the alternatives from Leica that cost several times more and aren't any faster.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
lanetomlane

lanetomlane

Posted
Posted

Excellent Jono, many thanks for posting. I handled the T at Camera West whilst visiting California and have to agree it's a thing of great beauty. However, I think this review confirmed it's not the camera for me. I've had the M8 and 9 and presently have the M and MM.

I travel a lot and always wanted a small camera but with the ability to produce decent sized prints. I liked the D-Lux but was disappointed in prints anything over A3.

I bought an RX1 and have to agree with the reviewer that the results are stunning.

Thanks for saving me a bunch of money.

 

Cheers

 

Tom

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
jonoslack

jonoslack

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I travel a lot and always wanted a small camera but with the ability to produce decent sized prints. I liked the D-Lux but was disappointed in prints anything over A3.

I bought an RX1 and have to agree with the reviewer that the results are stunning.

Thanks for saving me a bunch of money.

 

Cheers

 

Tom

 

Hi Tom - it may not be the camera for you, but it's fine for A2+ sized prints - nothing like the D-lux (I agree with you about that). Remember, MP differences are misleading with respect to print size ..... it's about pixel quality.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Louis

Louis

Posted
Posted

Hello, Jono,

Thank you very much for the link. I was extremely interested in this camera, but to be honest, more samples I see, less convinced I am becoming!...

For instance, most of the photos I saw in this article look slightly overexposed on my monitor; and, they lack contrast and sharpness!... I could say my monitor has a bad calibration, but the rest of the images I see in this site look great!... I understand why some people are complaining about focusing on "T"!

I was really expecting something much better from Leica at this price which I can't really call a "consumer" gear as it was announced before!... I find XV to be a much better camera. If only it was an interchangeable!... I wish Leica had adopted a MFT system from Panasonic instead of "T"! I am sure the pictures would have been more appealing (at least to me), and the price more reasonable!... No wonder why some people call "T" a piece of jewelry!... I wish it was a piece of fantastic Leica camera! ;)

Best Regards, dear Jono and so nice to see you in this site! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
sharookh

sharookh

Posted
Posted
?........ wish it was a piece of fantastic Leica camera! ;)

 

It is.....!!!!

 

I just wish they'd hurry up with the firmware upgrades. Otherwise, brilliant optics - as I've just said on another thread.

 

Jono - many thanks for this review. Enjoyable read....

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
colonel

colonel

Posted
Posted
Hi There

A different kind of review - but a good read and beautifully done.

 

Minimalist Leica T Review

 

nice. lots of photos and pictures so my type of review

 

The aesthetic is quite important with this camera. If you don't appreciate it you won't appreciate it....

 

I am not sure that Leica is all about making objects of desire. Thats just one of its design lines. The M, despite all its desirable build attributes, is much more demanding on the photographer then an aesthetic purchase would imply. In fact its quite brutal to be honest!

 

The T is more a blend of form and function to right result and effect.

 

There are those that couldn't care less about one or both of these, but for those that do there is very little out there that satisfies in the way the T does ....

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
jonoslack

jonoslack

Posted
  • Author
Posted

HI Louis

 

I was really expecting something much better from Leica at this price which I can't really call a "consumer" gear as it was announced before!... I find XV to be a much better camera. If only it was an interchangeable!... I wish Leica had adopted a MFT system from Panasonic instead of "T"! I am sure the pictures would have been more appealing (at least to me), and the price more reasonable!... No wonder why some people call "T" a piece of jewelry!... I wish it was a piece of fantastic Leica camera! ;)

 

Well, I've shot the Xvario and the T next to each other over the last few months, and I think the only technical advantage of the XV is that it focuses slightly closer. The jpg quality is really similar (quite low contrast - but you can always boost that up). At any rate the sensor and the processing seems to me to be identical, and the zoom on the T is at least as good as that on the Xvario, whilst the 23mm on the T is better than that on the X2.

 

The T is more responsive than the XV, and the focusing is very similar.

 

I think it's sad that it doesn't have in body image stabilisation, a faster processer, faster 16gb internal memory and a 24mp sensor and that it was weathersealed. But I like pretty much everything else about it.

 

Best Regards, dear Jono and so nice to see you in this site! :)

 

Nice to see you here as well - I must spend more time on the gallery side.

I hope that you're flourishing

 

all the best

Jono

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
zlatkob

zlatkob

Posted
Posted (edited)

I would love to use a T. Beautiful camera and beautiful results. But I get annoyed when a reviewer says that a product has soul or that a product lacks soul (in this case the RX1). "Soul" in a camera means whatever you want it to, so it is perfectly meaningless. It's as silly as saying that one camera is made of "unobtainium" while another camera isn't. Perhaps "soul" is a loose way of emphasizing a camera's prettiness, elegance or high quality feel, but that doesn't seem to fit the meaning of the word. Soul is the spiritual/immaterial immortal part of a human or animal. Someone put that in a camera? And I can get it if I just pay more? :confused:

Edited by zlatkob
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
jonoslack

jonoslack

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I would love to use a T. Beautiful camera and beautiful results. But I get annoyed when a reviewer says that a product has soul or that a product lacks soul (in this case the RX1). "Soul" in a camera means whatever you want it to, so it is perfectly meaningless. It's as silly as saying that one camera is made of "unobtainium" while another camera isn't. Perhaps "soul" is a loose way of emphasizing a camera's prettiness, elegance or high quality feel, but that doesn't seem to fit the meaning of the word. Soul is the spiritual/immaterial immortal part of a human or animal. Someone put that in a camera? And I can get it if I just pay more? :confused:

 

Oh, I don't know, isn't it simply saying that the camera 'floats his boat' - it's clearly subjective, but I can identify with it completely.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ozkar

Ozkar

Posted
Posted
I would love to use a T. Beautiful camera and beautiful results. But I get annoyed when a reviewer says that a product has soul or that a product lacks soul (in this case the RX1). "Soul" in a camera means whatever you want it to, so it is perfectly meaningless. It's as silly as saying that one camera is made of "unobtainium" while another camera isn't. Perhaps "soul" is a loose way of emphasizing a camera's prettiness, elegance or high quality feel, but that doesn't seem to fit the meaning of the word. Soul is the spiritual/immaterial immortal part of a human or animal. Someone put that in a camera? And I can get it if I just pay more? :confused:

 

As I see it, the T is a classic case of "Beauty is only skin deep".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...