bill

Nice to see that my original idea still has legs. Good luck with it and I hope you beat previous totals. Bill

The issue is not the sensor, it is the sub-par, style-over-substance body in which it is mounted.

Ok, I'll play. - Stop producing ridiculous "special editions" that just make the brand a laughing stock - Sack the current marketing department, root and branch, and employ people who understand digital marketing - Ditch the overpriced, under-specified, unloved T - Abandon the dead-end relationship with Panasonic - it went pear-shaped when you disagreed over four-thirds. Go on your knees to Fuji and ask them to partner again - Above all, once again produce reliable, robust, photographer-orientated cameras that I - a disenfranchised 20-year-plus Leica user who has given up in despair and disgust and gone to the competition - would want to buy

I don't miss predictable, small-souled snide crap like that either. No wonder this forum has such a bad name everywhere else. It's so nice to shut the lid again and just walk away.

"Retro-look cameras are more of a snob product really. Fake instead of the real thing." I call "bollocks". A little over two years ago I used five Leica bodies - M, R and LTM - and a multitude of lenses mostly Leica and Zeiss. Then I tried a Fuji X-10 Today, I have four Fuji X-series bodies - X-Pro1, X-T1, X-M1 and X100s - and Fujinon 14, 18, 23, 27, 35, 56, 60, 18-55, 18-135 and 55-200mm lenses plus legacy telephoto lenses. All that is left of my Leicas are my IID and M2, both with 50mm lenses. I have not used either in over a year. It's not about "retro-look", whatever that is. It's about form factor. I use and enjoy the X-Pro1 "rangefinder" form factor because I have spent the past 20-odd years using Leica M. The X-Pro1 suits me better than any M digital because it is a) more similar to a film Leica form factor and more reliable. I'm looking forward to the X-Pro2, too. Equally, I use the X-T1 because of it's "SLR" form factor; it is more suited to some types of photography, particularly macro and tele work. It is not a DSLR; it is not as bulky. Oh and it's weatherproof. Both the "rangefinder" and "SLR" Fuji X-Series form factors occupy different photographic niches. However, critically, they use the same lens mount and the same lenses. Result - only one system to buy into for any purpose. The X-M1 is, for example, a simple little beast, broadly equivalent to the Leica T in terms of target market - but it can take, without any form of adaptor, the finest Fujinon glass. Did I not mention the glass? The 23, 35 and 56mm lenses in particular match Leica's finest - and did I mention reliable? "snob" and "fake" are two words that do not apply to Fuji's X-Series products. Such words are only bandied about on this forum - which speaks volumes. I don't come here and piss on those who choose to continue to use Leica - and I don't see any reason why those who do so have any excuse or justification to piss on others. And people wonder why I don't post here anymore... Bye.

There is very little that would lead me to break my self-imposed silence on this Forum but I feel I must speak in defence of my fellow LeicaPlace moderator. Brian is a skilled engineer and has extensive relevant experience - he has optimised and "remanufactured" more lenses than I care to mention. Outside of the silo of this Forum he is well-known for his skill, the knowledge that he shares freely and his generally helpful approach. It is not helpful or appropriate for a moderator here to scoff at Brian's findings. When at the bottom of a hole, the best advice is to stop digging. Digital Leica owners - and Leica itself - are at the bottom of a very deep hole right now; I would have thought that a ray of light would be welcomed not slapped away. Carry on.

LoL! Thank you for re-airing my OPINION for the benefit of latecomers. Meanwhile, back in the real world...

I was addressing Stuart, and anyone else who values reality over hyperbole.

Inconvenient things, facts... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/10073196/Top-depreciation-beaters-revealed.html "The Porsche Cayenne tops this list, holding on to 84.2% of its original price after three years". Sent from another Galaxy

Stuart, I think that is a poor analogy. Porsche's non-sports car offerings would stand up well to rigorous inspection even if they didn't wear the Stuttgart crest. The Panamera and Cayenne are competent, state of the art machines that are credible in 2014. They share a family resemblance with the 911 without descending to pastiche. They keep their resale value. They keep up with - and often outperform - similar vehicles in their class. Not a good analogy at all...

! [returns to real world]

Of course, if you use a raw developer that can handle the files instead of relying upon reviews, "implication" and internet hearsay...

Why piss on others' chips? Use your camera as you see fit, in line with your vision.

Ignore our curmudgeonly colleague, he has no idea of art

"...dismally..."?