Looks nice but.....

[NZDavid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...How this particular camera is going to "push me into new directions" and "which none of the others do." ...

 

Of course it is just marketing. Leica wants you to buy it.

 

But if you feel comfortable and really like the tools you use for any job you will probably do a better job. The best tools may be those you appreciate because they are intuitive; you don't worry about how to use them, you just concentrate on the results. I think that is what Herr Kaufmann is getting at with his spiel on the T.

 

Which is most intuitive comes down to individual preferences. As I have written elsewhere, I far prefer simple manual controls to touchscreens, modes and menus, and LCDs.

[AlanG]

CalArts, I have to agree with all you have written. My take-a-way synopsis is if you think getting a new camera is going to change your general approach to photography or make you a better photographer, think again. Well going from an iPhone to an 8x10 might. But I mean fairly similar types of cameras.

 

Of course some cameras have features that let you do something that couldn't be done before. But the T isn't one of them.

 

However if you have the money, need a camera, and the T suits your needs, why not?

Edited April 28, 2014 by AlanG

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[CalArts 99]

Of course it is just marketing. Leica wants you to buy it.

 

But if you feel comfortable and really like the tools you use for any job you will probably do a better job. The best tools may be those you appreciate because they are intuitive; you don't worry about how to use them, you just concentrate on the results. I think that is what Herr Kaufmann is getting at with his spiel on the T.

 

Which is most intuitive comes down to individual preferences. As I have written elsewhere, I far prefer simple manual controls to touchscreens, modes and menus, and LCDs.

 

I agree. Although it was Jono's post where he used the "new directions" and "which none of the others do" comments about the camera. And since he has used it from October of last year, he would be the one to have the best reason for saying that. I understand the Leica marketing and "Kaufmann's spiel" etc., but that's something else.

 

Anyway, I won't belabor the point anymore but I'm just curious how this device might change someone's direction in their work aside from the appreciation of the device being intuitive and tactile (or what I sometimes call being 'transparent.') I think there are two different issues here: 1) one's work heading into a new direction because of the device itself (if that's indeed possible) 2) one's work being facilitated by using the device (making one more apt to use that particular device to produce their work.)

 

And what specifically about the T that changes one's approach to making images of the world (the iPhone experience? the smooth metal body? the LCD screen? etc., etc..)

 

Anyway, I'll stop now

 

EDIT: and to Jono, I hope your charity bike ride went well!

Edited April 28, 2014 by CalArts 99

[CalArts 99]

CalArts, I have to agree with all you have written. My take-a-way synopsis is if you think getting a new camera is going to change your general approach to photography or make you a better photographer, think again. Well going from an iPhone to an 8x10 might. But I mean fairly similar types of cameras.

 

Of course some cameras have features that let you do something that couldn't be done before. But the T isn't one of them.

 

However if you have the money, need a camera, and the T suits your needs, why not?

 

I will say that a new and different camera can certainly facilitate someone's world view to the point where it gives them a new idea on how to approach the work, or how to improve upon the work, etc.. As photographers there still is the device that we must use.

 

Anthony Dod Mantle had a vision to get the viewer right up into the cars when filming Rush, and small video cameras facilitated that idea. By playing around with a lot of them, he was able to achieve what he had envisioned in his mind. Experimenting with them surely got him thinking even more and then refining it. But I think that those visual ideas and thoughts were already coming from him. They are a style of image making that exists in him and is unique to his view of the world. And even with the Dogme films; the video cameras facilitated ideas, the politics of film making, and what was in the head.

 

What is it about the T that might give me 'new directions' that can't be found in other similar devices? And aside from simply creating more images because it's comfortable and inviting to use (it's a sincere question, really.)

 

Okay, I promise (and to Pico ) that I'll quit now.....

Edited April 28, 2014 by CalArts 99

[NZDavid]

Smartphone cameras may have prompted new directions in photography (obsession with food, 'selfies' -- which spell check doesn't even want to allow me to write), pics of anyone anywhere anytime that can be shared instantly -- but the T does not really look so different in operation from many other clever cameras, its undeniably stylish exterior and doubtless superb optics notwithstanding.

[flyalf]

Because (returning to the starter question) the sensors and IQ simply is sufficient in most cameras and photographers want to pay for handling and compatibility with their current lenses? I don't know if the T fits this bill. I hope so, for me the showstopper would be the lack of a finder. I simply do not not consider a screen as finder except for tripod work.

 

I have tried different APSC cameras as an addition to my Ms, but have discarded all. Not for lack of IQ, but for because their handling haven't been designed for photography. So the big question is how the T can let me handle manual focus, let me set aperture, shutter, ISO and "A" compensation by tactile mechanical controls. All other is stuff for the iGeneration that favours style over function.

[plasticman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think a large part of the reason why the T polarizes online opinion is quite simply the absurd rationalization that always has to accompany purchasing what is essentially a luxurious jewel-like gadget. I should know, I instantly bought a DLux2 the first instant I saw it, and spent the following months combatting realists like imants on this board who were (naturally) totally correct when they said Leica had simply repackaged the Panasonic DMC-LX1.

 

I'd really rather forget all the rubbish I came up with about different firmware or lens coatings to justify the extra cost: the reality is that I loved the look of the camera, and everything else about 'improved' image quality was my own invention.

 

Unsurprisingly, when I saw the T, especially the top and back view, and the very clever and typographically elegant interface - not so far in aesthetic from the DLux2 that had first seduced me into the Leica fold - I've been thinking a few days that maybe I could justify switching to this camera as my (very seldom used) digital unit. It's elegant, minimal, forward looking (in some ways), takes M lenses, and the camera body itself isn't expensive.

 

It's possible I'll still go ahead and get one. Luckily I'm not enormously enamored of the front view, and I really hate the whole philosophy behind the hand-polishing procedure and everything that goes with concentrating on that part of the production as your marketing message (I'd be more impressed if they'd developed a futuristic machine-polishing unit instead) - so I think I'll probably be able to resist.

But if I can't, I hope someone will slap me if I start saying it has superior IQ or that using a touch-screen instead of a button has 'transformed my image-making'.

[jonoslack]

And what specifically about the T that changes one's approach to making images of the world (the iPhone experience? the smooth metal body? the LCD screen? etc., etc..)

 

Anyway, I'll stop now

 

EDIT: and to Jono, I hope your charity bike ride went well!

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!

The group ready to set off

 

The two grandfathers, Kate and Scarlett after the ride (I think we look pretty okay )

 

NB - both shot with the Leica T and the zoom lens. (FWIW)

 

Okay - well, first of all, the bike ride was great - I was in the middle pack (we didn't slipstream, we looked over the hedges at the lovely countryside) the result of which was that we averaged 14mph instead of 15, and did 115km instead of 100 (because we took the wrong turnings when we were looking over the hedge). This morning I have a slight hangover - but seem otherwise unscathed - thank you for asking!

 

. . . . for those of you who don't know what I'm talking about, this will explain all:

 

Link to Scarlett Slack's page

 

We've raised nearly £7000 so far - which is fantastic - thank you so much to the many people here who have donated - you know who you are!

 

Now - the Leica T

Let's see:

 

If your photography entails planning a session, controlling all the variables and the lighting, then of course, the T is just another mirror lesscamera with a slightly dated feature set and a rather innovative touch interface. Blah (okay Alan G)

 

If you're thinking of a mirror less camera with an EVF, then the Leica stands up pretty well with the competition in terms of image quality and lens quality, AF is accurate but not as fast as the Olympus E-M1. It's small - a contender, but if you're doing a price/feature comparison then it's not that fantastic. If you add 'thingness' it does much better , and if you want to use it with Leica M lenses it does better still

 

However, if like me, most of your photography is reactive - camera in hand, waiting for something to come up; could be in the street, the countryside, travelling, whatever . . . then just try using the T without the EVF - THEN it's a different experience - switch on touch autofocus use the LCD - you can quickly change settings with the dials or the touch screen. You could do this with an iPhone - but you don't have control over the camera settings, the IQ is dodgy and it's all a bit fingers and thumbs. You can almost do it with the Olympus, but you get bogged down with the complications of the touch screen.

 

It encourages you to use odd angles and, like the M, you can see around your subject (although in a different way). Startup and Wakeup isn't that fast - so turn off sleep mode - the battery life is still fairly good.

 

 

But if I can't, I hope someone will slap me if I start saying it has superior IQ or that using a touch-screen instead of a button has 'transformed my image-making'.

 

Good Point - but still, giving you a different modus operandi might not improve your photography, but it might shake it up a little. I've included this, because I wasn't for a minute trying to suggest that it would transform anything - simply that if you take the T for what it is it DOES afford a rather different way of working with a camera. Frankly, also, lovely though it might have been the D-lux2 really didn't offer anything different - this really does.

 

Back to work

Edited April 28, 2014 by jonoslack

[Peter H]

If people buy them purely because they like the look and feel of them and they're fun to use, what's the problem?

 

People have bought expensive cars and houses and other things on that basis for generations. Why not cameras?

[rob_w]

I'm sorry - you misunderstand the significance of First Stage vs Second Stage thinking. The old scenario is that first stage thinking is 'instinct' - and that's what you're talking about. Of course, you can't do the research with photographers, but it's been done with chess masters (together with brain scans). Most chess masters will know in an instant their next move - even if they have half an hour to think about it - however, in a very high percentage of cases that first instinctive move is correct - and if they change their minds, then they are usually wrong.

 

But the real point is physiological, and it's that that 'subconscious' first thought contains thousands of times more synaptic movements than the subsequent 'conscious' thinking - literally thousands of times - and it refers back to all one's knowledge -whether that be to previous chess games or to previous photographs you've seen - books you've read - The second stage thinking is a superficial little twitch of your conscious brain, the first stage (instinctive) thinking is an almost instant subconscious resolution of all your knowledge.

 

.. . . . . . the decisive moment in fact

 

Very interesting -- you should get on with writing that article, Jono!

[pgk]

What is it about the T that might give me 'new directions' that can't be found in other similar devices? And aside from simply creating more images because it's comfortable and inviting to use (it's a sincere question, really.)

I am not going to attempt to answer your question (I haven't tried a T so how could I?), but your caveat is what intrigues me. I believe that equipment which is comfortable to use and becomes second nature to use because it suits the user is a very under appreciated factor. Its how I feel about my M cameras and whilst they may not be as high spec or 'up to date' as other cameras, I simply don't care. They help me take the images that I want to take and I enjoy using them and find them totally intuitive to use, a concept which could be classed as a 'new direction' for some perhaps. So concentrating on form and user interface make excellent sense to me, even if the absolute specification is not the ultimate (something which is almost certainly irrelevant to most people with many cameras today).

 

I'm more than happy with the M system so don't see the need to look at something like the T but I do think that there is far more to a camera then just its bottom line specification and design is part of it. After all, why buy a Porsce, Rolex, whatever, when there are cheaper and just as effective alternatives available?

[rob_w]

I was in London on Saturday for other reasons but discovered that the T is on display at both Burlington Arcade and Bruton Street Leica stores.

 

My advice to any potential commentators is: don't say anything until you have handled it. A lot of things I wondered about beforehand were quickly corrected once I had the unit in hand.

 

For example, it is not slippery. It is perfectly sized (at least for me) and nicely balanced. The EVF attaches firmly and sits well on the body; being detachable gives you a choice of shooting with or without. Never thought I would be saying that. The shutter is very quiet and smooth, as is the AF and everything else. The interface is intuitive -- you can have it running how you want it in a matter of minutes (unless you are an iPhone-hater beforehand).

 

There is no real attempt to produce a better camera for the tickers of boxes. Rather the current state of the art is re-packaged in a very thoughtful way that is just better integrated than you might have imagined. And there are lots of 'little' innovations, such as the T-Snap covers which give you a choice of colours without spending £'100s on custom leathers.

 

I came away thinking the T will appeal to existing Leica users because it has the same gestalt of quality, simplicity and integrity which so many Leica users love. The T is an object of desire that you just want to hold and use and make pictures with.

 

So again my advice is: go and see it and handle it before writing here.

[Steve P]

Before I acquired my Ricoh GXR-M and 15mm Voigtlander Heliar, I'd never seriously contemplated street photography, but I found this pairing to be a fantastic combination. Deep depth of field, whisper - quiet shutter, low distortion for the focal length and sufficiently wide of angle to get up close and still retain plenty of environmental detail. It's an absolute Ninja of a tool. It took my photography in a different direction. There's no reason to suppose the Leica T won't do the same for someone else.

[rob_w]

I believe that equipment which is comfortable to use and becomes second nature to use because it suits the user is a very under appreciated factor. Its how I feel about my M cameras and whilst they may not be as high spec or 'up to date' as other cameras, I simply don't care. They help me take the images that I want to take and I enjoy using them and find them totally intuitive to use, a concept which could be classed as a 'new direction' for some perhaps. So concentrating on form and user interface make excellent sense to me, even if the absolute specification is not the ultimate (something which is almost certainly irrelevant to most people with many cameras today)

 

Paul posted this while I was writing my feedback above and I think he sums up well the appeal of the M for some of us. I don't care whether the M produces better pictures than some other camera -- it produces beautiful pictures that make me happy and I love using it. With respect, my brief experience of the T on Saturday gives me confidence it will generate the same kind of Leica experience.

[rob_w]

PS I was actually in London on Saturday to visit PARIS IN THE SPRINGTIME | Beetles & Huxley

 

You will probably know many of the photos already. The chance to see them as the photographer intended them to be printed was special -- in fact quite a revelation.

 

Highly recommended!

[earleygallery]

So again my advice is: go and see it and handle it before writing here.

 

I'm sure it's nicely made and all that BUT would I spend approx. £2400 on it when I could buy a comparable product for £300? No I wouldn't.

 

So, I don't need to handle it in order to have an opinion.

 

The fact that some here love the new camera and have even ordered it is irrelevant. Leica has its fanatics just like Apple and some will buy every new gadget they release regardless.

 

I said elsewhere that I hope it's a success for Leica. I just wonder are they really going to attract the new customers they need with the T?

 

Time will Tell.

[Paul J]

You misunderstand me – I mean it is sleight of hand in the sense that it is still just a part of turnover when it comes to doing the accounts. Charging a digital capture fee, etc. doesn't make any difference to whether businesses end up paying for the capital equipment that they acquire, which was the point (the "myth") that I was addressing. I'm not suggesting for a second that there is anything wrong or dodgy about invoicing on an itemised basis – on the contrary, I fully agree with you re: the benefits for all parties in doing it that way (and you are probably right that if all businesses were fully transparent about costs there might be less grumbling about somebody's charge "per hour" or whatever). My point (not that well made) is that the "film production" (if I may put it that way) model of charging for a job by breaking everything up into talent, creative fee, equipment, etc. isn't that well received by smaller businesses (often less experienced with dealing with creative suppliers) or consumers. For example, I don't (often) do weddings or "social" but I know the reaction I would get if, as part of the bill, I included a hire fee for my cameras (even if the final total was the same as a simple fee which incorporates those costs). It's a different game altogether outside the "big city".

 

Thanks yes I had misunderstood you. I'm not aware of how the wedding and social markets work and I think in certain circumstances, particularly when dealing with the public rather than industry, the more you can simplify things the better because it could possibly create more confusion.

 

If I charged what I do and put it in one lump sum for a client to swallow I would find arguments and abrasive relationships with most clients and I have found they are more likely to walk or not even reply. I also wouldn't be fitting into their peg-hole way of doing things. My estimates are usually a couple to a few pages long with budget breakdown and standard procedure, timeline and terms and condition. Unless we do that, myself and my agent spend the next few days back and forth emailing explaining why things cost the way they do and we run into problems further down the chain of production which when under contract is not viable.

 

Transparency solves most issues and creates trust right from the start. Many people do need feeding in terms of what goes into it. Even experienced clients may have worked with other people who just do things differently or have another way of working so I have found it's worth taking the time to explain things in the beginning. Then there are some who really don't have a clue - It's not a case of turning up on the day clicking the button a few times and walking away with a large sum of money in my pocket and pictures magically appear from a computer at a single click of a button; some, somehow think that.

 

People like/need to see where the value is coming from. I think they appreciate it so much more when they realise they are part of a process too and see what is involved in the process.

 

Also it works well for negotiations because your creative fee stays put and strong. That is not something we negotiate on, it becomes a recognised value and that holds the strength of what I provide and creates the value in their own project that they appreciate and like. I don't discount it. However I can discount or trim lighting, digital, crew, set, etc. to the clients budget. It makes for easier negotiation on everyone's behalf when things are flexible and more manageable that way.

 

At the end of the day, of corse, what works for the individual is best but I'm finding more and more in the current climate we need to actively sell and negotiate things on an individual level and all this helps to facilitate that.

[BrianUK]

Cost aside, my first thought on seeing the T was, “metal body with no covering, that’ll be unbearably cold in the winter handle… my M6TTL is cold enough”. Yes, I know one can use a half-case, but I don’t. The other alternative is to wear thin gloves, which I do occasionally when the mercury really drops during the British winter.

 

The touch screen is a welcome technological avenue to pursue, although again, in winter with gloves, how practical will it be? My iPhone 5 certainly isn’t with gloves.

 

These are just my initial thoughts, as I haven’t seen or held the camera – but I intend to when I get the opportunity, as I want to replace my D90 for a smaller, lighter camera for colour work. At the moment top of the list is Fuji’s X-T1.

 

Full marks to Leica for being bold, but I wonder, is it style over function?

[sblitz]

they make gloves today designed to work with an iphone, so i suppose they would work with the T as well.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[colonel]

I'm sure it's nicely made and all that BUT would I spend approx. £2400 on it when I could buy a comparable product for £300? No I wouldn't.

 

So, I don't need to handle it in order to have an opinion.

 

 

What comparable product is £300 ?