Looks nice but.....

[BB W]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The only problem I have is that is I feel I take better photographs with a rangefinder than with an SLR. I often wonder why, and can't help feeling that it's due in part to the fact that I prefer to use a rangefinder to an SLR.

 

I'm sure that is why. The less one has to think about one's gear the better - as it doesn't interfere with the moment.

[jonoslack]

The only problem I have is that is I feel I take better photographs with a rangefinder than with an SLR. I often wonder why, and can't help feeling that it's due in part to the fact that I prefer to use a rangefinder to an SLR.

 

Hi Steve

I feel I do as well, and so does the boss, and though not even slightly photographically technically minded she can always tell the shots taken with the M.

 

It may be that they're nice to use - but I still think it's more the ability of being able to see around the image - it's less immersive and keeps you more attached to what's going on.

[Advertisement]

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

[AlanG]

I'm sure that is why. The less one has to think about one's gear the better - as it doesn't interfere with the moment.

 

Even very complex work requiring lots of lighting and technical decisions becomes fluid with practice.

 

When shooting from the hip, most photographers learn how to preset things or use auto mode. Some photographers program a custom function so they can instantly go to an auto grab shot mode. There are plenty of solutions.

[BB W]

Absolutely true. All it takes is some getting used to - and know how.

[stunsworth]

It may be that they're nice to use - but I still think it's more the ability of being able to see around the image - it's less immersive and keeps you more attached to what's going on.

 

I think it also has something to do with the fact that there isn't a single plane of focus as there is with an SLR.

[scaryink]

I think it also has something to do with the fact that there isn't a single plane of focus as there is with an SLR.

 

I must be misunderstanding your comment. Would you please elaborate? All cameras capture images in the same fashion and there is no difference in the plane of focus between an SLR or any other tool.

[mjh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I must be misunderstanding your comment. Would you please elaborate? All cameras capture images in the same fashion and there is no difference in the plane of focus between an SLR or any other tool.

I think he referred to the viewfinder image, not the eventually captured picture. With a rangefinder the viewfinder image has virtually unlimited depth of field, quite different from the image on the focusing screen of an SLR.

[lecycliste]

...But I am genuinely puzzled as to what those who consider the T to be overpriced actually expect from Leica...

 

No, if we want a company like Leica to be innovative in any way, its not going to result in a cheap product. If the 'quartz movement' they use is not as state of the art as it could be, there are obvious reasons for this, and we will either have to live with it for the other advantages of a Leica design, or expect Leica to simply stop making new products.

 

I suspect that the real problem some people have is accepting a high cost of electronics which do not compete at the highest level. But electronics, I am sure, cost money to design and develop, and if we ignore the requirement to pay for the cost of doing so we will eventually end up in a world with very few manufacturers dominating the electonics' marketplace (as we are to an extent already).

 

As I have said before I don't think that the T is for me, but I do think that Leica has quite an innovative design and I hope it does well for them (I suspect it will:)).

 

What defines an innovative design?

 

I think there are (at least) two sides to this. One is the exterior design, the appearance. The other is functionality.

 

From the exterior, I can agree the Leica T is innovative - carved from a single block of aluminum, recessed dials and mechanical controls, 3.7" touch screen. It's a sexy-looking piece of technology.

 

From the functionality side, the T is either 'me, too' or worse. 16MP, mounts Leica M-lenses with adapter, noisy at and above ISO 3200, touch screen which requires removing gloves to operate in cold weather, no built-in EVF.

 

What are we paying for and why?

 

Yes, DNG raw files are well-supported for processing in Lightroom / Abobe Camera Raw or Capture One Pro. Otherwise, I can get substantially similar performance for half the cost in a Fuji X-E2, which also gives me a built-in EVF, so it's really at 1/3 the cost. That applies right down to Fuji's M-mount adapter. Sure, the Fuji adapter doesn't read 6-bit lens codes, but it does have a dedicated pushbutton to access lens-specific post-processing built in to the camera.

 

I designed integrated circuits (electronic chips) for 25 years at AMD, National Semiconductor and elsewhere. For products that sell well, you recoup the development cost in 6 months or less. Competition defines what you can charge. Since you're spreading the production cost over many circuit die per silicon wafer in a dirt-cheap production process, those costs are very low with decent yields and smart testing.

 

So I don't see high development costs for the electronics as a factor, either.

 

If Leica can't deliver premium performance for a premium price, they have no place charging that price. I can certainly get good performance with M-lenses on my Fuji X-E2.

[stunsworth]

I must be misunderstanding your comment. Would you please elaborate? All cameras capture images in the same fashion and there is no difference in the plane of focus between an SLR or any other tool.

 

Hi, I was referring to what is seen through the viewfinder rather than what happens at the film/sensor end of the camera.

 

What I meant was that when you look at the fround glass on an SLR, or an EVF, what you see is a single plane from near to infinity in focus. Everything else is to some degree out of focus. With a rangefinder everything is in focus to the photographer's eye - obviously provided he/she focusses their eye on something. So the photographer can be looking at something in near to them, but still be aware of what's happening further away, or indeed outside the frame as Jono mentioned earlier.

[lct]

...I can certainly get good performance with M-lenses on my Fuji X-E2.

Are you sure you don't get smeared corners, red edges and/or cyan shift with M wides on the Fuji? Just curious.

[Steve P]

Are you sure you don't get smeared corners, red edges and/or cyan shift with M wides on the Fuji? Just curious.

 

Hard to tell with X-trans. I mean...it could be anything!

[lecycliste]

Are you sure you don't get smeared corners, red edges and/or cyan shift with M wides on the Fuji? Just curious.

 

This was captured with the X-E2, Fuji M-mount adapter, and CV 15mm f/4.5 v1 on LTM adapter - Piedra Lisa Park View, Sandia Foothills, Albuquerque, New Mexico | Active Light Photography workshops

 

Raw conversion was with Lightroom 5.4, with no noise reduction applied, and rotation to level horizon - otherwise full-frame.

 

This was an informal shot, and I need to do a complete test with a flat focus target, but I saw no evidence of focus-smearing, and only minor corner color shifts (slightly magenta / red corners here) with this lens-camera combination.

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!

Edited April 29, 2014 by lecycliste

[jonoslack]

This was captured with the X-E2, Fuji M-mount adapter, and CV 15mm f/4.5 v1

Raw conversion was with Lightroom 5.4, with no noise reduction applied, and rotation to level horizon - otherwise full-frame.

 

This was an informal shot, and I need to do a complete test with a flat focus target, but I saw no evidence of focus-smearing, and only minor corner color shifts (slightly magenta / red corners here) with this lens-camera combination.

 

Hi There

I spent some time with the Fuji, and actually really liked it, but I had real and nasty problems with smeary greens - not all the time, but quite a lot of the time. The only escape was to use Iridient as the raw converter . . . . and then there was a lot of CA.

 

There's no such thing as a free lunch - but the sensor in the T is the same as the one in the Ricoh GR, which is pretty universally applauded - certainly, as far as I can see, there's nothing obviously better on offer from an Image quality point of view - even the A7r is only more image rather than better

 

All the best

[lecycliste]

Hi There

I spent some time with the Fuji, and actually really liked it, but I had real and nasty problems with smeary greens - not all the time, but quite a lot of the time. The only escape was to use Iridient as the raw converter . . . . and then there was a lot of CA.

 

There's no such thing as a free lunch - but the sensor in the T is the same as the one in the Ricoh GR, which is pretty universally applauded - certainly, as far as I can see, there's nothing obviously better on offer from an Image quality point of view - even the A7r is only more image rather than better

 

All the best

 

A couple things -

 

First, in Sean Reid's review of the Leica T in which he compares it to the Ricoh GXR A12 (Leica module), it's very clear that the two sensors are not the same.

 

Second, corner smearing and color drift depend on the lens you use as well as the RAW converter (for color shifts). In Lightroom 5.4, I haven't seen severe shifts or smearing with the CV 15. I do still need to perform more rigorous testing with a flat focus target, though.

 

I'm curious, which lens(es) were you using with the Fuji?

[lct]

...the sensor in the T is the same as the one in the Ricoh GR, which is pretty universally applauded...

Comparisons by Sean Reid with 21mm and 28mm M lenses are not quite flattering though. The Ricoh M mount looks significantly sharper, especially in the corners.

[jonoslack]

Comparisons by Sean Reid with 21mm and 28mm M lenses are not quite flattering though. The Ricoh M mount looks significantly sharper, especially in the corners.

 

First, in Sean Reid's review of the Leica T in which he compares it to the Ricoh GXR A12 (Leica module), it's very clear that the two sensors are not the same.

 

Actually, I wasn't talking of the GXR A12 . . . but the Leica GR Whatever

 

and I used the Fuji X-T1 with Fuji lenses

[CaptZoom]

Referencing the last few comments.

 

It's not just the sensor, but also how the captures data is translated (with each company formulating their own processes). Comparing shared sensors does not tell the whole story and one should proceed with caution when making such comparisons.

[jonoslack]

Referencing the last few comments.

 

It's not just the sensor, but also how the captures data is translated (with each company formulating their own processes). Comparing shared sensors does not tell the whole story and one should proceed with caution when making such comparisons.

 

Of course, and good point.

[lecycliste]

Actually, I wasn't talking of the GXR A12 . . . but the Leica GR Whatever

 

and I used the Fuji X-T1 with Fuji lenses

 

I've read that the Leica T's sensor is the same as that of the Leica X-Vario (and Leica X2) - http://tinyurl.com/m4j4d7t. Where did you find the information about it being the same as the Ricoh GR?

 

(You're right, the Ricoh GR is a different camera than the Ricoh GXR A12.)

Edited April 29, 2014 by lecycliste

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jonoslack]

I've read that the Leica T's sensor is the same as that of the Leica X-Vario (and Leica X2) - The Leica T (Type 701) Unibody Digital Camera Review by Steve Huff | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS. Where did you find the information about it being the same as the Ricoh GR?

 

(You're right, the Ricoh GR is a different camera than the Ricoh GXR A12.)

 

Hi Mark

Haven't a clue . . .but I'm pretty sure it's also the same Sony sensor in the Sony NEX6 and the Pentax K5 (with or without AA filter). Dimensions and DxO marks etc.

 

all the best