No focus peaking???

[papimuzo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With a new device model, I'm using the simple chart:

-you try it - you like it - you buy it // you try it - you dislike it - you pass your way

 

Simple isn't it?

[Advertisement]

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

[tomasis7]

I can't ever win with you

 

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!

[jonoslack]

I've given up arguing about the features of the T because it is pointless to do so here.

 

Excellent

 

 

If anyone needs approval from me before buying it, then there is a big problem.

 

So why are you so assiduously giving your disapproval?

[Jeff S]

Don't know if anyone has posted

. Seems apropos here given that the reviewer likes the camera despite its lack of features and various other articulated deficiencies.

 

One either likes a camera or not, and that can only be determined by trying it. Not rocket science.

 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

It has been my experience in life that minimalism is a worthy goal, but difficult and surprisingly expensive to do well. As William Morris observed, have nothing in your house that is not beautiful or useful.

 

My biggest worry is that Leica has again not given us the best it can with the core ingredients here - sensor, lens, and ultimately, image quality. One thing this video rather alarmingly says throughout is "not great".

[AlanG]

Excellent

 

 

 

 

So why are you so assiduously giving your disapproval?

 

As far as I can tell the point of these threads is to present one's point of view. I could just post "ditto." I have no hesitation about standing my ground and that seems to be a problem for some here.

 

Perhaps informing potential buyers that mic and earphone jacks are omitted will be helpful to just one person.

 

Consider it a public service.

[thighslapper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My biggest worry is that Leica has again not given us the best it can with the core ingredients here - sensor, lens, and ultimately, image quality.

 

If the ultimate output is as good or better than the X-Vario then I will be very satisfied.

 

You will find very few people with an XV that find the images deficient .... and I have taken more excellent pictures with this camera ... shot for shot ...... than with my M

[IkarusJohn]

If the ultimate output is as good or better than the X-Vario then I will be very satisfied.

 

You will find very few people with an XV that find the images deficient .... and I have taken more excellent pictures with this camera ... shot for shot ...... than with my M

 

That is my hope as well.

 

As for video, it's a nice add on I will use instead of my iPhone. I find the idea of wanting to add an external shotgun mike (not much point in putting anything less on a video camera) or external mike link and headphones to this camera frankly ludicrous. If I was that interested in video, I'd a use my D800E with this gear (and to be honest, it would be marginal).

 

Let's not turn this camera into something it isn't. It is a step above the X cameras and a step below the M cameras. Simplified is good, the best quality for this sector is imperative.

 

Cheers

John

[AlanG]

Hi Alan

All of these technologies are likely to be useful to someone in some situations ( well, most of them!)

However, if you want to present a slimmed down interface without menu bloat (which we all agree is a supportable position and was certainly Leica's intent) then some things are going to have to be left out. So they've left some things out. Inevitably there will be disagreement about which are the things to leave out!.

 

Since it is you who brought this up and we are discussing design in general... this is true only if the features require menus or mechanical controls. Some features are transparent in use and could be added to a camera without any changes to the interface at all. I am sure you could list some of them. So they are not left off for reasons of keeping the camera interface simple. I do not know why any were specifically left off of any particular camera. Do you?

 

BTW, Sony has a remote release cord for the A7 that works through the USB port. So maybe that feature can be added to other cameras somehow if similar contacts are included. Is that a good idea or not since it will be useful to some and not add any complexity?

 

I got a new car a month ago - an SUV fully equipped. It has a slick navigation/entertainment system. Additionally it has Adaptive Cruise Control with stop, front collision avoidance system, lane change warning system, back up warning system, back up camera, 90 degree back out approach warning system, voice command, blue tooth phone interface, usb media interface, SD card slot, AC power outlet, USB charging outlets, numerous buttons on the steering wheel - front and rear, paddle shifters, 4X4 controls, ride height controls, power lift gate, remote apps on my phone - I can lock the car from anywhere in case I forgot, (a feature I appreciated on Sunday) and much more. I had no problem learning this and using it. I also have a stick shift sports car that has none of these features and I don't think its lack of features somehow gives me more driving satisfaction.

[IkarusJohn]

Ming Thein has an interesting post on his blog about numbers. It is his thesis that camera makers have created rods for their own backs by chasing numbers we don't need (MP for the dSLRs, and perhaps f stops for Leica?) - we aren't at all realistic about what we need for the photography we do.

 

Along with others, I struggled with the resolution of the A7r in such a small package, when that sensor is far better presented in the D800E, with the far more intuitive user interface and simpler strategy when it comes to buttons and where they're put (maybe it's a Nikon thing, but it makes more sense to me). For what I wanted the A7 to do, a simpler camera would have been better - leaving aside that the A7r promises more than it can (easily) deliver.

 

Ming concludes with what he thinks is important in a mass market camera - "And there’s my list: improved output/ presentation, fun, common sense/ intelligent design and education. Not quite what you expected, was it? MT"

 

My standard set up with the T will be with the 35 Summilux FLE - at least, that's what I'm going to try. I find around 50mm is a sweet spot for me, if I don't go wider. So, the T with 35 should be a useful walk around camera, and my bag will hold some or all of the 21-28-50-75-90 primes with Monochrom and T body.

 

The 18-56 zoom may get an outing, but it won't be a mainstay - AF and a convenient zoom range (though I've never been that keen on zooms, I must confess). No focus peaking required ...

 

PS - I originally bought the Distagon 15 for use with m7 NEX. It hasn't been used that much as it isn't rangefinder coupled (it's actually more than good with the Monochrom). The T might be a useful opportunity to give it another airing (equivalent 23mm).

[AlanG]

Ming Thein has an interesting post on his blog

 

Along with others, I struggled with the resolution of the A7r in such a small package,

 

The resolution and mirrorless design of the A7r is allowing some photographers to use it in ways that is pretty different than what many imagine. I don't own an A7r - mostly due to lack of tethering support in C1, but I find this usage and these comparisons very interesting. Clearly Sony created something very special considering the wide applications for it..

 

A7r on A/S M-Line Two?

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!

[IkarusJohn]

The resolution and mirrorless design of the A7r is allowing some photographers to use it in ways that is pretty different than what some imagine. I don't own an A7r - mostly due to lack of tethering support, but I find this usage and these comparisons very interesting. Clearly Sony created something very special.

 

A7r on A/S M-Line Two?

 

I'm not really sure I understand your point. If you're going to use such a huge mount, what benefit is the size (and increased problems with shutter shock) of an A7r? Again, it seems to me to be using a tool for something it's not designed to do. Even the discussion you linked refers to problems with crosstalk and a general consensus that an IQ260 would be a better camera to use.

 

If you own such a mount (how much does it cost?), and you're going to set it up for a high resolution, highly controlled exposure, why use an A7r? Because you can, even though the results are compromised?

 

And I think this puts the discussion about the T in a nutshell - it's not trying to be a professional camera, and there has been considerable effort (apparently) to ensure that it does not have anything you don't need for its intended purpose.

 

Is it expensive? Absolutely. Too expensive? Probably, but that is an individual choice. More critically, does it do what it is designed to do. That is the question neither of us can answer (yet). By all means, borrow one and attach it to an A/S M-Line Two mount, and compare the results to any camera you like - I will ask you what's the point?

 

As you are a professional architectural photographer, I imagine fine detail, colour rendition and every minute detail of your images is important to you - with the best DR and resolution money can buy. The T isn't for you. Reading that discussion in Luminous Landscape, I wouldn't have thought that the A7 would be for you either - if you're lugging that mount around, size doesn't seem to be relevant, and you'd get a better image with large or medium format at a fraction of the cost of an A7r, even second hand (mine is for sale, by the way).

 

Quite what this has to do with the T camera, I don't know.

 

Cheers

John

[Jeff S]

I also have a stick shift sports car that has none of these features and I don't think its lack of features somehow gives me more driving satisfaction.

 

Driving a stick shift sports car doesn't give you more driving satisfaction than driving an SUV?

 

That about sums it up; it really is all about features for you, and not about a pure and focused experience with classic interface.

 

Jeff

[AlanG]

Driving a stick shift sports car doesn't give you more driving satisfaction than driving an SUV?

 

That about sums it up; it really is all about features for you, and not about a pure and focused experience with classic interface.

Jeff

 

See it just comes around to mostly slinging opinions as if there is some universal truth there.

 

They both give satisfaction. Try driving a sports car off road. That can be fun too. The SUV has manual paddle shifters just like modern sports cars. All of the technology and gadgets certainly does not detract from enjoying the SUV. As a matter of fact they add a lot of pleasure. New sports cars have much of that stuff now but mine is 11 years old.

 

Are you implying simple cameras should give more pleasure to everyone?

 

Are you saying the T has a classic interface? It is anything but.

 

FWIW I've been driving stick shift sports cars for 43 years so I am pretty knowledgeable about why I like them.

[AlanG]

I'm not really sure I understand your point. If you're going to use such a huge mount, what benefit is the size (and increased problems with shutter shock) of an A7r? Again, it seems to me to be using a tool for something it's not designed to do. Even the discussion you linked refers to problems with crosstalk and a general consensus that an IQ260 would be a better camera to use.

 

If you own such a mount (how much does it cost?), and you're going to set it up for a high resolution, highly controlled exposure, why use an A7r? Because you can, even though the results are compromised?

 

And I think this puts the discussion about the T in a nutshell - it's not trying to be a professional camera, and there has been considerable effort (apparently) to ensure that it does not have anything you don't need for its intended purpose.

 

Is it expensive? Absolutely. Too expensive? Probably, but that is an individual choice. More critically, does it do what it is designed to do. That is the question neither of us can answer (yet). By all means, borrow one and attach it to an A/S M-Line Two mount, and compare the results to any camera you like - I will ask you what's the point?

 

As you are a professional architectural photographer, I imagine fine detail, colour rendition and every minute detail of your images is important to you - with the best DR and resolution money can buy. The T isn't for you. Reading that discussion in Luminous Landscape, I wouldn't have thought that the A7 would be for you either - if you're lugging that mount around, size doesn't seem to be relevant, and you'd get a better image with large or medium format at a fraction of the cost of an A7r, even second hand (mine is for sale, by the way).

 

Quite what this has to do with the T camera, I don't know.

 

Cheers

John

 

I am not making an argument. I am trying to show you and others that some people find ways to use cameras that you may not get. You were the one who wrote about the A7r saying the A7r promises more than it can deliver when the opposite seems to be true in this example. The A7r is an extremely versatile camera and is moving into fields that virtually nobody foresaw a small camera doing back in the days when film was used for these specialties. I don't own an A7r and have no dog in this fight.

 

Where it relates to the T has to do with versatility and image quality and I am not enumerating anything like that again. But keep in mind that when you and others bring up various cameras you are not objectively comparing them to the T. E.g. if you say you can't get all of the res. out of the A7r, is the solution to buy a camera that has no chance of providing that resolution? Maybe for you it is the solution because you have many other cameras, but that is not much of a reason for others to avoid the A7r.

 

Whereas the arguments for the minimalism approach and simple interface actually are consistent with a philosophy that believes this is a better way to go. And it may be a better way to go for some now and should this type of interface take off and be extended to other brands. However, no matter how nice the T is, the T is never going to have close to this impact on any aspect of photography that the A7r is having. And the complex menus of the A7r and its number of knobs and dials does not seem to be holding it back. So most of the reason to buy a T is simply it does what you need it to do for you and you like the camera for a variety of reasons. That is fine. But comparing it to the A7r is a long stretch.

 

Just get a T if you want one but you seem to be making posts that show you haven't convinced yourself why you really need one... just that you like the idea of using one. You clearly have plenty of cameras and lenses already so the addition of the T is not of much significance to your photographic capabilities in any case. And you said if it doesn't work for you, you will move on. I am sure you will have fun using it, good for you. I wouldn't mind having one either. I have no idea how much I would use it if I had one since I too don't need it.

[Jeff S]

Are you implying simple cameras should give more pleasure to everyone?

 

Absolutely not. To each his/her own. But, if that were your mantra, we wouldn't be having this repetitive discussion.

 

Jeff

[Jeff S]

All of the technology and gadgets certainly does not detract from enjoying the SUV. As a matter of fact they add a lot of pleasure.

 

Not for me. Are you implying they should?

 

Two can play.

 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

I am not making an argument. I am trying to show you and others that some people find ways to use cameras that you may not get. It has nothing to do with the T but you were the one who wrote about the A7r saying the A7r promises more than it can deliver when the opposite seems to be true in this example.

 

Not at all. The shutter shock seems to me to be a fundamental flaw in the A7r in its core purpose - that and its AF and frustrating MF capabilities. If you have a 36MP sensor, touted as the best in the business, why hamstring it with two critical flaws - movement in the mechanism and difficulties nailing focus (unless, of course, you choose to use a massive, expensive and complex mount which probably has its own case).

 

More critically, you selectively quoted from my post which made the more relevant point that the T camera is not designed to do much of what you criticise it for (not being "professional" or not having the ability to take an external mount and headphones).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[AlanG]

Not for me. Are you implying they should?

 

Two can play.

 

Jeff

 

I find a lot of pleasure in not getting lost as often and being able to know my doors are locked and get a message to my phone if someone is trying to break in and steal my cameras.

[AlanG]

Not at all. The shutter shock seems to me to be a fundamental flaw in the A7r in its core purpose - that and its AF and frustrating MF capabilities. If you have a 36MP sensor, touted as the best in the business, why hamstring it with two critical flaws - movement in the mechanism and difficulties nailing focus (unless, of course, you choose to use a massive, expensive and complex mount which probably has its own case).

 

More critically, you selectively quoted from my post which made the more relevant point that the T camera is not designed to do much of what you criticise it for (not being "professional" or not having the ability to take an external mount and headphones).

 

What I am trying to get at is why not make posts that show how the T can stand on its own merits? And how you think you will benefit from them.