No focus peaking???

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

knowledgeable?

 

Luckily the market has all options for you. Ugly, acne infected (on rear), plastic Japan camera or sleek, Bauhaus stylish, sturdy ones.

 

It is not about knowledge, it is the taste, man.

 

 

OK, since you are going there. I can't see why any knowledgeable photographer would choose a camera mostly on taste over function. But maybe some do. Shiny aluminum and a touch screen combined with minimal fast and direct controls does not represent an appealing taste to me. Whatever finish and covering material Canon puts over the 5DIII or Sony on the Nex 6 is very easy to grip, does not freeze to my hands and wears very well. I certainly would have no reason to ask them for a smooth aluminum finish.

Edited May 4, 2014 by AlanG

[AlanG]

So, you're a a Windows kind of a guy. It takes all types, but I don't think there is a RIGHT answer

 

This is some kind of backhanded slur. However your analogy is reversed. It is Windows that has a simple unified interface across its desktops, laptops, tablets and cell phones. And it is Windows that has a touch interface on all of those.

 

Why can't we just go back to car analogies?

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 May 4, 2014 by AlanG

[Advertisement]

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

[tomasis7]

Knowledgable or not I think it's really sad that Leica have to had to depart from making proper cameras and have put their efforts into making consumerist toys like this hideous so called camera!!

 

we have all opinions. If we kept think like that, we end up sitting in a cave

[tomasis7]

OK, since you are going there. I can't see why any knowledgeable photographer would choose a camera mostly on taste over function. But maybe some do. Shiny aluminum and a touch screen combined with minimal fast and direct controls does not represent an appealing taste to me. Whatever finish and covering material Canon puts over the 5DIII or Sony on the Nex 6 is very easy to grip, does not freeze to my hands and wears very well. I certainly would have no reason to ask them for a smooth aluminum finish.

 

The point is that the market covers our needs. If you like your stuffs, it is great for you and Im happy. For me, function and form are inseparable. M and T bodies are solid, lines are straight, not much fuss over it meanwhile Canikon is molded like a curvy woman. Nothing wrong with it. Bauhaus or organic, you prefer.

 

I've liked Barnack and M3 body shapes since I touched them. If you never liked Leica I then there is no reason to like a T body as well. I don't care about polished look but making a camera built of aluminium block is not bad, it's even clever. I prefer metal bodies over plastic. So even if they wont polish T bodies, I still would buy it.

 

I find S2 design superior to Canikon. Feel free to disagree but at that point it is matter of taste, not only in function as S2 and Canikon do similarly in that deparment, and S2 is not even of aluminium finish

[AlanG]

I have used straight and curvy cameras. Big deal. Some fit my hand better than others. And some have better control placement. I am not sure where you are going with this. People choose the S2 for its performance. I think it has an ergonomic shape and nicely placed controls. BTW some other digital backs have touch screens along with buttons. Keep in mind that the S2 would never have existed if not for the work of Kodak, Honeywell, Minolta, Canon, Nikon and others to develop that technology.

 

If anyone wants to choose a camera solely or somewhat for looks, I have no problem with that. But it is not how I generally choose a tool. FWIW I don't think many good cameras have plastic bodies. My Rollei 6006 did have some plastic over the metal in areas. Plastic can be more expensive than aluminum and they each have advantages depending on how they are used. Do you see any aluminum bike frames in the Tour de France?

Edited May 5, 2014 by AlanG

[jaapv]

Yes.

Tour de France winning bikes - BikeRadar

[tomasis7]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes.

Tour de France winning bikes - BikeRadar

 

my bike for Alps and such things. I have fun on fast descending.

 

[tomasis7]

I have used straight and curvy cameras. Big deal. Some fit my hand better than others. And some have better control placement. I am not sure where you are going with this. People choose the S2 for its performance. I think it has an ergonomic shape and nicely placed controls. BTW some other digital backs have touch screens along with buttons. Keep in mind that the S2 would never have existed if not for the work of Kodak, Honeywell, Minolta, Canon, Nikon and others to develop that technology.

 

If anyone wants to choose a camera solely or somewhat for looks, I have no problem with that. But it is not how I generally choose a tool. FWIW I don't think many good cameras have plastic bodies. My Rollei 6006 did have some plastic over the metal in areas. Plastic can be more expensive than aluminum and they each have advantages depending on how they are used. Do you see any aluminum bike frames in the Tour de France?

 

Form follows function and vice versa. It is not looks.

[Rick]

 

I think the whole thing is rather like the Apple/Windows conundrum. I need to use both, in fact, I earn my living writing Windows software on Apple computers.

 

 

[AlanG]

Form follows function and vice versa. It is not looks.

 

And this form intentionally gives up some functions. Where are you going with this? One can certainly get similar functions with different forms. I'm sure lots of people will love the form. So?

Edited May 5, 2014 by AlanG

[tomasis7]

And this form intentionally gives up some functions. Where are you going with this? One can certainly get similar functions with different forms.

 

Giving up some functions, you get other.

 

What Im trying to say, things are designed differently and it appeals for some people. Not necessarily seen as utilitarian tools.

[AlanG]

Giving up some functions, you get other.

 

What Im trying to say, things are designed differently and it appeals for some people. Not necessarily seen as utilitarian tools.

 

I think we all are well aware of that. But we are talking about specifics. Conceivably I might pay maybe $500-$1000 for a simpler type camera similar to the T, if I were interested in one. I certainly would not pay nearly $4000 for one. For that much money I would want a camera that does a lot more.

 

It seems very odd to me to have to pay such a high price for the luxury of simplicity.

Edited May 5, 2014 by AlanG

[tomasis7]

I think we all are well aware of that. But we are talking about specifics. Conceivably I might pay maybe $500-$1000 for a simpler type camera similar to the T, if I were interested in one. I certainly would not pay nearly $4000 for one. For that much money I would want a camera that does a lot more.

 

It seems very odd to me to have to pay such a high price for the luxury of simplicity.

 

yeah it reminds me that one pays more for lighter version of Porsche GT3.

 

Such is life and I generally keep low budget on the rest of common stuffs except bikes.

 

I prefer Android and PC because they offer more choices at lower price. I never owned any Apple products as they are too "wannabe" for me. I understand that people get similar feeling over T body.

[AlanG]

yeah it reminds me that one pays more for lighter version of Porsche GT3.

 

Back to dumb car analogies? I can't see why any of our recent correspondences would enlighten anyone. Bye.

 

And what does Porsche leave out on the GT3? The $130K GT3 is 111 pounds heavier than the $84K Carrera. Is this a sports car forum now?

Edited May 5, 2014 by AlanG

[jaapv]

Well, to start with: all comfort….

[AlanG]

Well, to start with: all comfort….

 

Have you been in a GT3? I have. But all of this is just crazy. There is no similarity in concept with Leica. The GT3 has lots more than the Carrera. It is not stripped down to the minimum... which would be the case on a race car and a few "stripped" sports car models. (Ferrari F40)

 

http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/911/911-gt3/comfort/

 

So when we have exhausted anything to say about the T, car discussions break out.

 

Look, the T has removed a lot of things for its simplicity. If you want to pay extra for that over other models out there.... GO FOR IT!!! But you won't be gaining higher performance as in an F40.

Edited May 5, 2014 by AlanG

[LocalHero1953]

.....the T has removed a lot of things for its simplicity. If you want to pay extra for that over other models out there.... GO FOR IT!!! But you won't be gaining higher performance........

 

I think you could substitute virtually any item sold by Leica and this statement would remain true. Which isn't the point, is it? I am guessing, Alan, because I don't know you or your photography, that you own some Leica equipment and use it for a certain sort of photography. I would be surprised to hear that the technical quality of your images could not be achieved by a number of other non-Leica cameras and lenses. But there's more to taking the image you, or anyone else, wants to get. It includes comfort in using the kit, size, weight, noise, ease of use, even looks. And everyone has their own opinions on this, and they're willing to pay, as you are, for just that combination of factors that suits their habits, style of photography etc.

 

Alan, I understand (from all your posts in the T forum) that you don't like this camera, it doesn't suit your needs, and you're not willing to pay the same mark-up that you must have paid for your other Leica kit. I respect that. But I'm baffled that you don't understand that others may take a different view, from their perspective and needs! That doesn't (necessarily) make them wrong, not a real photographer, a rich ignoramus or whatever (and I apologise if I attributing to you views expressed by others).

 

This forum should be entitled "YMMV".

[AlanG]

. But I'm baffled that you don't understand that others may take a different view, from their perspective and needs! That doesn't (necessarily) make them wrong, not a real photographer, a rich ignoramus or whatever (and I apologise if I attributing to you views expressed by others).

 

This forum should be entitled "YMMV".

 

You should not be baffled since I explained myself numerous times including saying I understand to whom this camera is targeted... and have no problem with that. It does not mean that I think this is a good camera for its price regardless of whether people buy it in droves.

 

And I can see why Leica would do this, which brings up a lot of what has bothered me about Leica for about 40 years or so. They simply moved from their primary focus of making very fine state of the art cameras targeted to the needs of pros to primarily focusing on well to do enthusiasts, collectors, and those who may not be very camera savvy and just buy a rebadged Panny or a T primarily for the Leica name. Whereas Canon and Nikon have really focused on the needs of pros, despite making all kinds of other cameras too. (Many of which I am not especially excited by either.) In my case, when I was a large format architectural photographer, it never occurred to me that someday I'd be only working in 35mm. But now thanks to Canon's technology and special lenses, that is what I use. Meanwhile Leica is only now making a full frame camera that has live view, but still just has a very narrow selection of lenses for it... however fine they may be. And no AF or IS.

 

I understand the marketing and competitive forces that have caused Leica to do this and I am happy they have better financial prospects than they've had for a long time. But it still makes me sad that they have no choice but to go this route and concentrate on things like a solid block of polished aluminum and newly designed neck strap attachments rather than being able to push the technology much.

 

And despite what some of you think about "ticking boxes," things like having the ability to lock on a specific eye and keep it in focus, better IS, higher ISO abilities, better dynamic range, video features, are some of the more interesting and useful things resulting from companies pushing the technology. And we are still at the early stages. Leica does not develop any of that kind of technology and often is slow at incorporating it.

 

Saying that most of its buyers do not really need these things and just want what is "essential" is just a marketing cop-out for lack of the ability to truly incorporate state of the art technology, let alone innovate any of it. They try to make a feature out of what they can't do. Yes, if they have a nice touchscreen interface for what features they do have, that is great.

 

And yes some find this approach OK and will like the T despite having to pay 8 times more for it than for a Nex 6. But consider that it is Sony (and others) that have done the heavy lifting and we should acknowledge their amazing contributions and thank them, not call it a "plastic acne covered camera." Have you ever thought about how much Sony gives you for $524 and how they got advanced and efficient enough to do that?

Edited May 5, 2014 by AlanG

[Steve P]

Thee are a complete pain

 

So are thou!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[LocalHero1953]

Saying that most of its buyers do not really need these things and just want what is "essential" is just a marketing cop-out for lack of the ability to truly incorporate state of the art technology, let alone innovate any of it.

 

Well, I only bought my first Leica a little over 30 years ago, so I can't answer for much of your post (though it was an early M3).

 

I don't agree with your opinion above, however: I think Leica has just taken a view on what its target customers want/need. Only time will tell whether they're right - I happen to think they've got it mostly right, even if I don't get one myself (still an open question).