Survey: Would you buy the new Leica T?

[TEBnewyork]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

First it was the SLR that was supposed to kill off the rangefinder camera, then it was AF, and now it's smartphones and touchscreen devices that will supposedly deliver the final knockout blow. Just a guess, but maybe reports of the death of the rangefinder are greatly exaggerated. There's still a demand for mechanical watches and vinyl discs, after all, so I find it perfectly plausible that rangefinder cameras will still be sought after -- not in high volumes, but in sufficient volumes for a sustainable business, which is the key thing.

 

Of course rangefinders are not so versatile but that has been the case for about half a century now. As Leica is now the only digital RF manufacturer, they have a point of difference they can exploit.

 

However, the T represents a break and a new direction, as Erwin Putts, David Pogue, and others have pointed out. Yet it still integrates with traditional Leica optics. I think it is likely we shall see two Leica lines: one classic, the other more contemporary and modern.

 

 

Of course! The important thing here is that Leica needs new customers not just rangefinder users that want to upgrade bodies every few years. So, the T and some of the other cameras like the X's are meant to expand the customer base. If Leica didn't launch new products like this I'd be a lot more worried about their future!!!!

[jaapv]

However, they don’t forbid existing M users to buy a T, nor T users to switch to an M.

[Advertisement]

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

[drdannn]

It looks like it may be a great camera. A 3.5-5.6 zoom lens is really unexciting for a Leica. A 2.0-2.5 like the old Digilux 2 would have been a whole lot more tempting for the kind of money the T is going to be priced at. I would chose a D Lux 6 over this anytime. I have a D Lux 5 w/ an external EVF and love the camera for a fraction of the total price of a T with it's 2 new lenses. It appears that a T with 2 lenses, and the EFV will cost over USD $6000.00. On another note I feel that Leica has ignored firmware updates on it's M240, the flagship camera on which Leica's reputation is built. Without supporting it's flagship, do the other cameras eventually sink? All this just IMHO.

Edited May 19, 2014 by drdannn
grammar

[dkCambridgeshire]

It looks like it may be a great camera. A 3.5-5.6 zoom lens is really unexciting for a Leica. A 2.0-2.5 like the old Digilux 2 would have been a whole lot more tempting for the kind of money the T is going to be priced at. I would chose a D Lux 6 over this anytime. I have a D Lux 5 w/ an external EVF and love the camera for a fraction of the total price of a T with it's 2 new lenses. It appears that a T with 2 lenses, and the EFV will cost over USD $6000.00. On another note I feel that Leica has ignored firmware updates on it's M240, the flagship camera on which Leica's reputation is built. Without supporting it's flagship, do the other cameras eventually sink? All this just IMHO.

 

An f2 zoom lens would probably make the 'T' too unwieldy. And have you ever tried making an A3 or larger size exhibition print from e.g. a D Lux 5 or D Lux 6 or Leica C image exposed at ISO 800? It's impossible to maintain printable exhibition image quality from low light subject matter when using such small sensor cameras at high ISO settings.

 

dunk

[brunom]

An f2 zoom lens would probably make the 'T' too unwieldy. And have you ever tried making an A3 or larger size exhibition print from e.g. a D Lux 5 or D Lux 6 or Leica C image exposed at ISO 800? It's impossible to maintain printable exhibition image quality from low light subject matter when using such small sensor cameras at high ISO settings.

 

dunk

 

Hi - In all seriousness who would buy a small sensor, almost point and shoot camera like the T to make exhibition prints from ? The D Lux 5 or 6 alternatives for the likely use a T would be put to, seem quite a reasonable argument, considering the size and zoom range/speed. offered by these models.

 

If you were buying a camera to make exhibition prints from I think it highly likely FF or medium format [ in film terms ] would be bought.

Edited May 20, 2014 by jaapv
repair quote

[jaapv]

I would not call an APS-C sensor a small sensor nowadays. Too many capable cameras around.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi - In all seriousness who would buy a small sensor, almost point and shoot camera like the T to make exhibition prints from ? The D Lux 5 or 6 alternatives for the likely use a T would be put to, seem quite a reasonable argument, considering the size and zoom range/speed. offered by these models.

 

If you were buying a camera to make exhibition prints from I think it highly likely FF or medium format [ in film terms ] would be bought.

 

High quality A3+ exhibition prints can be produced from M4/3 images … so from APS format the same size exhibition prints are a breeze. Many thousands of exhibition prints continue to be produced from APS format DSLRs and APS mirrorless cameras.

 

Many exhibition print workers use APS format cameras - and the smaller 4/3 and M4/3 format.

 

The 'T' is just one of many APS format cameras. Leica X series are all APS format.

 

In all seriousness, APS is a serious image format incorporated into serious cameras and is capable of serious image quality … especially when used by serious exhibition print workers

 

Visit some of the London print exhibitions and see the wealth of high quality images made using APS cameras.

 

dunk

Edited May 21, 2014 by dkpeterborough

[rramesh]

It's impossible to maintain printable exhibition image quality from low light subject matter when using such small sensor cameras at high ISO settings.

 

dunk

 

I disagree. The picture is all about capturing an image at the right moment. If you took a really good picture with an iPhone, it would most likely be exhibited at an exhibition.

 

Most of the pictures HCB took were not with sophisticated cameras the likes of which we have today.

[dkCambridgeshire]

I disagree. The picture is all about capturing an image at the right moment. If you took a really good picture with an iPhone, it would most likely be exhibited at an exhibition.

 

Most of the pictures HCB took were not with sophisticated cameras the likes of which we have today.

 

HCB used FF film cameras and his images are capable of considerable enlargement compared to e.g. pictures taken with an iPhone or a small sensor camera.

 

I was referring to small sensor images taken at high ISO in low light. Detail in the resultant images breaks up at high ISO - and that is a physical fact which has deterred one of my exhibition print worker friends from using his D Lux 6 for street photography at night.

 

HCB's images do not figure in the argument. And I have yet to see an A3+ print made from an iPhone image which has been accepted into an exhibition. Maybe such an image could be accepted but iPhone image detail of e.g. an urban night scene illuminated by street lights would be lacking.

 

dunk

[rramesh]

One of many exhibitions for iPhone art. An APS-C would be even more versatile. LA Mobile Arts Festival | IPA Quarterly Shortlist

[hamey]

I am not interested.

 

Personally I would opt for the Fuji X system.

 

I believe the "T" Lenses are made by Fuji so they will be good.

 

Ken.

[wattsy]

And I have yet to see an A3+ print made from an iPhone image which has been accepted into an exhibition. Maybe such an image could be accepted but iPhone image detail of e.g. an urban night scene illuminated by street lights would be lacking.

 

I have no idea what kind of exhibitions you are referring to (camera club competitions?) but I have seen plenty of "iphone" type photographs displayed in serious galleries. Just a recent example: I recall seeing a small room's worth of "iphone" photos at the NPG Bailey exhibition. Those prints are about a yard wide.

[hamey]

I would not call an APS-C sensor a small sensor nowadays. Too many capable cameras around.

 

I agree.

 

Personally my Canon 70D is just as good as my M240, however the M240 looks better on my chest.....Lol

 

Ken.

[dkCambridgeshire]

One of many exhibitions for iPhone art. An APS-C would be even more versatile. LA Mobile Arts Festival | IPA Quarterly Shortlist

 

From a pictorial and subjective point of view they are fine - but they lack fine detail. And that is one reason why we use e.g. Leica, Nikon, Canon et al cameras - to produce better quality detail.

 

dunk

[JeTexas]

I don't think the T system will survive. Leica has attempted to modernize and bring about a new UI, but with outdated tech at twice the price.

 

If they wanted this system to thrive, they should have released the body at $999, maybe $1200 max, to get enough people committed to the system and buying lenses to secure the market.

[jaapv]

I don't think this camera is meant for buyers in that price segment - There are Panaleicas to cater for the lower price bracket. This type of gear often sells better if it is priced in or just below the expectancy range of the intended customers. Like the iPhone pushed the cheaper - and often better- Nokias into the margin.

Listening to various dealers I hear positive expectations- and many prospective buyers are pleasantly surprised by the price.

Edited May 21, 2014 by jaapv

[sfage]

I'd buy one if it were hand polished for 90 minutes. Only 45 minutes of hand polishing isn't enough, it smacks of cheapness.

 

I agree. It seems a bit of a quick fapp. I mean, if you're going to pay for the full fapp, then this shouldn't be some puny little "rub n' tug".

[JeTexas]

It seems like tech is moving so fast and digital sensors have become so good that anything below a pro-level full frame camera body is just an every two-year purchase. People stick with the body that works with the lenses in which they've invested.

 

It's not quite back to Kodak's model of "let's make the cheapest camera possible and sell them the film," but these m4/3 and APS-C mirrorless cameras are getting cheap enough that everyone is upgrading bodies on a regular basis instead of shooting with the same thing for the next ten years.

[jaapv]

Might it be that this is the pattern Leica wants to break?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Carbon111]

If they wanted this system to thrive, they should have released the body at $999, maybe $1200 max...

 

The Leica T would be much cheaper if made as a chassis/shell system instead of a unibody. It'd also be cheaper made from different materials and in greater numbers in, say, Guiyang...but it's not so it isn't. It's expensive, yes, but not for what it is.

 

By all accounts there have been plenty of preorders already. My local camera store that carries Leica had an unveiling a few days ago and the response was extremely positive. They've already got preorders as well.

 

A lot of reviewers have really gelled with the camera and it's looking more and more like Leica have a real winner here.