Steve P Posted May 7, 2014 Share #301 Â Posted May 7, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's the Chinese internet whispers in full effect. Someone says something, it gets repeated, a word or two get changed, different people interpret the information differently and before you know it, somebody somewhere definitely said something and speculation is hailed as fact. We could go round and round with this forever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 7, 2014 Posted May 7, 2014 Hi Steve P, Take a look here Leica T performs digital lens correction , a claim by dpreview.com. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AlanG Posted May 7, 2014 Share #302 Â Posted May 7, 2014 Could you please reference where Leica claimed that only optical correction was used? Otherwise, all of your accusations are meaningless and a waste of forum ink. Â This may well be a very good camera but it is being promoted and marketed with all kinds of over the top fluff. I certainly would not be surprised if that was the impression Leica communicated to a number of people when they gave them early samples of the camera. Some of their other statements written on the T's product page are worse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 7, 2014 Share #303  Posted May 7, 2014 Sheesh - some here lambast Leica for not pushing the marketing enough, others for using marketing fluff. You can’t win, can you?…. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 7, 2014 Share #304 Â Posted May 7, 2014 It certainly does, but as I said before, it is not stupid to "collect" all residual aberrations in distortion, which is relatively easy to eliminate digitally resulting in a lens that is better corrected overall. Â That sounds like a nice concept but in practice there still are other items that also have to be corrected. Assume the end result is better than that of $150-$400 typical kit zooms. How much more do you want to pay for that? Â So if image quality is so important, consider that an A7 with kit zoom costs less than the body alone and my guess would be that it will make sharper images in quite a number of situations with less noise at higher ISOs. (Electronic fist curtain shutter, OSS, 24MP, much larger sensor, PDAF, etc.) With the built in EVF, perhaps it is not much larger and heavier. I haven't checked the specs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 7, 2014 Share #305  Posted May 7, 2014 Sheesh - some here lambast Leica for not pushing the marketing enough, others for using marketing fluff. You can’t win, can you?….  It is not the quantity of marketing, but the quality.  Marketing does not require extreme exaggeration and an emotional appeal to sell unless a product's attributes are insufficient.  "Discover the whole story – and how Leica and the Leica T break entirely new ground in the world of photography."  Can it get more "over the top" than that? Yes, their run-away enthusiasm is palpable. Who knows what they told anyone? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 7, 2014 Share #306  Posted May 7, 2014 Well, isn’t that the eternal question regarding Leica gear? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted May 7, 2014 Share #307 Â Posted May 7, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Actually it is not clear whether they did make this claim. Â Correct. So far we have only hearsay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 7, 2014 Share #308  Posted May 7, 2014 As I said, I am convinced this was a misinterpretation. Maybe the rep who is quoted was a bit woolly (as Alan points out, not unlikely given the marketing), maybe combined with a DPR person understanding what he thought he would hear, maybe the Leica representative wasn’t even a native speaker. Translation was never Leica’s strongest point, etc…Until this is cleared up it is all hot air. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted May 7, 2014 Share #309 Â Posted May 7, 2014 Yep, I assume the leica rep dont know about all technical fluffs. Â Imagine to ask about internals of engine to BMW rep Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 7, 2014 Share #310  Posted May 7, 2014 As I said, I am convinced this was a misinterpretation. Maybe the rep who is quoted was a bit woolly (as Alan points out, not unlikely given the marketing), maybe combined with a DPR person understanding what he thought he would hear, maybe the Leica representative wasn’t even a native speaker. Translation was never Leica’s strongest point, etc…Until this is cleared up it is all hot air.  This all could have simply been avoided if Leica actually did understand their product and the benefits it brings to the typical photos in the intended market. They could have illustrated as I did how barrel distortion can improve your photos yet also be easily corrected when straight lines are needed.  But they are not actually selling this camera based on how it can be used to make better photos for advanced users. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted May 7, 2014 Share #311  Posted May 7, 2014 I agree with Rosuna. Leica have been found to release a lens which performs (from initial results anyway) very averagely and has to rely on digital correction to turn in an acceptable result.  The faithful are immediately converts to this new way of thinking - what does it matter if the hardware ain't up to much, software fixes are great!  I thought that Leica's raison d'etre was optical excellence. I was obviously mistaken all these years.  Yes, I think you have been mistaken. I think there's been a fetishisation of optical quality over photographic opportunity by many Leica users, which I admit Leica have been happy to exploit, but which I've always regretted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted May 7, 2014 Share #312  Posted May 7, 2014 This all could have simply been avoided if Leica actually did understand their product and the benefits it brings to the typical photos in the intended market. They could have illustrated as I did how barrel distortion can improve your photos yet also be easily corrected when straight lines are needed.  But they are not actually selling this camera based on how it can be used to make better photos for advanced users.   Our world views are different, and I suspect others share the same differences.  In my view T buyers are point-n-shoot folks with a lot of money.  Alan, I doubt any of them could appreciate the tip you have provided, or care at all. It is the way it is.  Peace, Pico     Sent from my Etcha-sketch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted May 7, 2014 Share #313  Posted May 7, 2014 I have hunted high and low on the internet and can find nothing anywhere in any official Leica documentation that states that the T lenses are 'fully optically corrected' or anything remotely similar.  Steve Huff was fully aware the zoom lens had software correction of distortions etc. and was completely unsurprised .... as all the other cameras in this format do the same ....  In fact, even the APO 50 is not 'fully optically corrected' .... and I don't think there will ever be a lens which is completely aberration free  I think someone needs to produce a verbatim assignable statement to indicate precisely what was said ......  .... there is a world of difference between 'optically highly corrected, optically high quality' and the implication that all aberrations are fixed optically with NO in camera adjustment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 7, 2014 Share #314 Â Posted May 7, 2014 Â Alan, I doubt any of them could appreciate the tip you have provided, or care at all. It is the way it is. Â Yes, even a perfect lens is not always best. This you only learn from experience. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted May 7, 2014 Share #315  Posted May 7, 2014 ... In my view T buyers are point-n-shoot folks with a lot of money.....  Pico     Sent from my Etcha-sketch.  This is surely their primary target : people who likes to have a prestige product which looks fine and distinguishing : probably (and not to be unpolite to them, who can be nice chaps as any other) most of them even ignore the term "aberration" in relation to optics... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB W Posted May 7, 2014 Share #316 Â Posted May 7, 2014 I'm a relative neophyte here. I came on the forum just as the Leica X was coming out. Â I just don't understand why people who have no interest in the camera seem to feel they need to denigrate people who do have an interest in the camera. I realize this thread is about some hearsay that has been blown up by DP Review, etc, but it hasn't taken this thread long to degenerate into finding the company guilty "as charged", as well as anyone who has an interest in trying out the T. Â What's the big deal about letting people enjoy their choices without disparaging them as though they're inept and incompetent as well as "of course" rich? Â OK, back to optics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 7, 2014 Share #317  Posted May 7, 2014 Yes, I think you have been mistaken. I think there's been a fetishisation of optical quality over photographic opportunity by many Leica users, which I admit Leica have been happy to exploit, but which I've always regretted. What is Leica's raison d'être then if it is not optical excellence anymore? What's the forte of C lenses, S system, M lenses if it is not optical excellence? How could it be possible to sell a little 50mm lens for $7K if optical excellence was not the raison d'être of the brand? Made in Japan "affordable" lenses won't change that hopefully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboch Posted May 7, 2014 Share #318  Posted May 7, 2014 I'm a relative neophyte here. I came on the forum just as the Leica X was coming out. I just don't understand why people who have no interest in the camera seem to feel they need to denigrate people who do have an interest in the camera. I realize this thread is about some hearsay that has been blown up by DP Review, etc, but it hasn't taken this thread long to degenerate into finding the company guilty "as charged", as well as anyone who has an interest in trying out the T.  What's the big deal about letting people enjoy their choices without disparaging them as though they're inept and incompetent as well as "of course" rich?  OK, back to optics.  I can only agree to you.  I think it is pretty cocky to judge anyone interested in the T as "rich" (lets not even talk about how to define rich) and an incompetent "point 'n' shooter"...  I checked out a demo model of the camera today and I am really impressed. The build and quality of the body is outstanding - it feels more solid and durable than the M 240 in hands (yes I own one). The lenses truly feel like real Leica lenses (if there is such a "feel").  I think it is really wrong to put the Leica T in the same league as the Hasselblad Lunar for example...  Sometimes I really wonder whats going on in some peoples minds by judging and "talking" so extremely arrogant about other people they do not know...  Just live and let live...  Talking about technical aspects of a camera and lenses is one thing, but insulting people is another... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted May 7, 2014 Share #319 Â Posted May 7, 2014 Well people wanted a cheaper Leica , they got it, a aluminum body (no titanium), another manufacturers sensor what seems to be a software corrected slowish zoom lens probably with quality to match.................... what's the problem? Sure it may downgrade the Leica name, Zeiss and Sony don't seem to have a problem with being a bit of common neither do Panasonic and Leica Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted May 7, 2014 Share #320  Posted May 7, 2014 I'm a relative neophyte here. I came on the forum just as the Leica X was coming out. I just don't understand why people who have no interest in the camera seem to feel they need to denigrate people who do have an interest in the camera. I realize this thread is about some hearsay that has been blown up by DP Review, etc, but it hasn't taken this thread long to degenerate into finding the company guilty "as charged", as well as anyone who has an interest in trying out the T.  What's the big deal about letting people enjoy their choices without disparaging them as though they're inept and incompetent as well as "of course" rich?  OK, back to optics.  bingo!  I think it is side effects of having M products long time so below the M segment products seem inferior. When S2 arrived, it wasnt much noise. Those bashers people dont quite get that no matter what camera, one gets a picture one wants. Even a Magnum photographer. If he uses T body, suddenly other "wanna-be" start justify that camera as acceptable for advanced user.  yep, horse beating as usual. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.