Jump to content

Thoughts on the T


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was pretty critical of the T when it was launched, and although I'm sure it's a capable enough camera within its limitations I do still think it was the wrong product for Leica to introduce.

 

What should they have developed instead? An APS-C DSLR. They could still do this.

 

Here's my reasoning if you're interested;

 

https://jamesearleyphotoblog.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/leicas-wrong-turn/

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say that the T Type 701 is a technology demonstration and to a certain degree a first generation product. I think that what Audi probably taught them was new manufacturing techniques that they could apply in future products. Some of these cannot be applied to existing designs but must be part of the design from the onset. They certainly didn't do the firmware. It is obviously a highly evolved descendent of the M series firmware. 

 

i totally disagree with you that Leica should have made a SLR. I think that the writing is on the wall that SLR is a engineering concept past it's useful life. As the innovation curve ticks forward, SLR wIll be replaced by mirrorless in the same way that SLR replaced TLR and to a large extent rangefinder. The two limiting factors have been fast enough read out of live view sensors and high enough resolution EVFs with high enough refresh that optical viewfinders are no longer obviously advantageous. There is no technological trend that favors SLR over mirrorless in even the medium term.

 

I think that this guy may have some really good insights and taking his views into account it makes absolute sense that Leica focused on the UI http://photorumors.com/2015/02/24/how-to-tackle-the-collapsing-camera-market-video/ could they have done better? Maybe. Are there some gaps? Yes. But I'd say that almost all of them can be fixed in firmware upgrades. The thing that is obvious is that they did an impressive job of making a UI that has capability without complexity. Comparing my E-M1 with its labyrinthine acrostic poem like menu system to the T's UI is night and day different. Sheer brilliance. If you take the arguments made in the collapsing camera market video seriously, and the iphone reset people's expectations for UI design then Leica made the right move.

 

I would say that there are different cameras for different kinds of users and maybe the X or Q body style will better suit some high end enthusiasts while the fully touch 701 style will be favored by a less technical crowd or maybe more artistic crowd. Sony has done well with targeting different types of users with the variations found in their APS-C line of cameras. Diversification within the camera body line can allow Leica to expand into new markets while also serving a current market.

 

My suggestion to Leica:

1) more lenses

2) more firmware updates

3) some new various on the body

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was pretty critical of the T when it was launched, and although I'm sure it's a capable enough camera within its limitations I do still think it was the wrong product for Leica to introduce.

 

What should they have developed instead? An APS-C DSLR. They could still do this.

 

Here's my reasoning if you're interested;

 

https://jamesearleyphotoblog.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/leicas-wrong-turn/

 

 

You cannot be serious!

 

dunk

Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot be serious!

 

dunk

 

Leica produced a mediocre camera in a competitive and crowded yet relatively small market segment. When I say the they should have produced a class leading product for a much larger market segment then yes, I am serious. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why chase where cameras are right now? DSLRs are on the way out. Look at what Sony's been doing.

 

I'm excited about the T because of the ways it's forward-thinking: Mirrorless. ILC w/ autofocus. Single-block svelte aluminum body. Touchscreen-centric, with adjustment dials where they make sense. Very clean UI. No viewfinder. Just a really cut-down-to-the-core vision.

 

I think the mistake is that it's forward-thinking but not class-leading. Its autofocus and general operation should be much faster. It should have in-body stabilization. It should have some fast primes. Its app connectivity should provide full-resolution photos. Maybe have a body variation that includes viewfinder for people who prefer that.

 

The T feels like the place for Leica to provide the vision of what cameras could be for people who want to look forward. They can have other lines that compete with the DSLRs of the world and whatnot (it could even use a T-mount lens with a much more traditional body), but I still feel the T is what I want in a camera—if it just did it a little bit better.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was pretty critical of the T when it was launched, and although I'm sure it's a capable enough camera within its limitations I do still think it was the wrong product for Leica to introduce.

 

What should they have developed instead? An APS-C DSLR. They could still do this.

 

Here's my reasoning if you're interested;

 

https://jamesearleyphotoblog.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/leicas-wrong-turn/

 

Gotta agree.

 

I tried really hard to like this camera.  My feeling started to change when I saw that the M Adapter T didn't recognize the R-Adapter M, and that in fact the camera mount wasn't sturdy enough for heavier R lenses.

 

My opinion continued southward when I saw that that DNG files from the T were neither as good OOC nor as malleable as are files from the X-Vario, which uses the same sensor.

 

The final nail in the coffin for me was seeing that the manual focus assist gave too much latitude for critically accurate focus at longer focal lengths.

 

The T appears to be a snob-appeal item intended to make a "real Leica" product accessible to less affluent snobs.  Its aesthetics are great, but its mediocre performance makes it unworthy of the Leica name.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no technological trend that favors SLR over mirrorless in even the medium term.

Betamax was better than VHS. What on earth makes you think that logic and technology go hand in hand ;) ? The ragngefinder concept was apparently technologically irrelevant when SLRs 'took over', but rangefinders haven't gone away (and although much is made here of the ageing user base, there are more than just older users buying them because some post here too). The technology may be better but that's not what always drives markets, especially high end ones (and the dSLR may potentially become just that eventually.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta agree.

 

I tried really hard to like this camera.  My feeling started to change when I saw that the M Adapter T didn't recognize the R-Adapter M, and that in fact the camera mount wasn't sturdy enough for heavier R lenses.

 

My opinion continued southward when I saw that that DNG files from the T were neither as good OOC nor as malleable as are files from the X-Vario, which uses the same sensor.

 

The final nail in the coffin for me was seeing that the manual focus assist gave too much latitude for critically accurate focus at longer focal lengths.

 

The T appears to be a snob-appeal item intended to make a "real Leica" product accessible to less affluent snobs.  Its aesthetics are great, but its mediocre performance makes it unworthy of the Leica name.

 

I might be a snob or better yet a contrarian (whats wrong being a snob after all? :)), but the DNG files look pretty good to me, at least developing them with Capture One Pro, again a software that doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the mainstream gigantic Adobe ones, but with a better output IMHO. 
As for R lenses, I'm using a pretty solid novoflex R-T adapter and of course I wouldn't let the heavier among the R lenses hanging from whatever camera without supporting them.
 
By the way I bought the T instead of the highly praised M (there's always the used market if you can't afford a new one and you really really want one for whatever reason) because I'm not interested in the rangefinder technology and I'm not interested in the Reflex technology either- I'm all for technology advancements and to me the future is mirrorless and EVF, even if right now there's still a lot of room for improvements in this regard. I started taking pictures many years ago with a film Nikon reflex, so I know the "old way" of taking pictures, but when I decided to start again taking pictures more seriously, I never feel attracted by the big DSRL, I always bought compacts or mirrorless, I want autofocus when autofocus makes sense and manual focus when manual focus makes sense, all in the same camera.
 
Yes I do agree the camera could be better, with a faster processor and faster and less error prone autofocus for instance, but considering it is the first of a new system mount, l do hope they improve seriously the next body, they do have the tech now, judging from the just released Leica Q.
 

Betamax was better than VHS. What on earth makes you think that logic and technology go hand in hand ;) ? The ragngefinder concept was apparently technologically irrelevant when SLRs 'took over', but rangefinders haven't gone away (and although much is made here of the ageing user base, there are more than just older users buying them because some post here too). The technology may be better but that's not what always drives markets, especially high end ones (and the dSLR may potentially become just that eventually.

 

I would have bought Betamax, luckily I didn't  :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why chase where cameras are right now? DSLRs are on the way out. Look at what Sony's been doing.

 

 

I keep hearing/reading this but sorry, the facts say otherwise. 10M DSLRs annually V 3M mirrorless. Sales of both types of camera are falling year on year, by roughly the same proportion. If the T was a DSLR Leica would have an additional 7M potential customers.

 

If the T had been a class leading product maybe they could have bucked the trend, but it's not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

James , You invariably criticise nearly EVERY new camera announced by Leica - your negativity is expected - and thus taken with a pinch of salt.  

 

BTW, I have a T and it suits my current projects very well - including auto-focusing in total darkness. Leica do some things very well indeed.

 

dunk

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

James , You invariably criticise nearly EVERY new camera announced by Leica - your negativity is expected - and thus taken with a pinch of salt.  

 

BTW, I have a T and it suits my current projects very well - including auto-focusing in total darkness. Leica do some things very well indeed.

 

dunk

 

Not correct Dunk, I have been critical of the X and T models only as they have all fallen short of what I would expect from Leica.

 

The Q is an interesting development and - in my opinion - almost a great camera from what I've seen/read (I've yet to see one personally). Granted I don't like the digital zoom gimmick but that's just a feature like the 'miniture' image etc that one can select in the menu's.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Alxndr

No, why would I?

 

I did however buy a Canon M last year which is very similar, and arguably better (has OIS and sensor cleaning) and was a fraction of the price. The Canon 22mm f2 prime is a superb little lens.

 

So you're judging the T a "mediocre camera" although you don't have experience with it. Let's conclude you don't have a clue what you are talking about. Which explains why you think a Canon EOS M is "very similar" to a T.

 

No further questions your honor...

 

As I said in another thread, based on my experience with the T (and which seems to be confirmed by some other people in the current thread on the basis of their experience with the T): it's a joy to use and it delivers excellent pictures.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep hearing/reading this but sorry, the facts say otherwise. 10M DSLRs annually V 3M mirrorless. Sales of both types of camera are falling year on year, by roughly the same proportion. If the T was a DSLR Leica would have an additional 7M potential customers.

 

I've seen sales figures, sure (though if you look at US-only, DSLR sales are slowing down faster than mirrorless, as Sony has been excited to point out).

 

But mass-market DSLRs were clearly superior to mass-market mirrorless until quite recently. If you were looking for a great high-end camera, mirrorless was closer to mid-range—and markets can be slow to react, especially when the dominant forces (Nikon, Canon) are resistant. Which is why it's insane for companies to chase past market sales trends. Leica could spend years getting their DSLR tech working well only to see the "market" evaporate when Nikon/Canon finally switch away.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt we will ever see a new DSLR system, from any vendor. Established systems will continue to exist, for the foreseeable future anyway, but any new system will be mirrorless.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep hearing/reading this but sorry, the facts say otherwise. 10M DSLRs annually V 3M mirrorless. Sales of both types of camera are falling year on year, by roughly the same proportion. If the T was a DSLR Leica would have an additional 7M potential customers.

 

If the T had been a class leading product maybe they could have bucked the trend, but it's not.

The latest from DPReview on the subject http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0748717592/the-future-of-dslr-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-ilc He calls it convergence but ends with

 

"Does this mean the DSLR is dead? Don't be silly. But I'd argue that in time, the DSLR will become a niche product, as will the differentiated mirrorless. Instead, convergence will mean greater choice and more capable cameras for everyone. Long live the ILC."

 

I'd argue that he's not fully appreciating how disruptive the trends are and that the cost of manufacture advantage that mirrorless has over DSLR will quickly swamp the economies of scale and entrenched distribution channels that the big two DSLR companies have.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

(Since you placed this post in two different places James, I though I would do the same for my reply).

 

I was pretty critical of the T when it was launched..............

https://jamesearleyphotoblog.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/leicas-wrong-turn/

 

 

No, surely not James   ;)   :)

 

 

Joking aside, I don't think Leica have any intention or desire to enter the prosumer dslr market at all.  PanaLeicas excepted, they operate in an upmarket niche with premium priced products that are different (even if only in design in some cases) from the mainstream.  S, M, X,T, and now Q, all show how Leica's thinking is developing and I just don't see them ever doing a 'normal' me too product.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

(Since you placed this post in two different places James, I though I would do the same for my reply).

 

 

 

No, surely not James   ;)   :)

 

 

Joking aside, I don't think Leica have any intention or desire to enter the prosumer dslr market at all.  PanaLeicas excepted, they operate in an upmarket niche with premium priced products that are different (even if only in design in some cases) from the mainstream.  S, M, X,T, and now Q, all show how Leica's thinking is developing and I just don't see them ever doing a 'normal' me too product.

 

OK, how about they make a DSLR with a body carved from an elephant tusk? That would be 'niche', suitably expensive and they would have great cross selling opportunities with their 'sports optics' customers! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...