Jump to content

Thoughts on the T


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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.

 

I've posted the actual production figures, DSLR's 10 million, ILC's 3 million. Maybe one day ILC's will dominate the market but it's a long way off based on the facts. 

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.

 

But what about the S system. That is a new DSLR system, with a new format. Why didn't Leica go mirrorless for the S? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

So by your comments I assume you own a Canon M? Do you? Well, do you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical 'Leica snob' comments which I expected to be honest - how dare I mention a Canon product!!!! Even if it does have sensor cleaning and optical image stabilisation and a touch screen interface in a package that offers more than the T at a fraction of the price. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But what about the S system. That is a new DSLR system, with a new format. Why didn't Leica go mirrorless for the S? 

Well, yes. But a system within a narrowly defined niche. It is hardly representative of the DSLR market in general.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The T  did not attract the M owners and the consumers of that type of system camera are well catered for by other camera manufacturers at price they can afford to buy a whole system.

 

 The X is a dead end  waste of time too slow

 

 

 

The Q is Leica's way out  from the T non event

 

Do a sigma  and have a  quad 28mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm you will get the M buyers ....................... and there is   "I want only one great camera with a fixed lens"  mob out there are a lot of those buyers out there with money to spare.

Edited by Imants
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The T's USP was the hand polished body. Seems that having a hand polished body isn't that important to most potential customers. 

 

Why did Leica think that a hand polished body wasn't appropriate for the Q? What if a T customer wants to upgrade to the Q but still wants a hand polished body? Can it be an 'a la carte' option? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly! And an APS Leica DSLR would be a similarly narrow niche. 

 

Why didn't Leica use an EVF for the S though? Any ideas?

 

 

Because at the the time the S series were under development (at least two years prior to launch) there was no suitable (for the S series) EVF technology available.

 

dunk 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The T  did not attract the M owners and the consumers of that type of system camera are well catered for by other camera manufacturers at price they can afford to buy a whole system.

 

 The X is a dead end  waste of time too slow

 

 

 

The Q is Leica's way out  from the T non event

 

Do a sigma  and have a  quad 28mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm you will get the M buyers ....................... and there is   "I want only one great camera with a fixed lens"  mob out there are a lot of those buyers out there with money to spare.

X dead-end waste of time?  You do realize that the X line has been around for six years now, and that other than the slow start for the X Vario (dumbest marketing campaign ever) all of the X models have very loyal user bases.

 

T is excellent camera that produces excellent results.  Its not for me (don't care for the interface), but there is no arguing with the image quality and the lens range is uniformly excellent and with the new wide and tele zooms quite complete.

 

Q is off to a great start.  Double the price of the X, but full-frame and built-in EVF.  The Q is a very logical evolution of the X, but hopefully both can coexist as APS-C does have its advantages (cost, size, weight, deeper depth of field).

 

Just because the non M Leicas aren't for you, doesn't reduce their capabilities in any way.  I own the M-E, M Monochrom and some very nice Leica and vintage Zeiss lenses, but when I go out for a non-photography trip its usually the X that comes with me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

X dead-end waste of time?  You do realize that the X line has been around for six years now, and that other than the slow start for the X Vario (dumbest marketing campaign ever) all of the X models have very loyal user bases.

 

T is excellent camera that produces excellent results.  Its not for me (don't care for the interface), but there is no arguing with the image quality and the lens range is uniformly excellent and with the new wide and tele zooms quite complete.

 

Q is off to a great start.  Double the price of the X, but full-frame and built-in EVF.  The Q is a very logical evolution of the X, but hopefully both can coexist as APS-C does have its advantages (cost, size, weight, deeper depth of field).

 

Just because the non M Leicas aren't for you, doesn't reduce their capabilities in any way.  I own the M-E, M Monochrom and some very nice Leica and vintage Zeiss lenses, but when I go out for a non-photography trip its usually the X that comes with me.

 

+1.  I have never owned an X but I can vouch for the T which is a very well balanced system with excellent handling and image quality.

 

It is a true Leica just like the S2 and the M9 which I also own.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that the X line has been around for six years now and it is still as slow as ever,  ideal for static objects and people being still

 

T is  camera that produces excellent results be it great at handling a slow focusing situations............................................ a shiny dud

 

 

I go out for a non-photography trip its usually the X that comes with me. 

 

Thanks for confirming my argument  the X is ideal for non photography

Edited by Imants
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the upside, they know me by name now at the Leica store, and as of today, they just hand me the Q as soon as I come in the door so I can cuddle it.  Still nobody wants to come into the store to look at anything else other than the Q.  And the list is almost 60 people deep now.  60 x $4250 USD = $255K USD.  Not bad for just over a week of sales, for one store.

 

 Just goes to show how the X, T and Vario were a waste of time  Leica should have been on this path 10 years ago

Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that the X line has been around for six years now and it is still as slow as ever,  ideal for static objects and people being still

 

T is  camera that produces excellent results be it great at handling a slow focusing situations............................................ a shiny dud

 

I don't see any reason why faster autofocus and a built-in EVF could not be applied to the next iterations of the X and T.

 

Apparently Leica has made significant progress there, so it would only be logical that other products benefit from that as well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that the X line has been around for six years now and it is still as slow as ever,  ideal for static objects and people being still

 

T is  camera that produces excellent results be it great at handling a slow focusing situations............................................ a shiny dud

 

Thanks for confirming my argument  the X is ideal for non photography

Non photo outing means I'm going out for some other purpose, like family, wine, travel, etc.  X 113 is much faster than X1, it is considerably improved over the last six years.  Your loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Just goes to show how the X, T and Vario were a waste of time  Leica should have been on this path 10 years ago

 

 

Please tell us which Leica camera(s) you use and if you have ever used or owned an X or T.

 

I own and use all the X and T models and can assure you they are definitely not a 'waste of time'.

 

Your dogmatic naysaying appears to say more about you than the cameras.

 

dunk

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see any reason why faster autofocus and a built-in EVF could not be applied to the next iterations of the X and T.

 

Apparently Leica has made significant progress there, so it would only be logical that other products benefit from that as well.

Every iteration of X has been faster than the one before.  X1 was the only that was really slow, X2 was fine in good light, with X Vario a bit better and X 113 quite quick most of the time.

 

Where the X line always excelled, however, was manual focus, which on the Vario and 113 is arguably better than any other live view camera with the exception of the Q, which of course is newer and double the price.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell us which Leica camera(s) you use and if you have ever used or owned an X or T.

 

I own and use all the X and T models and can assure you they are definitely not a 'waste of time'.

 

Your dogmatic naysaying appears to say more about you than the cameras.

 

dunk

He's a troll.

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...