Jump to content

Does the Q Portend the Death of the M?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 207
  • Created
  • Last Reply

No, he just makes basic mistake upon basic mistake

 

Unfair.

Lloyd is just a man and - as any one of us - what he says needs to be filtered and taken with a grain of salt.

But he does not make "basic mistakes".

I hope someone at Leica has subscribed to his (and other reviewers') site, and carefully considering his findings. Someone more open-minded than the average forum user here; willing to accept critical feedback with the purpose of improving the product. Because all that matters is how good the next Leica camera is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes he does - for instance he made a lot of noise on the first Monochrom because he "discovered" focus shift using red filters and called for "further investigation".

Informed criticism is good, it only makes a, or the next, product better, but simpleminded calling of POS for pilot error is not on for a serious reviewer, in my book.

Falsum in uno falsum in omnibus, if you set yourself up on the pedestal of an authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember the red filter issue, and thought it was very unfair criticism to Leica since this was normal behavior and has been like that since b/w film was invented.

It is also curious that a reviewer would use such emotional and insulting terms to describe Leica products. Not on just one occasion but systematically with every new camera body. It seems to me this is not someone rational whose product reviews I can trust. I didn't renew my subscription this time because of such irrational reactions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I remember the red filter issue, and thought it was very unfair criticism to Leica since this was normal behavior and has been like that since b/w film was invented.

 

Still waiting for the link...  :rolleyes:

 

But let me help you:

http://diglloyd.com/prem/prot/LEICA/LeicaM9/LeicaMM-filters-sharpness.html

 

I don't see anything rude or unfair, here.

All he is saying is that the lack of Live View and the substandard quality of the MM display make it hard to shoot sharp pictures with MM + some filters.

 

Not "falsum", no "pilot error", and optical cause of the issue explained.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting for the link... :rolleyes:

 

But let me help you:

http://diglloyd.com/prem/prot/LEICA/LeicaM9/LeicaMM-filters-sharpness.html

 

I don't see anything rude or unfair, here.

All he is saying is that the lack of Live View and the substandard quality of the MM display make it hard to shoot sharp pictures with MM + some filters.

 

Not "falsum", no "pilot error", and optical cause of the issue explained.

To be honest I'm not going to bother looking up links, but yes, he's more well behaved for paid articles but I've read some very derogatory remarks about the same subject in his news section.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting for the link...  :rolleyes:

 

But let me help you:

http://diglloyd.com/prem/prot/LEICA/LeicaM9/LeicaMM-filters-sharpness.html

 

I don't see anything rude or unfair, here.

All he is saying is that the lack of Live View and the substandard quality of the MM display make it hard to shoot sharp pictures with MM + some filters.

 

Not "falsum", no "pilot error", and optical cause of the issue explained.

 

So, does the Q portend* the death of the M?

 

(*Portend? Really?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have really no interest in looking up links from a blogger who is rather low in my personal esteem.You are linking to an amended piece. That was not his original discovery  as he presented it on his site. If you love the guy - fair enough. I have drawn a different conclusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He just seem like an angry old man when it comes to RF. He is fine with Q I guess and doesn't object to a larger lens. :)

From his article (link posted by someone in the last page) about Q killing M.
"....These lenses can be new designs optimized for mirrorless and be made larger so as not to require such esoteric optical designs (no more concern in blocking the rangefinder)...."

 

BTW, I live in the same general area and have photographed same/similar scenery. In the above page he has a shot of Mt. Conness from Mt. Dana in hailstorm using Q. Here is my picture from approximate same place (actually little higher on the mountain) looking at the same general direction towards Mt. Conness from Mt. Dana using M9+28cron ASPH.

 

What matters to me is my picture is better than his and has better light. :)

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did you waste so much time? The fact that it has an electronic viewfinder and a fixed lens can be ascertained from the first ad in the internet that comes to hand.

Because I like to see things by myself and hold them in my hands before I pass judgement on them.

 

Perhaps I may seem strange to you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I like to see things by myself and hold them in my hands before I pass judgement on them.

I see that the sarcasm of ‘Why did you waste so much time?’ was wasted on you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Funny how so many flaming arrows were shot to my post, and now all the talk is about Leica's "new camera system," one with AF lenses, etc. Personally, I like the M system, really like it in fact, but the system may have plateaued. What more can Leica do other than incremental changes, a Noctilux 35mm? The new game for camera manufacturers appears to include AF lenses and EVFs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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