Paulus Posted October 30, 2015 Share #121 Posted October 30, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Are you? If if you want to see how the SL takes pictures, in detail, with the new zoom, head over to Reid Reviews. Detailed, competent testing. There's also detailed comparison of the new cameras to the M(240), an accepted high quality 24MP camera, using the same lenses in controlled conditions. Shortly, Jono Slack will be providing similar test results for an SL v A7II comparison, also controlled. Try the camera for yourself. Chasing about leaping to unfounded conclusions based on little is just making noise. This is is a new system, designed by people who've been making some of the finest cameras and optics for over 100 years. They do know what they're doing. Yes, sometimes they misjudge the market; and yes there can be quality control or other unanticipated problems. Those problems are not, generally, identified by DPreview or DXO - they're found here, by users, and by a relatively small group of competent testers. With all this in mind. SL or new M. I think we'll have a really interesting Photokina! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 30, 2015 Posted October 30, 2015 Hi Paulus, Take a look here I'm waiting for the new M and I'm worried.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted November 1, 2015 Share #122 Posted November 1, 2015 Update - after seeing the new SL images on dpreview, I'm REALLY worried about the new M Why? It is a totally different concept. It is up to the customer to choose according to his needs and wants. There is no reason why two complementary camera systems cannot coexist. The M has the advantage of being a mature system with a complete range of lenses and accessories. It will take the SL quite a few years to approach a full system status. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AAK Posted November 3, 2015 Share #123 Posted November 3, 2015 I read posts here regularly that someone wants a "new" body because they "don't know the history" or "want the MP finder" or whatever... when I can buy an M4-P, have the new finder installed and have the camera completely serviced by DAG or Sherrie or YY and STILL have less than half the cost of a new M-A invested. Or if I already own an M4 or M4-P, I can have that done for less than a quarter of the cost. No, advertising creates a demand for "new" for the sake of "new." That's why manufacturers pour princely sums into it... and people keep falling for it. Buying for need or necessity is one thing... buying for the sake of "new" is quite another. "New" means free of cosmetic defects, at factory specifications, and a 3-5 year warranty against malfunctions. The Passport program on new Leica film cameras also covers even accidental damage by the owner. New ownership also comes with some sense of pleasure, and (especially with Leica film cameras), that this will last me the rest of my life. Advertising certainly creates demand for new products, but there are real differences between buying a 30-year old camera and a new one, which are reflected in their relative costs. You may pay 1/5 of the price for an M4-P vs. an M-A, and one could argue how to value the premium to apply to newness, but it seems to me that the relative prices fairly reflect what you get. In addition, for many Leica buyers, cost is not the primary driver in the purchase decision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted November 3, 2015 Share #124 Posted November 3, 2015 "New" means free of cosmetic defects, at factory specifications, and a 3-5 year warranty against malfunctions. The Passport program on new Leica film cameras also covers even accidental damage by the owner. New ownership also comes with some sense of pleasure, and (especially with Leica film cameras), that this will last me the rest of my life. Advertising certainly creates demand for new products, but there are real differences between buying a 30-year old camera and a new one, which are reflected in their relative costs. You may pay 1/5 of the price for an M4-P vs. an M-A, and one could argue how to value the premium to apply to newness, but it seems to me that the relative prices fairly reflect what you get. In addition, for many Leica buyers, cost is not the primary driver in the purchase decision. You can buy my 15 year old MP and I assure you: it is the same as the new one. Not 30 years, but " almost' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.