The Leica M-D thread - merged.

[ECohen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think many pay more to have access to the M lens. So I am not sure if we are paying more to get less. For me the lens are worth it. But I agree the camera body is overpriced, the MD as well. Not sure about the price being a reflection of production costs though. The MD seems to utilizing all the spare parts of previous runs, which means there should be no additional material cost. I think the price is more likely to be a marketing scheme where a short overpriced run gives an aura of exclusivity. Typical approach for high end luxury sellers.  

 

Still I like the concept. Too bad that no EVF - it is useful for some shots, even if it is a bit crummy.

 

 

I paid more for less...and I'm so happy I did.

I went from Japanese Nikon's that had layers and layers of menus. That I hated everytime I picked up the camera.... wondering how it was set...what was hidden from my view....I got so tired of the bad experience I finally went to Leica.

I over paid for the pleasure of shooting with a well made well, designed, minimalism camera . That for the most part has only the features I use,all in plain sight. 

Less is always more and usually costs more  ........the choice it ours as to if its worth it....I for one think Leica knows exactly how to price it's cameras.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Adam]

I totally agree, on top of the lens, there the quality and simplicity factor that makes the camera a real pleasure to use. Not to mention the superb OVF.

 

But lets be honest, if the lens were worse than Nikon's, a body with a simple menu would not be worth the amount of money being charged.

[ECohen]

+1

[IkarusJohn]

I can't imagine a high price for a rubbish camera being a success, whoever made it. Leica would have gone out of business years ago if quality were not pretty much assured.

[ECohen]

I can't imagine a high price for a rubbish camera being a success, whoever made it. Leica would have gone out of business years ago if quality were not pretty much assured.

 

 

I not sure why you say this? Where did rubbish camera come from? Did someone say Leicas were rubbish...on this forum?

There are a lot of great cameras on the market to me Leica is worth paying 3x's the price of a Nikon for the simplicity alone

Edited April 27, 2016 by ECohen

[bocaburger]

Do you have a camera bag that only fits a slimmer body, do you find ergonomics more important than the screen, or is there some other reason for such a view?

I carry 2 bodies, so yes, a pair of slimmer bodies would free up quite a bit of bag space or allow me to carry the same gear in a smaller one.  Ergonomics is also a factor.  I find the film bodies much less tiring on my hands, and it has nothing to do with not having the film wind lever, as I never used it as a thumb grip.  

 

It's really not a big deal anymore, as I have not used film bodies since the M8 came out, and have long since adapted to the fatter dimensions.  I did not say I would buy it if it was as slim as a film body, merely that I would NOT buy it for any other reason.

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I can't imagine a high price for a rubbish camera being a success, whoever made it. Leica would have gone out of business years ago if quality were not pretty much assured.

Lomo?

[hexx]

Also RedDotCameras list it - http://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/m-bodies/9940-leica-m-d-typ-262-black-body.html the price is ridiculous to be frank. If I want to have 'analogue' feel I'll take out my M6. Digital camera w/o LCD is a non-sense to me - if you don't like it, switch it off or, in Leica fashion, put a tape over it

[IkarusJohn]

I not sure why you say this? Where did rubbish camera come from? Did someone say Leicas were rubbish...on this forum?

There are a lot of great cameras on the market to me Leica is worth paying 3x's the price of a Nikon for the simplicity alone

 

Post #222 from Adam - "But lets be honest, if the lens were worse than Nikon's, a body with a simple menu would not be worth the amount of money being charged."

 

If we're not starting from the perspective that as a package, there is a benefit in buying a Leica camera, then the discussion is pointless.  If the lens were worse than Nikon's, or if the camera is rubbish, there would be no point in buying it.

 

Sorry, I should have quoted Adam's post - in a hurry.

Edited April 27, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[IkarusJohn]

Also RedDotCameras list it - http://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/m-bodies/9940-leica-m-d-typ-262-black-body.html the price is ridiculous to be frank. If I want to have 'analogue' feel I'll take out my M6. Digital camera w/o LCD is a non-sense to me - if you don't like it, switch it off or, in Leica fashion, put a tape over it

 

So, is the price the problem, or the whole concept? or both?

 

I normally wouldn't bother responding to a post like this as Hexx has made his feelings clear; and fair enough.  But, what I don't get is the idea that it's a better idea to buy a camera you don't particularly like, with functionality that either doesn't match the rest of the camera (video and EVF) or you don't want, and then put gaffer tape over the LCD.  Seriously?  This camera costs $7,000.00 and you recommend taping up what you don't like; yet, buying what you do want (i.e., the camera minus what you don't like) for $6,800.00 is ridiculous.

 

While it might not work for you, the fact that you don't understand or agree with people making different choices doesn't really work for me either.

 

If it's price that's the driving issue, then the Sony A72R is surely a better choice, isn't it?  More functionality, more MP, more of everything.  I'm not being facetious, I just don't get the criticism when pretty much everyone here has spent twice what a higher spec Sony would cost on a lower spec Leica.

 

If you get the reasons for buying a Leica M(240) over a half the price Sony A72R, surely you can understand why someone might spend $200.00 less than the cost of an M(240) on an M-D.  And don't say lenses, the Zeiss lenses for the Sony, and with adapters (Otus and Milvus) look pretty good to me.

 

But, then I like Leica, and I really like my M60, so I guess I am a ridiculous poseur by definition.  Sadly, no one recognises my M60 - it's just a quaint old fashioned camera.  I tell people there's no problem getting film.

Edited April 27, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[ECohen]

Post #222 from Adam - "But lets be honest, if the lens were worse than Nikon's, a body with a simple menu would not be worth the amount of money being charged."

 

If we're not starting from the perspective that as a package, there is a benefit in buying a Leica camera, then the discussion is pointless.  If the lens were worse than Nikon's, or if the camera is rubbish, there would be no point in buying it.

 

Sorry, I should have quoted Adam's post - in a hurry.

 

 

 

Honestly for me simplicity was the main reason for going to Leica ....Nikon lenses are not rubbish...some may be.... but many are perfectly wonderful ...but thats another topic.

I over paid for simplicity of design and the joy of using this product/Leica. and yes the lenses are amazing.

 

Comparing apples to apples the IQ of the M was not 3X better than Nikon .... IMHO

 

To be clear I don't regret "over paying" I regret not switching to Leica sooner

[hexx]

...

While it might not work for you, the fact that you don't understand or agree with people making different choices doesn't really work for me either.

...

I see I touched one's nerve but I guess through that surge of adrenalin one misunderstood what I've written - if you read my comment, i was talking about myself and myself only. Also that could really work the other way that little bit I quoted from your comment. And where the hell did the Sony platform come from????

 

Yes, I do find the price of it ridiculous, considering I bought my M240 new for £4199 when there was £500 off promo Now chill and let's be civil, shall we?

Edited April 27, 2016 by hexx

[sblitz]

Agreed. I am talking about pricing within the Leica range of offers. If you offer less the price should be less. They might find they sell more. I have not problem paying more for a Leica vs other brands. But there is a point we all reach where we recognize that price and value have split. Different points for everyone and I fully understand and respect that. For me, sell me the latest with less and charge less and I am interested. Not the other way around. Still the MD is a fine looking camera.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[honcho]

Can't take this camera seriously.  They left the meter in it.

[hexx]

Can't take this camera seriously.  They left the meter in it.

 

LOL!!!

[Sean ASA]

I like it as I rarely use rear lcd on my mirrorless camera and don't chimp often on my M8 but would prefer it to have live view via the external evf, so you can choose it for when you need it, long, wide lenses etc. I even need video on occasion. If the new M does have some sort of hybrid vf, or an excellent external. I wouldn't mind this style of design.

[IkarusJohn]

I see I touched one's nerve but I guess through that surge of adrenalin one misunderstood what I've written - if you read my comment, i was talking about myself and myself only. Also that could really work the other way that little bit I quoted from your comment. And where the hell did the Sony platform come from????

 

Yes, I do find the price of it ridiculous, considering I bought my M240 new for £4199 when there was £500 off promo Now chill and let's be civil, shall we?

 

 

I apologise if my response appeared uncivil.  Describing the price as ridiculous, the camera as nonsense and proposing tape seemed to require a response - I thought my words were chosen with some care, and certainly I was responding to what you said, rather than you personally.

 

Sony is the logical comparison for a full frame mirrorless camera.  Is there another?

Edited April 27, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[lykafile]

with more reasonable pricing, won't the M-D cut into the sales of the M60?.....lol

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

I see I touched one's nerve but I guess through that surge of adrenalin one misunderstood what I've written - if you read my comment, i was talking about myself and myself only. Also that could really work the other way that little bit I quoted from your comment. And where the hell did the Sony platform come from????

 

Yes, I do find the price of it ridiculous, considering I bought my M240 new for £4199 when there was £500 off promo Now chill and let's be civil, shall we?

I always find these price discussions mildly amusing. what is ridiculously expensive to some is dirt cheap to somebody else. Some of us have to save for a year to buy a used M8, others buy everything Leica brings to the market without blinking. 

What price a hobby? I have four marinas around me, filled with boats and yachts worth from tens of thousands up to tens of millions of Euros. A suit of sails for a mid-level boat such as the median of us could afford would come to the multiple of the price of a Leica M, and sails do have a limited life span. Not to mention harbor fees, maintenance, etc. That it just maritime. Now let's start talking golf, cycling, vintage cars, guitars, watches, or any other hobby.

Everybody will be spending leisure money according to his/her condition. There is always somebody else able/willing to spend more. If you can't/won't spend the money, don't.  Complaining won't get you anywhere.

[ECohen]

It's still just a camera