XY/CL design vs TL design

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Aren't the strap lugs a bit too thin? Especially towards the lateral.

No.  They look identical to the lugs on my M10.

[scott kirkpatrick]

@rchrd -- That's a handsome Retina.  I didn't know they came with a thumb advance lever.

[Guest]

So there's room for hope of seeing the top redesigned in order to please eyes and hands and to facilitate function?

[hborowski]

I think the T is a somewhat awkward and not quite successful attempt at modernism, the XY simply a variation on the old Barnack shape, and rather well executed. A typical X series camera. The only thing that seems slightly misplaced is the shape of the viewfinder, which could be more elegant, although, the Leica Standard had dials on the top and a protruding viewfinder as well.

 

Rather smart by Leica to design two -probably- technically fairly similar cameras to appeal to different customer types.

 

We still have to wait to know what the top display does show. To me, it seems to be rather practical to have some information as the camera is hanging from its strap without having to lift it to look at the back.

 

To refer to Porsche is rather akward, just compare the present-day pumped-up steroids blob to the original svelte 911...

Oskar Barnak made a 135mm camera that in digital terms is a FF camera.

The T (or XY) is an APS-C camera that in film terms could be a 110mm, therefore for me it does not exits...

As the owner of a Porsche car I really do not understand the analogy that you mentioned...

From every point of view this design is really ugly.

[BLECHdosenM3]

The XY/CL is horrible. Honestly, who is going to buy this and say "Leica is like driving a Porsche" or "Leica is like a well crafted watch." to justify the high cost?

 

leica.png

 

leica_2.jpg

 

1. They could of raised the top half of the camera to avoid evf bump. Leica Q does this.

2. Numbered dials or blank dials are better than adding a 90s electronic display. Info can be displayed on back LCD display. Now you have two displays drawing your attention.

 

T is far superior in terms of Leica's "Das Weisentliche" design philosophy. In fact, the T is more in line with German design as a whole. Dieter Rams, Adolf Loos, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, The Bauhaus, etc. If they wanted a more classic style camera because the T is not charming enough to the masses, then make a crop sensor Leica Q that accepts TL lenses.

 

1407287455618.jpg

 

Ferdinand Porsche: "A formally harmonious product needs no decoration, it should be through pure form."

Adolf Loos was Austrian.

[jaapv]

Oskar Barnak made a 135mm camera that in digital terms is a FF camera.

The T (or XY) is an APS-C camera that in film terms could be a 110mm, therefore for me it does not exits...

As the owner of a Porsche car I really do not understand the analogy that you mentioned...

From every point of view this design is really ugly.

110 is not APS-C. 110 is 13x17 mm, APS-C is 25x17.   It was quite possible, BTW, to get very good results on 110, provided one had a good camera. Like the exquisite Pentax 110 Super.The Barnacks, in their time, were looked down upon as being miniature cameras. 24x36 film was regarded as inferior to the standard 6x9 cm negatives, or larger.

[mmanda]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, I still don’t believe this is it. Is most likely an earlier prototype and Leica is having good fun releasing it and reading the comments.

I agree. These pics released around the same time as invites from Leica are going out to customers to come and celebrate the announcement around the world.

 

I think they are stirring the market up and generating interest in the new camera by releasing these photos of an older prototype

Edited November 13, 2017 by mmanda

[Leicaiste]

If the ´XY’ is supposed to work also with SL lenses, it will be to small for a good handling of the 90-280.

 

And if it has no IBIS it will be of no use with R long lenses.

[miro]

I agree. These pics released around the same time as invites from Leica are going out to customers to come and celebrate the announcement around the world.

 

I think they are stirring the market up and generating interest in the new camera by releasing these photos of an older prototype

 

 

Google Translation from the original post : 外観(※認証用のサンプル機なので塗装や文字は製品版とは異なる場合あり)

 

Appearance (* Since it is a sample machine for authentication ※ Painting and characters are different from product version) 

 

 

 

http://www.nokishita-camera.com/2017/11/blog-post.html

Edited November 13, 2017 by miro

[willeica]

Some size comparisons. Vest Pocket Kodak folded (from 1915) v iPhone 6 and the I Model A (1926 model) v the M10. Sorry that the M10 is wearing a 'suit', but it is the only photo I had to hand. Readers will get the picture, though.

 

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!

 

 

It will be interesting to see a size comparison between the CL (or XY or whatever it will be called) and the TL. To my eyes and hands (and all the rest of me as well) small is beautiful when it comes to cameras. Did I see someone talking about putting the 90-280mm bazooka on this new model? Leica should issue a lens size warning with the new camera. That last point is slightly tongue in cheek, but well meant.

 

William

Edited November 13, 2017 by willeica

[miro]

X2

 

XY/CL ?

Edited November 13, 2017 by miro

[earleygallery]

I'd be surprised if this is the new camera. It looks like a mock up based around the X1 for starters, and a complete opposite to the type of modernist styling Leica adopted for the T and SL cameras which is the 'family' for the new camera. This would look odd with the TL/SL lenses.

 

Also the lugs - I'd have thought they'd carry forward the T lug design?

[LocalHero1953]

Some size comparisons. Vest Pocket Kodak folded (from 1915) v iPhone 6 and the I Model A (1926 model) v the M10. Sorry that the M10 is wearing a 'suit', but it is the only photo I had to hand. Readers will get the picture, though.

 

4 VPK Camera Folded and iPhone 6-.jpg

 

8 Leica I Model A 4 digits SN 1926 and M10-1020942.jpg

 

It will be interesting to see a size comparison between the CL (or XY or whatever it will be called) and the TL. To my eyes and hands (and all the rest of me as well) small is beautiful when it comes to cameras. Did I see someone talking about putting the 90-280mm bazooka on this new model? Leica should issue a lens size warning with the new camera. That last point is slightly tongue in cheek, but well meant.

 

William

Thank you - an enlightening comparison with the iphone 6. The Leica Ia would look equally diminutive.

I've used the 90-280 on the TL2, and it works well (i.e. you can take great photos with it), though it wouldn't be my weapon of choice for the obvious reasons of balance - and if I'm using that lens, I might as well use the SL body: it doesn't add much weight proportionately. The specific issue of balance arises because I find I need a certain heft of body in my right hand in order to operate the camera controls. The TL2 is just too light in comparison to keep everything steady.

 

Incidentally, your shot confirms my opinion that only its mother could think the Leica I-a beautiful. Flat on its back it looks like a miniature gas cooker with a saucepan. But then I don't go with the received opinion on the Porsche 911 either: looks like a slug (equally streamlined), and I expect to see it leave a glistening trail. (How boring life would be without opinions  )

[rchrd]

Rosuna, you are right. Touch screen is a valuable technology and natural addition for digital cameras. People dismissing the T as an iPhone wannabe are overlooking how carefully crafted the T was. The T is not a perfect camera for everybody. It is however a good design for what it is and people will either love it or simply have no use for it. For example, some people love instant photography and the T would not be good for that purpose. (Tarkovsky's instants are amazing). I think its bad design that many instant cameras are now integrating digital camera technology. I would really like to have an M10 one day too. That is a really good design for the camera that it is.

 

Pure function is ugly. Pure form is useless. The harmony and balance between both is deceptively hard to achieve and the result is pure craftsmanship. It is not snobbery anymore than a carpenter is a snob for making a piece of wood both beautiful and functional. If you like the XY/CL's appearance, that is cool. But do you really believe it couldn't have easily been better designed? Do you really prefer that evf bump? For everybody who pretends to not care about beauty, but only function in their buying decisions, why not buy a Sony and put an M lens on one? 

Edited November 13, 2017 by rchrd

[rchrd]

LocalHero1953, can you give us an example of what you would consider a more beautiful mechanical camera during the Leica I-A time period?  And can you explain why you think so? (Not an interrogation, honestly just want to see what your taste is.)

Edited November 13, 2017 by rchrd

[Leicaiste]

Did I see someone talking about putting the 90-280mm bazooka on this new model?

Yes I did.

 

I was hoping for an APSC SL.

 

[emoji6]

[LocalHero1953]

LocalHero1953, can you give us an example of what you would consider a more beautiful mechanical camera during the Leica I-A time period?

No. But don't get me wrong - I don't look for beauty in a camera, I look for practicality and functionality - these are the good design elements I look for. Let's not get mixed up between good design and beauty. 

 

Your suggestion that "For everybody who pretends to not care about beauty, but only function in their buying decisions, why not buy a Sony and put an M lens on one?" takes no account of practicality, usability, interface etc. These are nothing to do with beauty and everything to do with good design. I'm sure it's possible to have a well-designed consumer product that is also beautiful, but I don't think it's necessary.

Edited November 13, 2017 by LocalHero1953

[Guest]

.....

Pure function is ugly. Pure form is useless. .....

 

 

I'm a bit surprised about your statement.

in your first post you refer to the classic of the design (mies van der rohe, bauhaus, rams...) which I really adore too

 

but....I guess you know,the best of these modern classics were created after the rule....  form follows function

 

lambda.

Edited November 13, 2017 by Guest

[earleygallery]

Let's be honest that is ugly! Looks like a cheap toy camera. Also that 4 way control will surely keep getting pressed unintentionally when holding the camera in normal fashion.

 

I really hope the leaked photos are fake.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[LocalHero1953]

LocalHero1953, can you give us an example of what you would consider a more beautiful mechanical camera during the Leica I-A time period?  And can you explain why you think so? (Not an interrogation, honestly just want to see what your taste is.)

My earlier response was before you edited your post to add the second question.

 

If I could adequately define beauty, the world would beat a path to my door. But I observe, and I believe others have observed the same, that people find things beautiful that have elements of symmetry, simplicity, regularity and clarity - and these can be seen in abstracts as well as concrete objects.

 

Having stuck my neck out further than I intended, I shall beat a hasty retreat and let others argue beauty to death. I would much rather express an opinion and let others take it or leave it - I have no wish to persuade everyone that I am right and they are wrong.