krabat Posted September 2, 2009 Share #21 Posted September 2, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...Leica's answer to cameras like the Sigma DP1/DP2 and for those who wanted a digital version of the Leica CM. Maybe, but certainly no answer for those who are waiting for a Digilux 4... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 Hi krabat, Take a look here Fact or fiction? M9 and X1 . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stuny Posted September 2, 2009 Share #22 Posted September 2, 2009 The pix went away since having them here might be a copyright violation, and not in any way having anything to do with whether they are true or not to what's coming. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemalk Posted September 2, 2009 Share #23 Posted September 2, 2009 I think if the X1 *is* real, it'll give us all the attributes of a German-made Leica compact that we can compare to a DP1, DP2 or even GF1. I think if anything, it'll help the underrated PanaLeicas show their true value if the X1 isn't a stunning performer. I just wish there was a lower-cost DRF that would bring people in. The D-Lux has done an admirable job of bringing people to the Leica fold, but most arent venturing in to the RF world. Either way, I'm excited. Broke. And hard-pressed to find cash for these new offerings, but excited nonetheless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted September 2, 2009 Share #24 Posted September 2, 2009 I think if the X1 *is* real, it'll give us all the attributes of a German-made Leica compact that we can compare to a DP1, DP2 or even GF1. I think if anything, it'll help the underrated PanaLeicas show their true value if the X1 isn't a stunning performer. I just wish there was a lower-cost DRF that would bring people in. The D-Lux has done an admirable job of bringing people to the Leica fold, but most arent venturing in to the RF world. Either way, I'm excited. Broke. And hard-pressed to find cash for these new offerings, but excited nonetheless. I agree. It may be interesting... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted September 2, 2009 Share #25 Posted September 2, 2009 It does not use interchangeable lenses. Manual focus ring on the lens and aperture dial on the top plate. Almost certainly no EVF. Leica's answer to cameras like the Sigma DP1/DP2 and for those who wanted a digital version of the Leica CM. Yes, the Leica CM can be a good reference for this camera! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 2, 2009 Share #26 Posted September 2, 2009 The pix went away since having them here might be a copyright violation, and not in any way having anything to do with whether they are true or not to what's coming. Can a manipulated picture with the unlawful use of brand and logo , depicting a non-exisitng product, be covered by a copyright? Otherwise can the use of marketing material of a new product, lawfully distributed yet still covered by a NDA, constitute a breach of law when perpetrated by a non-signatory of the NDA? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceflynn Posted September 2, 2009 Share #27 Posted September 2, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The major technical advance I saw in the photo of the X1 was invisible lens coatings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
m6goesch Posted September 2, 2009 Share #28 Posted September 2, 2009 X1 is real! Look at the tags in the leica video (click on more information on the right side) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Mitchum Posted September 3, 2009 Share #29 Posted September 3, 2009 X1 is real! Look at the tags in the leica video (click on more information on the right side) Good catch! Tags: Leica, leica-camera, press conference, NY, new york, rudi spiller, photography, photo journalism, s2, leica s2, x1, leica x1 Yet no tag for the M9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted September 3, 2009 Share #30 Posted September 3, 2009 Good catch! Tags: Leica, leica-camera, press conference, NY, new york, rudi spiller, photography, photo journalism, s2, leica s2, x1, leica x1 Yet no tag for the M9 Looks like the forensic investigation teams is still dissecting for clues! Whatever is the truth, the compact camera depicted seems clearly not a functional camera but some mock up (and looks a bit worn around the edges too). So it cannot have come from from any possible future Leica official release. Even if the name X1 was correct that does not tell you whether this mock up resembles any actual future possible camera in production. It only tells you that someone constructed a mock-up, or created it in Photoshop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjmike Posted September 3, 2009 Share #31 Posted September 3, 2009 Can a manipulated picture with the unlawful use of brand and logo , depicting a non-exisitng product, be covered by a copyright? Otherwise can the use of marketing material of a new product, lawfully distributed yet still covered by a NDA, constitute a breach of law when perpetrated by a non-signatory of the NDA? A NDA has to be signed. Copyright (if properly filed & registered, etc.) covers the use of the Logo & brand, so: "Yes". It is definately covered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbaron Posted September 3, 2009 Share #32 Posted September 3, 2009 A NDA has to be signed. Copyright (if properly filed & registered, etc.) covers the use of the Logo & brand, so: "Yes". It is definately covered. Copyright does NOT get filed or registered. It automatically and by default resides with the author until 70 years after their death, or it is passed to another. (in most western countries these terms are now identical) Trademarks cover logos and brand names. They are an entirely different issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjmike Posted September 3, 2009 Share #33 Posted September 3, 2009 Copyright does NOT get filed or registered. It automatically and by default resides with the author until 70 years after their death, or it is passed to another. (in most western countries these terms are now identical) Trademarks cover logos and brand names. They are an entirely different issue. Well, actually, that's not entirely true. You can "assert" a copyright, but you MUST go thru the process of registering/filing it (the term changes in different int'l jurisdictions) or it may not be upheld in court. "Asserting" a copyright may mean stating somewhere (title page, bottom corner on a photo, etc.) that it is copyrighted, when & by whom. Sometimes, that's enough. Many times, its not. Also, it will only cover you in countries that have a "copyright relationship" with your own country. You can also do nothing at all, relying on your ability to establish your initial creation & ownership of a copyrighted work. But, again (and especially if you're dealing with something w/ real value), you're taking a risk in doing that -- your assertion of IPR is subject to attack/dispute. see: U.S. Copyright Office Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackTheRipper Posted September 3, 2009 Share #34 Posted September 3, 2009 how much do you think the X1 will cost? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackTheRipper Posted September 3, 2009 Share #35 Posted September 3, 2009 also, do you think the X1 will be available in all black? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
integrale Posted September 3, 2009 Share #36 Posted September 3, 2009 OT: Well, actually, that's not entirely true. You can "assert" a copyright, but you MUST go thru the process of registering/filing it (the term changes in different int'l jurisdictions) or it may not be upheld in court. "Asserting" a copyright may mean stating somewhere (title page, bottom corner on a photo, etc.) that it is copyrighted, when & by whom. Sometimes, that's enough. Many times, its not. Also, it will only cover you in countries that have a "copyright relationship" with your own country. You can also do nothing at all, relying on your ability to establish your initial creation & ownership of a copyrighted work. But, again (and especially if you're dealing with something w/ real value), you're taking a risk in doing that -- your assertion of IPR is subject to attack/dispute. see: U.S. Copyright Office Copyright law varies from country to country. In general, howver, a registration is not required to obtain protection by copyright laws; your work is protected from the moment it assumes a tangible/fixed form. A copyright notice or marking your work with © or even (e) (as in electronic copyrigth) is not required. In the US, registration is often recommended, e.g. for evidence purpose (registration is recognised as prima facie evidence). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
veraikon Posted September 3, 2009 Share #37 Posted September 3, 2009 at least the name "X1" isn´t a fiction Registerauskunft des Deutschen Patent- und Markenamtes (DPMA) Leica registered it in July 09 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjmike Posted September 3, 2009 Share #38 Posted September 3, 2009 OT: Copyright law varies from country to country. In general, howver, a registration is not required to obtain protection by copyright laws; your work is protected from the moment it assumes a tangible/fixed form. A copyright notice or marking your work with © or even (e) (as in electronic copyrigth) is not required. In the US, registration is often recommended, e.g. for evidence purpose (registration is recognised as prima facie evidence). That's my point; if you're passive about it, you stand to lose if your work is copied without your permission. I don't live in the U.S., BTW. You have to either show you had some role in developing/writing/designing a work prior to its illicite use or other train of events. That can be pretty tough sometimes. You can say: "Hey! That's mine!" And whomever has used it w/o permission can try to make acase that it's theirs. Their word against yours. If you've gone thru the (simple, fast & cheap) registraion process. all of those challenges are precluded. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveleo Posted September 3, 2009 Share #39 Posted September 3, 2009 looks like the aperture settings are on a top knob? the strap lug location is HORRID .... my Bessa T's have the lugs there and the cameras rock backward very ackward on the shoulder, unless you mount a large heavy lens. also .... my guess is it will be a fixed 28mm or 35mm (a fixed 24mm is too radical). my hope is this is a very early mockup that will show great improvements at the 9-9-09 announcement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted September 3, 2009 Share #40 Posted September 3, 2009 OT: Copyright law varies from country to country. In general, howver, a registration is not required to obtain protection by copyright laws; your work is protected from the moment it assumes a tangible/fixed form. A copyright notice or marking your work with © or even (e) (as in electronic copyrigth) is not required. In the US, registration is often recommended, e.g. for evidence purpose (registration is recognised as prima facie evidence). In England and Wales there is no requirement to register and no central register if you want to. You can "register" your works with various commercial organisations, but as far as I can make out this has no legal effect though it can have evidential weight (e.g. as evidence that you had created your work before the date of the infringing work). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.