News Leica mirrorless camera

Location
Switzerland
Real Name
Matt
How is this fantasy camera of yours different than a Fuji X-Pro, XE1, XE2, or XT1 with two or three of their excellent primes?

No touch screens. Aperture rings, dedicated shutter speed dials, exposure comp dials and, in one case, ISO dial. A few programmable buttons such that once you set it up to your liking you rarely have to mess with the menus at all. And pretty much anything you'd need to go into the menus for available in one easily available quick menu. And a real OVF in the Pro and real EVFs in the others.

-Ray

In terms of handling, they're mostly there - but after using the m4/3 cameras, especially the OM-D series, they just feel sluggish and frankly are rather big. I admit that the X-T1 especially, but also the X-E2 both hold a lot of appeal for me, but as I have said elsewhere, for me, the m4/3 system hits the sweet spot when it comes to the quality-to-size ratio. The same goes for the GR - small, unobstrusive, very direct handling and control, great IQ for its size and prize.

However, when I saw the T, it made me realise that it's mostly about the size-to-feature ratio, too; after all, I still really like my PM1, and that's surely not as straightforward in handling as the T, and it surely is less sophisticated than the M10. In every real test, the M10 wins hands down, and it really is a joy to use - so why is it that I still reach for the PM1 a lot? Size and form factor. So, obviously, what I really want is something more or less the size and style of the PM1 or PL5 (it'd have to be a little bigger, I know) *with* a built-in viewfinder (I really think the one of the V1 would be enough) and a couple of *dedicated* controls (yes, maybe a mini-E2). If that sounds a lot like a GX7, you're right there - but this camera is already bigger than I'd like it to be, even the M10 is actually more pocketable. And handling-wise, the M10 still wins for me, too.

There's another dream product of mine, though: The GR with a viewfinder matching at least the one on the V1 (which itself nearly matches the one on the M10, but is smaller). That'd mean prime handling without that "classic" touch - but Ricoh have created a classic in its own right.

Still, I hear you, and I agree that in terms of control layout and design, Fuji have more or less nailed it. And the GX7 as well as the M10 offer everything I need (and lots more) in very convincing packages. So I'll freely admit that it's more down to wishful thinking than unfulfilled *needs*. So I guess I'll best shut up :)

M.
 
Location
London UK
Real Name
Andy
Well I'm drooling too much to write. :biggrin:

As per usual it is a thing of beauty and for once it looks bang up to date rather than the usual 2 generations behind everyone else. However I think I'll stick to my Fuji and a decent prime or 2. Saying that, the Leica T 23mm f2 kit looks yummy!
 

Lightmancer

Legend
Location
Sunny Frimley
Real Name
Bill Palmer
So, 24 hours in, I see it this way. Design is "fresh" - a bit 'phone-like (shades of the Android-powered Samsung Galaxy cameras?) It is pitched at a demographic that I, happily, am not a part of. What I am is a long-term Leica owner and user with a range of LTM and M lenses that I use with film Leicas and on my Fuji digitals. This offers me a "solution" for using my Leica glass on a Leica digital body so let's play compare, from my very personal point of view:

Sensor - APS-C - draw
EVF - detachable - Fuji win
fixed screen - not of interest to me - draw
touchscreen - not of interest to me - draw
physical controls - Fuji win
focus aids - Fuji win
Price/value - Fuji win
Ability to take Leica lenses - draw
secondhand value retention - Leica win (probably)
firmware updates - Fuji win (based on past track record)
Tethering to mobile 'phone - draw
"Monocoque" construction - Leica win (but so what?)
Weatherproofing - Fuji win
Add-on costs (EVF, proprietary strap, etc) - Fuji win
Ability to take 3rd party lenses - Fuji win (for now)
Ability to take life's knocks - undecided
Servicing - undecided
Quality of native lenses - undecided
Value - undecided

And there my speculation ends, until a) there are more real-world testers and tests b) I can get my hands on one from my friendly dealer. IF it delivers OUTSTANDING handling AND outputs I MAY consider one, but what I have seen and read so far does not set my pulse racing.

If you compare "starting positions" - The first Fuji X with interchangeable lenses - the X-Pro 1 - vs. the T and their respective lenses and accessories available at launch, I would say that the X-Pro was more innovative from the outset in the areas that matter - sensor, viewfinder, handling - than the T. Fuji took a chance with their choice of sensor, which has resulted in the imaging software manufacturers having to play catch-up ever since, and those that tried the system in the early days with their usual raw developers writing it off prematurely. Leica on the other hand have sent a bod down to the local Sony Centre and taken a standard offering, then enrobed it in chocolate - sorry, aluminium. Smart move? Certainly a safe one. I am not going to enter into the debate on price - it is not relevant to what I suspect is the target market.

What I WOULD say is that Leica appear to have learned the lesson of the X-Vario "mini-M" launch fiasco and done it this time much better, thereby avoiding the anger of those who felt that they were sorely misled and let down. They now need to avoid their other frequent failing which is an inability to get product out into the market quickly enough.

My jury is out, but they are not known for their gullibility.
 

Biro

Hall of Famer
Location
Jersey Shore
Real Name
Steve
It's interesting. Many of the comments I'm reading across the Internet seem to be of the "I like it. I won't buy one, but..." variety. For those who do like this new Leica, more power to you. I'm happy that you're pleased. Me? I think it's yet another Leica that's a day late and $1000 too expensive. Honestly, a non-integrated EVF? That's so 2008. And the price of those lenses with very pedestrian specs just leaves me cold. But that's just me.
 

Ray Sachs

Legend
Location
Not too far from Philly
Real Name
you should be able to figure it out...
In terms of handling, they're mostly there - but after using the m4/3 cameras, especially the OM-D series, they just feel sluggish and frankly are rather big. I admit that the X-T1 especially, but also the X-E2 both hold a lot of appeal for me, but as I have said elsewhere, for me, the m4/3 system hits the sweet spot when it comes to the quality-to-size ratio. The same goes for the GR - small, unobstrusive, very direct handling and control, great IQ for its size and prize.

However, when I saw the T, it made me realise that it's mostly about the size-to-feature ratio, too; after all, I still really like my PM1, and that's surely not as straightforward in handling as the T, and it surely is less sophisticated than the M10. In every real test, the M10 wins hands down, and it really is a joy to use - so why is it that I still reach for the PM1 a lot? Size and form factor. So, obviously, what I really want is something more or less the size and style of the PM1 or PL5 (it'd have to be a little bigger, I know) *with* a built-in viewfinder (I really think the one of the V1 would be enough) and a couple of *dedicated* controls (yes, maybe a mini-E2). If that sounds a lot like a GX7, you're right there - but this camera is already bigger than I'd like it to be, even the M10 is actually more pocketable. And handling-wise, the M10 still wins for me, too.

There's another dream product of mine, though: The GR with a viewfinder matching at least the one on the V1 (which itself nearly matches the one on the M10, but is smaller). That'd mean prime handling without that "classic" touch - but Ricoh have created a classic in its own right.

Still, I hear you, and I agree that in terms of control layout and design, Fuji have more or less nailed it. And the GX7 as well as the M10 offer everything I need (and lots more) in very convincing packages. So I'll freely admit that it's more down to wishful thinking than unfulfilled *needs*. So I guess I'll best shut up :)

M.

No need to shut up - now I understand what you want, unrealistic as it may be... :biggrin: The controls of the Fuji with the speed and "snappiness" of the faster m43 gear but in the size of the smallest m43 gear. Got it. Actually, that's probably not unrealistic - it's just not here yet. Although if the GX7 and XE2 are still bigger than you'd like, it may be tough to get the kind of controls you want on a body as small as the EPM or EPL series cameras. But who knows, it could happen. The Fuji XM1 and XA1 are almost that small, but they do lose the dedicated shutter speed and exposure comp dials, but I found them really easy to get around on once set up. They're still a bit more sluggish than the XE2 and XT1 (which are getting pretty close to, but still not quite as quick and immediate as the newer m43 gear), but I'm sure the next generation of them will catch up. But of course, they are the only Fujis without any sort of viewfinder, so maybe you just want too much in too small a package...

Good luck,

-Ray
 

rbelyell

All-Pro
Location
NY Mtns
i cant take credit for this, though i wish i could since i actually owned one for years, but what about the comparison with the ricoh gxr. for $5-600 you get a very solidly built cam, sony sensor, external evf, AF/zoom/M mount capability (a plus for ricoh as its 'natural' vs adapted m mount), one touch magnification, plus 2 peeking modes, no AA filter, plus a microlens array specifically designed to optimize m lenses, useable to 16-3200.

so to sum, gxr = leica T, except gxr has m-specific microlens array, has peeking, has natural m mount, costs $1300 less; leica T has 4 extra megapixels, touch screen and red badge. just sayin'...

for me personally, im impressed the T doesnt cost more considering its source. but it needed to distinguish itself beyond cosmetics. imo--that means its opinion--it needed a ccd sensor and a different focusing method for m lens users, maybe like the fuji xt. now its just another high priced pretty face. sometimes you like to have a little mature conversation beyond physical attraction, no?
 

CM_SK

Regular
I think Biro is on the mark by noting that many on the 'net say they won't buy.... Because the Leica T is not made for most of us on camera forums. It is a new direction in design however (build and UI), and brave for Leica to try to lead this. There may well be a segment of potential camera users who want more than phone pics, want a good tool, but are turned off by the 16-reassignable-dials-and-buttons approach to camera design - again mostly people not chatting here. The fact that 3 of 4 initial lenses are zooms also suggests that the prime-loving traditional gear nuts are not the market here.
 

Duane Pandorf

Top Veteran
Location
Western NC
i cant take credit for this, though i wish i could since i actually owned one for years, but what about the comparison with the ricoh gxr. for $5-600 you get a very solidly built cam, sony sensor, external evf, AF/zoom/M mount capability (a plus for ricoh as its 'natural' vs adapted m mount), one touch magnification, plus 2 peeking modes, no AA filter, plus a microlens array specifically designed to optimize m lenses, useable to 16-3200.

so to sum, gxr = leica T, except gxr has m-specific microlens array, has peeking, has natural m mount, costs $1300 less; leica T has 4 extra megapixels, touch screen and red badge. just sayin'...

for me personally, im impressed the T doesnt cost more considering its source. but it needed to distinguish itself beyond cosmetics. imo--that means its opinion--it needed a ccd sensor and a different focusing method for m lens users, maybe like the fuji xt. now its just another high priced pretty face. sometimes you like to have a little mature conversation beyond physical attraction, no?

The problem I ran into with my GXR and M lens options was if I wanted to go wide and fast on a cropped sensor was way out of my league. The same is true with the T.
 
Location
Milwaukee, WI USA
Real Name
Luke
I don't mean to derail the thread, but with Tony and Duane's references to the venerable GXR, why don't Ricoh make a full frame GXR?

And why doesn't Voigtlander make a digital Bessa. Seriously.....keep it EXACTLY the same as it is, except put a sensor where the film goes. I'd even be cool with no LCD screen.

I mean seriously, that 10 year old Epson RD1 still changes hands regularly for 4 digits, so don't tell me if you stick a whizz-bang modern sensor in there that you wouldn't have a small army of customers lined up to plunk down whatever your asking price needs to be.
 

Biro

Hall of Famer
Location
Jersey Shore
Real Name
Steve
I don't mean to derail the thread, but with Tony and Duane's references to the venerable GXR, why don't Ricoh make a full frame GXR?

And why doesn't Voigtlander make a digital Bessa. Seriously.....keep it EXACTLY the same as it is, except put a sensor where the film goes. I'd even be cool with no LCD screen.

I mean seriously, that 10 year old Epson RD1 still changes hands regularly for 4 digits, so don't tell me if you stick a whizz-bang modern sensor in there that you wouldn't have a small army of customers lined up to plunk down whatever your asking price needs to be.

I've asked both questions myself repeatedly over the past couple of years. There was even a rumor about a K-mount module for the GXR that would have been easy to produce. But, alas, it was not to be.
 

rbelyell

All-Pro
Location
NY Mtns
I don't mean to derail the thread, but with Tony and Duane's references to the venerable GXR, why don't Ricoh make a full frame GXR?

And why doesn't Voigtlander make a digital Bessa. Seriously.....keep it EXACTLY the same as it is, except put a sensor where the film goes. I'd even be cool with no LCD screen.

I mean seriously, that 10 year old Epson RD1 still changes hands regularly for 4 digits, so don't tell me if you stick a whizz-bang modern sensor in there that you wouldn't have a small army of customers lined up to plunk down whatever your asking price needs to be.

'cause ricoh is no more and i think pentax has no interest. btw, my rd1 (3 digit cost ): ) arrives today! and truly, i sold my gxr only because i didnt enjoy the 'user experience'. i dont like focus peeking and my eyes are many times not good enough for magnification focus, and i am honestly sick of menu diving. it produced great images--i still think, even with this T, the gxr is the best IQ option for m lenses besides m9 up line. but im really an analogue guy in a digital world and in the end i just didnt enjoy shooting it. like i said, in this world now you need to distinguish yourself. leica always used ccd sensors. that was part of the digital leica look. and they need a new manual focus method, something more 'tradtional' akin to the fuji xt. anyway im hoping the rd1 paired with my old summarit 50/1.5 (adjusted 80/1.5) will be a fun mf companion to my 35mm rx1.
 

SnapDawg

Rorschach Test Pilot
Location
Canary Islands
Real Name
Ken
...
And why doesn't Voigtlander make a digital Bessa. Seriously.....keep it EXACTLY the same as it is, except put a sensor where the film goes. I'd even be cool with no LCD screen.
...

Give me an OM1 or 2 with a nice 16MP FF sensor and SD card slot, leave the rest unchanged and I'll shut the heck up for a while.
Leica T ? Not for this old fart. YMMV.
 

rbelyell

All-Pro
Location
NY Mtns
its the only piece i care about as a photographer, or whatever it is that i do with a camera. ): were we discussing copiers? if we were i guess i missed it. ):
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom