V
Vivek
Guest
So, it is Leica WB and the Asian guy who messed up the (CMOS) sales?:shocked:
I thought it was the wrong thread pitch in the shutter release button!
I thought it was the wrong thread pitch in the shutter release button!
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
So, it is Leica WB and the Asian guy who messed up the (CMOS) sales?:shocked:
I thought it was the wrong thread pitch in the shutter release button!
That's been my feeling all along. Which is why the difference between the two cameras, for me, is more dependent upon other things, responsiveness being the first amongst them... What David has done to his credit is to show that with most photographs ...the results are too close to reliably differentiate . ...
I feel the same is true of the Olympus E-1 vs all the later models of FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds cameras that switched to higher resolution CMOS and NMOS sensors. The E-1 has an imaging quality quite different from those later models. I hesitate to call it "CCD vs CMOS" however, because the combination of the E-1's low resolution (5 Mpixel) and heavy AA filter are a MUCH bigger influence on the results than the difference in sensor technology....
The M9 had a distinct "finger-print" in the eyes of many. Why begrudge it's unique place in Leica's history of image making tools?
It all seems to be a moot point ... actually, soon to be a pointless point
Might also be a diminishing market for $7000 cameras that can be outclassed as it pertains directly to image quality by cameras that cost about half or less.So, it is Leica WB and the Asian guy who messed up the (CMOS) sales?:shocked:
I thought it was the wrong thread pitch in the shutter release button!
Aye.Its interesting how much sentiments we can read in discussions about Leica, even if people just compare the color output between 2 models.
Anyways, I am quite happy with the M, in regards of handling, sensor (including color) and lenses. Flawed, outclassed, dated, luxury subject? Who cares
Thank you, I truly appreciate your candid response Jono.Nobody is denying the cameras are different Marc - OR that the M9 doesn't have a distinct finger print (many cameras have distinct finger prints - uncontroversial ones might be the Olympus E1 and the Sony A900)
The reason for bringing it up is twofold
1. People are not buying the M240 because there is a huge groundswell of opinion on the internet that the colour is no good (of course, we both know that this is a matter of personal preference - which is fine if it was the general perception, but it isn't). It's one of those stories which largely originated in the incorrect WB adjustment on the original firmware - exacerbated by a series of photos taken in the far east and widely circulated where the photographer SAID he had used AWB but actually had used Daylight WB in streets in Hong Kong (I know this because I saw the raw files with intact exif information) . This still resonates around the internet and it's still putting people off
2. Because the CCD/CMOS / Colour thing does not seem to be founded in fact (again, I'm not denying the difference in the colours). Colour is a function of the Bayer filter and the demosaicing (and partly the DR) - NOT a function of the underlying structure of the sensor. . . . . . . But the reason I referred to it as a 'religion' is that it isn't really possible to investigate on any kind of empirical basis.
It's certainly NOT moot - because it's costing a number of manufacturers money (not just Leica) and it's on the basis of fundamental misconceptions - and disinformation.
Let me repeat - I'm NOT saying there is no difference between the M9 and the M240 - and I understand and respect your dislike for it . . . but what I am denying is that the reason for it is that the M9 is CCD and the M240 is CMOS!
. . And your reply MarcThank you, I truly appreciate your candid response Jono.
Quite right - and I've never, for a minute, denied the absolute right of others to prefer the M9 (of course I don't have to agree). . . I just don't think it's to do with CCD/CMOS arguments - and our mutual like of the A900 contributes to this argument.While I never saw the incorrect WB shots of Hong Kong, as you know I did work with the M240 (with new firmware) and found the color rendering in the broad variety of lighting scenarios I face to be inconsistent, and skin tones not to my liking. However, that is strictly the personal preference of one person.
I don't think they are Marc - and I think that the M240 is selling well - BUT I'm aware of a lot of people who aren't buying them because of the CCD/CMOS arguments (more on LUF than here indeed).If Leica is experiencing a slump,
I couldn't agree more -I think they need to better promte the rangefinder experience. IMO, most people that discount that unique experience simply do not get it ... and maybe more communication regarding the Rangefinder Way verse others would do more good?
That is a debate I'd gladly engage in ....
Thanks again,
- Marc
Maybe you didn't see it Vivek - it went on for months (mostly on Chinese forums and LUF, not here) - I ended up as a messenger (transferring files to Leica) and got duly shot! But I think it still resonates.So, it is Leica WB and the Asian guy who messed up the (CMOS) sales?:shocked:
I thought it was the wrong thread pitch in the shutter release button!
This could very well be the case for me. I have used M6 about 30 years ago. Even at that time I tried Leica R but for some reason, even though the R had more functions and lens selection etc I allways connected better to the M. I have also allways liked simple and reduced cameras, so no wonder I find the A7 series and most mirrorless overloaded and dont "connect" so well to them.This might be a bit lame and uninformed, but I see them as more different than one better or right over the other.
I am a believer that it is mostly about perception, the eyes and brains of us all are different and we all have preferences mixing up attitudes even more.
Another factor is, the item you originally had becomes the norm, anything else that comes along later you feel is wrong. It can apply to anything.
With sensors its, Two steps forward, one back, repeat.
As you all know I also like to join the discussions on the internet but I think we must not forget: The internet forums are just a small percentage of people who actually own and use those cameras. I am sure there are many just out shooting with it. So it is allways the best to not overrate such internet discussions, specially as long as you do not know the people you are talking to, and make own experiences and build up an own opinion. In case of Leica a good example was the M8, which quite some people in the internet saw as a flawed camera, but for me it worked quite well and was my main camera for some years.Maybe you didn't see it Vivek - it went on for months (mostly on Chinese forums and LUF, not here) - I ended up as a messenger (transferring files to Leica) and got duly shot! But I think it still resonates.
There are so many things that get 'stuck' in the public perception on the web - I'm sure you can think of lots of them - two that spring instantly to mind are the wonderfulness of the 'king of bokeh' which now sells for more secondhand than a recent 35 'cron Asph. . . or the lovely 75 Summicron, which is apparently 'clinical'.
I'd forgotten about that!
This may be the crux of the problem ... at least for me.This might be a bit lame and uninformed, but I see them as more different than one better or right over the other.
I am a believer that it is mostly about perception, the eyes and brains of us all are different and we all have preferences mixing up attitudes even more.
Another factor is, the item you originally had becomes the norm, anything else that comes along later you feel is wrong. It can apply to anything.
With sensors its, Two steps forward, one back, repeat.
This statement most accurately reflects my thoughts.This may be the crux of the problem ... at least for me.
"Continuity" is a discussion I've had with a number of photographers. It may not be a matter of being wrong, instead it is "different" when different is not what one wants.
I'd like the better functionality of the M240, but not at the expense of an interruption in the continuity I've managed to accomplish with a digital M9 and with my S system.
- Marc
A couple of years ago, I looked up the "reviews" and comments about the AA 75/2 (particularly from an ancient Leica M reviewer from the UK- I guess he has retired now) and I understand what you mean about that. But these are the folks (who get influenced by such reviews) that Leica are eager to cater to.Maybe you didn't see it Vivek - it went on for months (mostly on Chinese forums and LUF, not here) - I ended up as a messenger (transferring files to Leica) and got duly shot! But I think it still resonates.
There are so many things that get 'stuck' in the public perception on the web - I'm sure you can think of lots of them - two that spring instantly to mind are the wonderfulness of the 'king of bokeh' which now sells for more secondhand than a recent 35 'cron Asph. . . or the lovely 75 Summicron, which is apparently 'clinical'.
I'd forgotten about that!
Not at al Vivek. These are useful discussions . In this case David is a retailer, but he's also a good photographer and an honest bloke. He will do an honest job with the statistics, and I'm 90% certain that this wasn't sponsored. The results won't (can't) be definitive, but I'm sure he won't suggest they are.A couple of years ago, I looked up the "reviews" and comments about the AA 75/2 (particularly from an ancient Leica M reviewer from the UK- I guess he has retired now) and I understand what you mean about that. But these are the folks (who get influenced by such reviews) that Leica are eager to cater to.
[I think Leica needs a different strategy. May be get back to the roots? Their magazine has become a joke, for example.
If a retailer is the only last hope for them to set opinions right, it is sad.]
Sorry, if I opened my mouth a bit much.