The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

The Leica T - Impressions and Images

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Not for me I would need my reading glasses on the whole time shooting this. Bad enough there on and off like a robot now. Lol

Not fond of the looks but hey that's me. I drive a VW not a BMW. ROTFLMAO
 

Taylor Sherman

New member
Then substitute NEX-7 or a6000 for A7/A7r, and my point is the same. :)
Actually, I think this system is more about the AF lenses. The A6000 is probably a better camera in most/all technical ways than the T, but what AF 18-55 lens are you going to put on it if that's what you want? I'm quite certain that the Leica kit zoom will be much better than the Sony 18-55!

So a better comparison is the Fujis probably, eg the X-A1.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Even if it's more solidly built, I wouldn't waste my time. It's not the build quality, it's the price point vs the cameras capabilities. Heck, I could buy THREE A6000's for the cost of this thing, and have a camera(s) with better IQ, more resolution and a faster AF.

It's my personal opinion that the value in Leica is not the bodies, it's in the glass. And if I can mount that glass to a superior body, again specification wise, and for less money, why wouldn't I chose that route?
Hey you just threw a olive in there koolaid. Lol

I'm joking of course but your comment does have a lot of value to it. Dang thing is unpowered for the cost. I agree but its Leica and folks will buy Leica and the luxury products. To me the S makes some sense as well as the M240 but this one just does not.
 

Terry

New member
Even if it's more solidly built, I wouldn't waste my time. It's not the build quality, it's the price point vs the cameras capabilities. Heck, I could buy THREE A6000's for the cost of this thing, and have a camera(s) with better IQ, more resolution and a faster AF.

It's my personal opinion that the value in Leica is not the bodies, it's in the glass. And if I can mount that glass to a superior body, again specification wise, and for less money, why wouldn't I chose that route?
I guess for me it is all about user interface. As Jono has pointed out in his write-ups a good camera to me is one that you can pick up after a period of time and there isn't a learning curve over and over again. My Leica M's were like that and after that the Fuji's have come closest. I own and Olympus and I feel like I'm starting from scratch every time I pick it up.

So, a body can have all the functionality in the world and still be a fail to me.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Actually, I think this system is more about the AF lenses. The A6000 is probably a better camera in most/all technical ways than the T, but what AF 18-55 lens are you going to put on it if that's what you want? I'm quite certain that the Leica kit zoom will be much better than the Sony 18-55!

So a better comparison is the Fujis probably, eg the X-A1.
Sigma 18-35 1.8 on the Sony a6000 would be pretty dang impressive. I like there Art series a lot
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
The question is, WHY would I buy this when I can simply mount Leica manual focus glass to the "obviously superior" (specifications wise) A7 or A7r??
The obvious answer would be because the Leica T support lens profiles and metadata for m mount lenses. The crop sensor has a " negative" affect for wides but possibly a positive affect on the longer stuff where your 90 becomes a 135 and a 135 becomes a 190-ish... With lens corrections and metadata baked in the DNG.

That being said I clearly prefer the A7 and A7r personally. I think the Leica T is too little too late for me personally.
 

Elderly

Well-known member
Hmmmmm ....... In the UK the price of the body, the current zoom lens and the EVF is £3000.
I can see that it might be a lovely aesthetic object but with no ibis, no weather sealing and a zoom that's not as fast as my EM-1's 12-40, for me it's no contest.
 

bradhusick

Active member
The user experience is something that sets apart great products from merely competent ones.

Apple understands this. Leica gets it. BMW, Bosch, Makita, SureFire, Omega, Amazon, REI all get it.

Samsung, Sony, Olympus, Microsoft, and a whole bunch more don't get it.

Feel free to disagree and use what makes you smile.
 

jonoslack

Active member
The question is, WHY would I buy this when I can simply mount Leica manual focus glass to the "obviously superior" (specifications wise) A7 or A7r??
Then substitute NEX-7 or a6000 for A7/A7r, and my point is the same. :)
HI there Lonnie
I think I said at the beginning that if you were doing a feature check-box / price comparison then it's a ludicrous idea to buy the Leica T.


Still, I'd much rather use M lenses on the T than on a NEX-7 (or an A7) - even for silly reasons like the Lens is in the exif information (useful to me), but also because the IQ is certainly better - I've not tried the A6000, so I can't comment, but I suspect that the same thing will be the case - especially with wide angle lenses. My instinct is that the wider lens mount of the T is relevant here, added to which they're in a position to do some correction in Firmware, which is never going to happen with Sony.


I have never had a non-M camera before where I was pleased to use M lenses with an adapter, there was always some nasty kind of gotcha.

I would just advise you not to go into a store and handle one - there may not be a valid excuse for buying one . . . . . but when was that ever an important component of GAS :ROTFL:
 
Last edited:

iiiNelson

Well-known member
The user experience is something that sets apart great products from merely competent ones.

Apple understands this. Leica gets it. BMW, Bosch, Makita, SureFire, Omega, Amazon, REI all get it.

Samsung, Sony, Olympus, Microsoft, and a whole bunch more don't get it.

Feel free to disagree and use what makes you smile.
I agree on the point that a singular product philosophy is a great business model whether it's Apple thinking differently, BMW making the ultimate driving machine (although Porsche would disagree,) or Leica's simplistic functionality.

I would argue on some level that often perceived functional simplicity is a generation thing. Case in point many issues that many have with LR were second nature to me without reading help me guides or manuals. Coincidentally I had to use tutorials when I switched to Aperture 3 from LR for some additional feature and me and Capture One have always had a hate affair.

Point is choice is good for us all and just because a product doesn't fit everyone doesn't make it a bad one. I love my A7/A7r and the M9P. I almost bought an OM-D but I really didn't want to go back to less that FF on my sensors again. Nothing wrong with the OMD. Many make amazing pictures with them but the A7's fit my desires as a hobbyist better.
 

bradhusick

Active member
Lonnie, resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. The collective is all.

By the way, I think you're hungry now. Eat an apple. And scratch that right elbow - it's been itching for a while.
 

jonoslack

Active member
No, it's not. It's simply that you have your priorities in a camera and I have mine. I know what my priorities, my needs, and my budget are. Those are a valid reason as any to make decisions about what camera to purchase and use.

For you to suggest that you somehow know better that I do what I need to prioritize, what I need, and what my budget is thru some sort of digital clairvoyance and that my conclusions are "ludicrous", is frankly, somewhat offensive to me.

With all of your praising this camera, y'all have yet to convince me why I should change my priorities to yours (and likely you won't be able to).
You've completely misunderstood me Lonnie
I was saying that buying the camera was a ludicrous idea. I wasn't for a second suggesting that your priorities OR your conclusion was ludicrous (and I'm sorry you took it that way).
I meant that buying the camera would be ludicrous if you were doing a feature price comparison.

I've changed my wording in my post - please accept my apology
 

jonoslack

Active member
Fair enough. If that's what you said/meant, then we agree. Sorry about the confusion. I cannot read your review as it must be blocked here.
HI Lonnie
It shouldn't be blocked - but some people were having trouble viewing it a week or so ago - I'll talk to my ISP

all the best
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Looks good, Jono!

I can never understand all the whinging over price. Sure, it's pricey—what's the big deal? No one forces you to buy it. The issue seems to be that everyone one WANTS a Leica, they're just not willing to pay the premium required.

Why? Well in my experience, Leica simply makes better cameras than most of the other guys. The fact that they charge for them is a point of aggravation to those who want one but can't afford it.

I've got my fireproof suit on, so flame away...

G
 

rayyan

Well-known member
Hi there Jono.

First and foremost..happy birthday to your grand daughter.
Our prayers for her long and healthy life.

Second.. Kudos to the parents, family and hospital staff.

Third.. Very impressive written review of a ' ho-hum' camera that seeks
seeks to appeal on the basis of the ' red dot ', following
the sleek unibody design of Apple products and representing no
Innovation whatsoever. To cap it all I wonder if Audi is the car
Of the future?

An excellent attempt to make a mediocre product and lenses
Seem to be the epitome of cropped sensor cameras.

Best regards.
 

Ulfric Douglas

New member
Do the twin dials work like a NEX-7?
Is the touchscreen basically an Olympus SCP?
Is the kit zoom basically a Lumix 14-45?
Is the 23mm prime better than the EOS-M 22mm prime?
 
Top