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!

x100 - why I'm selling mine

PeterA

Well-known member
I wasn't being disingenuous when I asked the question many months ago :) I do know what the camera is today though.

I have been making a lot of shots with my new Iphone lately - great for happy snaps. I am also considering buying one of those Sony Nex cameras - because I discovered accidentally that you can make sweeping panoramas in camera with it - I have been looking for something that digitally mimics some of what the XPAn does.

If anyone has a better idea about that I would be grateful 'all ears' reader!

Pete
 
M

memories

Guest
Let's get back to the topic and ignore the trolls...

I can understand the argumentation of Jono, but some of you mentioned already, this is a very personal decision, influenced by the alternatives Jono already has.

If someone does not have yet Leica M body or Leica M glasses, the decision making process will be definitely different.

If i.e. someone wants to have a small but capable camera (no DSLR) with a kind of rangefinder feeling and an OVF, there is simply no alternative to the Fuji X100 out there

I used both, X100 and Sony NEX. The image quality of the X100 is already so good for my needs, that the benefit of a potential marginal "more" IQ of a NEX 5N is no value driver for me (I will sell mine with a lot of Contax G lenses)

But the NEX 5 does not have an OVF. The optional EVF is no alternative because if you think this process until the end, you will realize that the whole NEX concept is no concept at all as long as there are no native small lenses offered and an integrated EVF or OVF (i.e. Nex7)

I do not see the point of a "Lego" build strategey, that I have to purchase this and that addionally to have one day finally what I wanted at the beginning.

The NEX body is really tiny, the offered lenses are so big, that it is more a Pentax DSLR competition or Leica M competition in terms of size.

As soon as you look at the NEX system not as a back-up for existing Leica lenses, the whole system does not make anymore that much sense. And as we all now, Sony originally did not intend to target this system to enthusiast photographers. It was meant for mass market life style people with no other system or lenses at home. Just look at the broschures and you understand my point.

So IMHO it is totally logical. that leica M users have no real benefit with a X100. They will tend naturally more to NEX system to be able to use it with their already existing glasses.

But the thread should not mislead readers. The X100 and even more the upcoming Fuji LX is the answer to a long existing wish of many photographers. And it delivers 100%.

It is not the question whether someone has the money for Leica M or not. It is a quetion whether you want to live with so many compromises at a price level this high. I used to have a M6 and know what I am talking about.

Let's face it: Leica is not the owner of a RF concept. They had never a patent on this AFAIK. They are by accident the only ones who offered it continiously over decades and went almost bankrupt with it. Others offered RF too over a shorter period of time.

If Leica would have had more money in the past, they would not have killed their DSLR segment. So this was not a choice of better system (RF vs. DSLR), it was a choice of how many loyal customers they have in this or that segment after everybody bought DSLRs from different brands.

But we are now in the digital world. Leica is no innovator here. And the question I ask myself is why I should invest a lot of money in a Leica System, that was optimized for the analogue world, with a concept of 1950.

If you just look at how many Leica M users buy now Sony NEX, and how big the demand is for the Fuji X100, I would get worried if I would be in the shoes of Leica. The next step for loyal Leica M-customers because of lack of alternatives in the past is only a small step.

With the Fuji X100 you can see how a "RF concept" of the year 2011 should look like and where the market will go over the next decades.

The X100 is for the digital world a very expensive camera. But it addresses my needs of 2011 a lot better than a Leica which basically did not change since 1950. If Fuji will offer Fullframe with the upcoming LX, we can count the number of postings here who will buy one ;)

IMHO it is not a question of "whether", it is more a question of "when", the market share of the Leica M system will decrease significantly. If they do not respond with a better concept than minor improvements over an M9 you will see the same development as in Medium Format over the last 10 years.

Just my 2 cents...
 
Last edited:

lowep

Member
:OT:

Perhaps all this guilt trip business belongs in the Sunset Cafe part of the forum?

-Marc
THUD :D

+1. Just penned a long diatribe about Imelda Marcos and the X100 that went awol due to a fortuitous operator error just as I pressed the button to post it on the Sunset Bar.
 
Last edited:

jonoslack

Active member
Hi There
I won't answer all of your points, just maybe one or two :)
With the Fuji X100 you can see how a "RF concept" of the year 2011 should look like and where the market will go over the next decades. .
But it isn't a rangefinder - it's a hybrid viewfinder. Whether rangefinders should exist in the modern world or not is a moot point . . . but whether the X100 is a rangefinder or not isn't . . .it isn't!
IMHO it is not a question of "whether", it is more a question of "when", the market share of the Leica M system will decrease significantly. If they do not respond with a better concept than minor improvements over an M9 you will see the same development as in Medium Format over the last 10 years.

Just my 2 cents...
But MF has rocketed over the last year or so . . and Leica is in profit for the first time in several decades. . . . . whilst the price of the X100 is dropping week by week.

Of course, there is no more reason for you to like the M concept than there is for me to like the X100. But using the X100 as a weapon for the demise of Leica seems a little cataclysmic!
 

jonoslack

Active member
THUD :D

+1. Just penned a long diatribe about Imelda Marcos and the X100 that went awol due to a fortuitous operator error just as I pressed the button to post it on the Sunset Bar.
:ROTFL: it's happened to me several times - isn't a relief!
 

jonoslack

Active member
I wasn't being disingenuous when I asked the question many months ago :) I do know what the camera is today though.

I have been making a lot of shots with my new Iphone lately - great for happy snaps. I am also considering buying one of those Sony Nex cameras - because I discovered accidentally that you can make sweeping panoramas in camera with it - I have been looking for something that digitally mimics some of what the XPAn does.

If anyone has a better idea about that I would be grateful 'all ears' reader!

Pete
no Peter - that's a really good idea (the NEX 5n) make sure that you get the add on viewfinder, and also the Leica R adapter, and then you can use all those lovely R lenses with it.

all the best
 

woodyspedden

New member
Jono

I don't know what is happening to price in the U.K. but here in the U.S. dealers like B&H photo and Amazon and Adorama are still selling at US$ 1199 and there is still a backlog issue. So folks here are apparently O.K. with the current price. I had the original version, with all of its firmware pitfalls and returned it (for full price.) I recently bought another (at the $1199 price) and am so glad I did. The firmware fixes have dealt with most of the annoyances of the original and the IQ is beyond reproach. A fixed focal length lens is not for all but what I wanted was a carry around camera which was never out of reach and which had superior image quality to the P&S crowd. I use my S2 system when I am doing serious landscape or portrait work. Love the combination and plan to stick with these tools for quite a long time.

I would love an M9 and four lenses but having bought the (for me) far superior S2 system I couldn't possibly afford it (the divorce that is LOL!)

Woody

Hi There
I won't answer all of your points, just maybe one or two :)
But it isn't a rangefinder - it's a hybrid viewfinder. Whether rangefinders should exist in the modern world or not is a moot point . . . but whether the X100 is a rangefinder or not isn't . . .it isn't!


But MF has rocketed over the last year or so . . and Leica is in profit for the first time in several decades. . . . . whilst the price of the X100 is dropping week by week.

Of course, there is no more reason for you to like the M concept than there is for me to like the X100. But using the X100 as a weapon for the demise of Leica seems a little cataclysmic!
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Let's get back to the topic and ignore the trolls...

I can understand the argumentation of Jono, but some of you mentioned already, this is a very personal decision, influenced by the alternatives Jono already has.

If someone does not have yet Leica M body or Leica M glasses, the decision making process will be definitely different.

If i.e. someone wants to have a small but capable camera (no DSLR) with a kind of rangefinder feeling and an OVF, there is simply no alternative to the Fuji X100 out there

I used both, X100 and Sony NEX. The image quality of the X100 is already so good for my needs, that the benefit of a potential marginal "more" IQ of a NEX 5N is no value driver for me (I will sell mine with a lot of Contax G lenses)

But the NEX 5 does not have an OVF. The optional EVF is no alternative because if you think this process until the end, you will realize that the whole NEX concept is no concept at all as long as there are no native small lenses offered and an integrated EVF or OVF (i.e. Nex7)

I do not see the point of a "Lego" build strategey, that I have to purchase this and that addionally to have one day finally what I wanted at the beginning.

The NEX body is really tiny, the offered lenses are so big, that it is more a Pentax DSLR competition or Leica M competition in terms of size.

As soon as you look at the NEX system not as a back-up for existing Leica lenses, the whole system does not make anymore that much sense. And as we all now, Sony originally did not intend to target this system to enthusiast photographers. It was meant for mass market life style people with no other system or lenses at home. Just look at the broschures and you understand my point.

So IMHO it is totally logical. that leica M users have no real benefit with a X100. They will tend naturally more to NEX system to be able to use it with their already existing glasses.

But the thread should not mislead readers. The X100 and even more the upcoming Fuji LX is the answer to a long existing wish of many photographers. And it delivers 100%.

It is not the question whether someone has the money for Leica M or not. It is a quetion whether you want to live with so many compromises at a price level this high. I used to have a M6 and know what I am talking about.

Let's face it: Leica is not the owner of a RF concept. They had never a patent on this AFAIK. They are by accident the only ones who offered it continiously over decades and went almost bankrupt with it. Others offered RF too over a shorter period of time.

If Leica would have had more money in the past, they would not have killed their DSLR segment. So this was not a choice of better system (RF vs. DSLR), it was a choice of how many loyal customers they have in this or that segment after everybody bought DSLRs from different brands.

But we are now in the digital world. Leica is no innovator here. And the question I ask myself is why I should invest a lot of money in a Leica System, that was optimized for the analogue world, with a concept of 1950.

If you just look at how many Leica M users buy now Sony NEX, and how big the demand is for the Fuji X100, I would get worried if I would be in the shoes of Leica. The next step for loyal Leica M-customers because of lack of alternatives in the past is only a small step.

With the Fuji X100 you can see how a "RF concept" of the year 2011 should look like and where the market will go over the next decades.

The X100 is for the digital world a very expensive camera. But it addresses my needs of 2011 a lot better than a Leica which basically did not change since 1950. If Fuji will offer Fullframe with the upcoming LX, we can count the number of postings here who will buy one ;)

IMHO it is not a question of "whether", it is more a question of "when", the market share of the Leica M system will decrease significantly. If they do not respond with a better concept than minor improvements over an M9 you will see the same development as in Medium Format over the last 10 years.

Just my 2 cents...
This is not a new argument. It is one vociferously forwarded decade-after-decade at each new turn of technology. The Leica M killers came with flags and fanfare, and they ALL vanished with a sigh and a whimper.

The M endures for a reason.


-Marc
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Thanks Jono - I think I will buy a nex to try how good the nexpan function is...

Marc - the only thing that will make the M redundant as it is - will be my eyesight - I just visited my optometrist today complaning about marginal loss of long distance accuity - and after the usual techno checkups etc....she annouced that I would need a new prescription - as my short sightednes hs become less short sighted!? hahahha

* PS I also discovered a new technology ( for me) and an old technology for most - they are called "desk glass presritptions" a pair of glasses specifically made to maximise sharpness around yoruy desk for those who spend long hours staring at screens etc...WOW!
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I love my X100 as the fill in for my long sold M9 outfit. If you enjoy the 35mm focal length then I find it's a great travel complement to the "big stuff". If I still had my Leicas then I can totally understand why it would seem like a superfluous system - lets face it, it's a somewhat automated alternative for an M9 & 35/2.8 (if you consider that at 23mm f/2 doesn't compare to a 35 summicron).

When I buy back in to a Leica M I know it'll be a similar problem for me - the M9 has been such a great system that I still miss it every day and would shoot it in preference to any other portable camera.

Peter: ah yes, the fun of glasses. I hit that age where I can't see anything close up any more and so now it's a relief to just let it go and have several pairs for various purposes. I have reading, computer/desk work glasses and then full progressives for everything else. Having specialized solutions for different tasks isn't cheap but makes things so much easier!
 

kit laughlin

Subscriber Member
I made some very nice images with the X-100 but, like a number of folk here, I sold mine; for once (as I bought it here second hand) I did not lose on it.

For me, the X-100 felt slow, and despite using it constantly for weeks on my last trip, I never did get that efficient 'flow' feeling in the way I was using it; I found myself continuing to have to 'think' about what I was doing in order to do it. Lovely finder, to be sure, though. I often had to press the shutter button get it out of some snooze loop it had settled into. As well, and this did surprise me, I found the fixed 35mm EFOV lens limiting.

I have bought a new X-10, and I am finding that I really like it and for the purpose the IQ is excellent. Memory is cheap enough these days to shoot raw and jpegs at full resolution (I tell myself if I do happen on an extraordinary opportunity I can PP anything I need to), but I am shooting this little toy on Auto-EXR most of the time—and the JPEGs are lovely. I shoot it wide open most of the time, too.

The X-10 has excellent ergonomics; very fast AF point selection process, and seems to have little or no shutter lag. Finally, I still have a lot of images I made with the D2/LC1 that I still like; I mention this because these cameras also had 2/3" sensors (tho' many generations older). The X-10 feel sorted, and I find it versatile. It will be the camera I take on the road next trip, I think.
 

Tim

Active member
I found myself continuing to have to 'think' about what I was doing in order to do it. Lovely finder, to be sure, though. I often had to press the shutter button get it out of some snooze loop it had settled into. As well, and this did surprise me, I found the fixed 35mm EFOV lens limiting.
I though the X100 was designed to be a "thinkers" camera. Old school dials to set aperture/shutter speed etc, you could however always put the X100 on full auto A+A mode and sit back enjoy, so you have both options. Yes, I am sometimes finding 35mm limited too but I am more used to 28mm on the GRD is affecting me - I am not so used to 35mm anymore. I see the X10 a companion to the X100.
 
M

memories

Guest
This is not a new argument. It is one vociferously forwarded decade-after-decade at each new turn of technology. The Leica M killers came with flags and fanfare, and they ALL vanished with a sigh and a whimper.

The M endures for a reason.

-Marc
Hi Marc

... but the gap between a M"x" and products simlar or (in the future) better than the X100 becomes smaller and smaller with each innovation cycle of the competition. One generation of M takes time like 2-3 generations of other producers. Everyone can do the math for himself.

I bet that a Fuji X100 without AA filter would give the M9 already nowadays a harder run for the image quality ;)

But each one for his own. I just do not believe, that the majority of M-owners or potential buyers will be willing to spend 10x the money of an X-system if they find out that the difference in image quality will be not there anymore in the short future (i.e within the next 2-3 years). But maybe I am wrong with this opinion.

I still find the M9 very attractive. But not because of image quality vs. X100. I just want to have fullframe and no AA filter. That is what I am missing the most. As soon as somebody else is offering this with similar IQ and at a reasonable price, the Leica M-system will be deleted from my wish list.

I am neither a professional nor a collector. So I do not care about history and "image" (=red dot) is not important for me. I am only interested in results with a reasonabe price/perfomance ratio. And this is getting each year better. But this is only my personal view, which might be too extreme for others.

Actually the improvement in IQ becomes less important over the next cycles for me, since I am already now pleased with a very high IQ. The lack of AA filter and fullframe are for me the next 2 important steps in the industry, which would make me buy something new - depending on price.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Hi Marc

... but the gap between a M"x" and products simlar or (in the future) better than the X100 becomes smaller and smaller with each innovation cycle of the competition. One generation of M takes time like 2-3 generations of other producers. Everyone can do the math for himself.

I bet that a Fuji X100 without AA filter would give the M9 already nowadays a harder run for the image quality ;)

But each one for his own. I just do not believe, that the majority of M-owners or potential buyers will be willing to spend 10x the money of an X-system if they find out that the difference in image quality will be not there anymore in the short future (i.e within the next 2-3 years). But maybe I am wrong with this opinion.

I still find the M9 very attractive. But not because of image quality vs. X100. I just want to have fullframe and no AA filter. That is what I am missing the most. As soon as somebody else is offering this with similar IQ and at a reasonable price, the Leica M-system will be deleted from my wish list.

I am neither a professional nor a collector. So I do not care about history and "image" (=red dot) is not important for me. I am only interested in results with a reasonabe price/perfomance ratio. And this is getting each year better. But this is only my personal view, which might be too extreme for others.

Actually the improvement in IQ becomes less important over the next cycles for me, since I am already now pleased with a very high IQ. The lack of AA filter and fullframe are for me the next 2 important steps in the industry, which would make me buy something new - depending on price.
History and image has some impact ... but it is because it is a tradition of being a rangefinder in the face of all types of challenges. The Contax G with it's excellent Zeiss auto-focus optics and rangefinder type size and viewfinder window was supposed to be a M killer ... but it wasn't a rangefinder camera ... and is history now.

Leica has done more than okay with the M9. When it came into being, the IQ either held its own with the other similarly priced so called pro-cameras, or exceeded it. Specifications aside, many M9 users still believe there is no current 35mm camera, full frame or APSC, that can exceed the M9's IQ.

If sensor technology even's out the playing field where the actual IQ off the sensor is not the point of difference ... we are simply back to the same comparison as when all cameras used film ... you could put any film in any camera and the medium of capture would be equal ... Leica still sold Ms ...

Because they are rangefinders ... and have continued to be the best one out there.

-Marc
 

jonoslack

Active member
But each one for his own. I just do not believe, that the majority of M-owners or potential buyers will be willing to spend 10x the money of an X-system if they find out that the difference in image quality will be not there anymore in the short future (i.e within the next 2-3 years). But maybe I am wrong with this opinion.
But I don't think you're right. People who only use an M because of the Image quality soon move away to something more conventional - be it an SLR or a compact camera.

However, many of us who use an M do so because of the fixed focal length viewfinder and the framelines, with the ability to look outside the frame and decide what isn't in the image as well as what's in the image, and with the very accurate, visible and controllable manual focus - those people aren't going to be impressed by anything that's on offer at the moment -

As Marc says - the Contax G was designed as an M killer, and despite price advantages and very good lenses it failed.

The point is that the 'shortcomings' of the Leica M are actually it's strengths, and the fact that the concept is 50 years old doesn't alter this fact.

Basically, if the operation of an M floats your boat, and the image quality is good, there are lots of people who will use them - and this is not just oldies who have been using them for years, but also new users who discover the elegant simplicity of the operation and the lovely lenses.

It's a classic example of If it's not broken . . . don't fix it - as far as I can see all the competition is trying to fix it, whilst it's only really in Leica's power to actually break it.
 
I hate to sound like a broken record.. or skipping CD..

Leica, to me, is about the glass. I do believe Leica makes the best glass on the planet and their are some very good competitors as well but Leica still rules in the glass department for manual focus lenses and quality.

Now, about the rangefinder bodies.. there are those who love them and I respect that. I understand the "Leica Experience"..

What I want is a camera that has the form factor of the Leica M or something very close to it and the ability to use M lenses on it.. BUT.. you do not rely on a rangefinder mechanisim for focus but rather an alternative method of manual focus.. focus peaking may be a close answer. I really don't have the answer for such a focus system.

I am not interested in spending $7K on a camera body but would consider investing in Leica glass.

The NEX-7 is not the camera I wish to use but the form factor is close to what I desire.

If Fuji delivered a FF camera in the form factor of the X100 with M-Mount capabiity via an adaptor (and the sensor was as good or better than the sensor in the M9) I would be in line for such a camera and begin to buy Leica glass for it.

We live in interesting times as photographers. Many have dumped their DSLRs for smaller systems, self included but we still have not been offered a camera that meets the rangefinder form factor and allows us to use those wonderful Leica M lenses with truly great focus accuracy.

[Sidebar] I sent a letter to Santa asking for an M9 and a couple of lenses.. the reply I got back was.. ho Ho HO.. not going to happen, Jim! :)

I still wish that Leica would produce a digital CL style camera with at least and APSC sensor that did not depend on a rangefinder mechanism for focus but would allow M mount lenses to be used on it as thier entry level Leica rather than something like a rebadged Panasonic or the X1.

Yes, I wish I could afford an M9 and lovely glass but financially, it is out of my reach. I keep hoping Leica will produce an affordable entry level M system of some kind but I doubt they will ever do so. The word "affordable" and Leica are rarely used in the same sentence. Maybe one day Zeiss will produce a digital system.. who knows.. as I said, we live in interesting times as photographers.

Here's looking to the future.. I hope Fuji has a real trick up thier sleeves for 2012 with an interchangeable lens system that will accept M-Mount lenses in some way.

Merry Christmas to all and to all good shooting!
 

fotografz

Well-known member
But I don't think you're right. People who only use an M because of the Image quality soon move away to something more conventional - be it an SLR or a compact camera.

However, many of us who use an M do so because of the fixed focal length viewfinder and the framelines, with the ability to look outside the frame and decide what isn't in the image as well as what's in the image, and with the very accurate, visible and controllable manual focus - those people aren't going to be impressed by anything that's on offer at the moment -

As Marc says - the Contax G was designed as an M killer, and despite price advantages and very good lenses it failed.

The point is that the 'shortcomings' of the Leica M are actually it's strengths, and the fact that the concept is 50 years old doesn't alter this fact.

Basically, if the operation of an M floats your boat, and the image quality is good, there are lots of people who will use them - and this is not just oldies who have been using them for years, but also new users who discover the elegant simplicity of the operation and the lovely lenses.

It's a classic example of If it's not broken . . . don't fix it - as far as I can see all the competition is trying to fix it, whilst it's only really in Leica's power to actually break it.
" ... as far as I can see all the competition is trying to fix it, whilst it's only really in Leica's power to actually break it."

Best line in the entire thread! :thumbup:

-Marc
 

Tim

Active member
Re: I hate to sound like a broken record.. or skipping CD..

What I want is a camera that has the form factor of the Leica M or something very close to it and the ability to use M lenses on it.. BUT.. you do not rely on a rangefinder mechanisim for focus but rather an alternative method of manual focus.. focus peaking may be a close answer. I really don't have the answer for such a focus system.
Jim, over on another Leica forum when the M9 was announced I submitted the idea of an FF M9 without the "top deck". IE: no Rangefinder mechanism. My understanding is that this is an extremely expensive part of the M, it needs alignment and complex glass. The idea was for a machine similar to the M1 or maybe more like a digital Bessa L. I think with an LCD only, it would make a fine backpackers landscape camera. Accessing M glass as you say. I was of course told no one would buy it, it would be no cheaper to make and generally told it was a rubbish idea. I Still.. see occasional posts like yours that make we wonder if such a machine would have niche. It would not need to be made by Leica, maybe Fuji would do a better job.

A Nex5 with M adapter is a close approximation but something more akin to a FF body with a moderate pixel count is what I hope for. My want for FF is to utilize those M wide-angles, which is the M's strength. I'll trade pixel count if it helps keep the cost down.

I'd line up to buy one.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Re: I hate to sound like a broken record.. or skipping CD..

Leica, to me, is about the glass. I do believe Leica makes the best glass on the planet and their are some very good competitors as well but Leica still rules in the glass department for manual focus lenses and quality.

Now, about the rangefinder bodies.. there are those who love them and I respect that. I understand the "Leica Experience"..

What I want is a camera that has the form factor of the Leica M or something very close to it and the ability to use M lenses on it.. BUT.. you do not rely on a rangefinder mechanisim for focus but rather an alternative method of manual focus.. focus peaking may be a close answer. I really don't have the answer for such a focus system.

I am not interested in spending $7K on a camera body but would consider investing in Leica glass.

The NEX-7 is not the camera I wish to use but the form factor is close to what I desire.

If Fuji delivered a FF camera in the form factor of the X100 with M-Mount capabiity via an adaptor (and the sensor was as good or better than the sensor in the M9) I would be in line for such a camera and begin to buy Leica glass for it.

We live in interesting times as photographers. Many have dumped their DSLRs for smaller systems, self included but we still have not been offered a camera that meets the rangefinder form factor and allows us to use those wonderful Leica M lenses with truly great focus accuracy.

[Sidebar] I sent a letter to Santa asking for an M9 and a couple of lenses.. the reply I got back was.. ho Ho HO.. not going to happen, Jim! :)

I still wish that Leica would produce a digital CL style camera with at least and APSC sensor that did not depend on a rangefinder mechanism for focus but would allow M mount lenses to be used on it as thier entry level Leica rather than something like a rebadged Panasonic or the X1.

Yes, I wish I could afford an M9 and lovely glass but financially, it is out of my reach. I keep hoping Leica will produce an affordable entry level M system of some kind but I doubt they will ever do so. The word "affordable" and Leica are rarely used in the same sentence. Maybe one day Zeiss will produce a digital system.. who knows.. as I said, we live in interesting times as photographers.

Here's looking to the future.. I hope Fuji has a real trick up thier sleeves for 2012 with an interchangeable lens system that will accept M-Mount lenses in some way.

Merry Christmas to all and to all good shooting!
I personally appreciate the civil manner in respecting those who prefer the rangefinder experience, and in return it is easy to respect your desires. I do think your wishes will come true ... but I do not think current focus peaking technology is the answer IF you like faster glass and like to shoot in lower light ... conditions where I found it ineffective and not very accurate.

What I do think may be possible is a simple manual focus confirmation linked to the AF sensors in the new wave of smaller cameras (which are already AF). EVF should make this a snap to do. Heck, they may already have such a thing for I know ... LOL!

Then it just has to be implemented in a FF camera of a more demure size. If it happens, I'd bet it'll be Sony ... they make sensors, and have deep pockets.

-Marc
 
Re: I hate to sound like a broken record.. or skipping CD..

Jim, over on another Leica forum when the M9 was announced I submitted the idea of an FF M9 without the "top deck". IE: no Rangefinder mechanism. My understanding is that this is an extremely expensive part of the M, it needs alignment and complex glass. The idea was for a machine similar to the M1 or maybe more like a digital Bessa L. I think with an LCD only, it would make a fine backpackers landscape camera. Accessing M glass as you say. I was of course told no one would buy it, it would be no cheaper to make and generally told it was a rubbish idea. I Still.. see occasional posts like yours that make we wonder if such a machine would have niche. It would not need to be made by Leica, maybe Fuji would do a better job.

A Nex5 with M adapter is a close approximation but something more akin to a FF body with a moderate pixel count is what I hope for. My want for FF is to utilize those M wide-angles, which is the M's strength. I'll trade pixel count if it helps keep the cost down.

I'd line up to buy one.
I'm with you. I've always loved Leica but I have also been a critic of Leica on a number of levels. There is no denying their glass is top shelf.
 
Top