Leica's new APS-C Interchangeable lens camera

[ptomsu]

Can you explain what a camera for photographers is or means? What is the T missing? Does a camera need a zillion controls and buttons and an 800 page manual? Isn't being a photographer about what you see and how you capture the light?

Can a real real photographer create a winning image with a simple pinhole camera?

If there were one answer to what makes a good camera all cameras would be the same. However, we know that people are different and one tool doesn't fit all.

I like the T because it simplifies the camera back to the basic elements similar to the M's with the benefit of auto focus. But that I guess precludes me from being a real photographer.

Terry,

I feel very much the same way you feel about the Leica T. It is really reduced as far as possible to the essentials for photography, is very much same spirit like the M but with the advantages of having AF, zoom lenses, APSC sensor allowing for smaller and lighter camera and lenses (IMHO the overall optimum sensor size today), WiFi connectivity, GPS, an excellent EVF supporting also perfect MF and a number of other benefits a camera can bring to the table today, while still not loosing focus on essentials for photography. In my eyes a modern M.

Using such a tool rather speaks for you being a real photographer than opposite! Also real photographers need to listen to the signs of time and evolution ....

 

[Godfrey]

Can you explain what a camera for photographers is or means? What is the T missing? Does a camera need a zillion controls and buttons and an 800 page manual? Isn't being a photographer about what you see and how you capture the light?

Can a real real photographer create a winning image with a simple pinhole camera?

If there were one answer to what makes a good camera all cameras would be the same. However, we know that people are different and one tool doesn't fit all.

I like the T because it simplifies the camera back to the basic elements similar to the M's with the benefit of auto focus. But that I guess precludes me from being a real photographer.

+1

I just spent an hour and some scanning 52 Polaroid SX-70 prints. I'm sure that makes me 'not a real photographer' to some, that I LOVE shooting with the Polaroids—focus (AF if I use the Spectra or SX-70 Sonar), no control of anything else other than lighten/darken and when to push the shutter release. Maybe when to fit the flash.

I like the simplicity, the unpredictability. You only have to find a subject and get the light right. The prints have a warm and inviting appeal that few other cameras ever produce. They're not super sharp; they're like quiet memories that resemble what you experience rather than record it.

The T does take Leica in a new direction. It's what follows the M, not what supplants it. The X was the first step there, this is a larger step.

The technical remains for when it's the need. My lovely German and Canadian R lenses live happily on the A7. My superb Japanese Olympus and Panasonic-Leica lenses sing on the wunderkamera, the E-M1. Both have every feature and facility to think of and beyond.

It's all good. Real and faux photographers can both enjoy photos together...

G

 

[woodleica]

The Taifun is beautiful and innovative and could redefine the way people interact with cameras that aren't P&S. I think saying that Leica is imitating Apple or that it's just a rich man's tool is making small of a big step and risk Leica is taking. While there are parallels with apple etc, Leica is taking a decisive and bold step in a new camera system with a firm stake in the ground philosophically and technologically and I think it deserves applause. Yes there are tradeoffs, but that doesn't matter if it fits in with the buyers lifestyle, wallet, and photographic style, and also why it won't be for everyone. I'm excited for Leica and for myself. I'm not yet convinced I'll order one, but I'd certainly like to own one. Kind of like the BMW M6 that I'll never own , but admire for its engineering and beauty regardless if only rich people buy it, but this is far more affordable and could live in my photo bag someday. I've had several Nex cameras and sold every one of them very quickly. They were a mess to use for me, although I don't denigrate anyone that does use them - it's a personal thing. I love my D800e too, but for different reasons and none of them have to do with why I like Leica. The T looks beautiful and enticing, and not because of its lofty price tag, but because as a photographer I want to experience this new interface and method of taking serious pictures.

Onto details ---

Is there a way to do an AE lock while shooting? This would be a difficult thing to not have.

Also wrt the software correction, from what Jono said earlier, it looks like it's mainly DNG opcodes and not firmware, unless I'm mistaken. This seems in line with the technological direction Leica is taking with an open raw format, which again would seem to be an admirable technological step?

 

[lambert]

My other question is: Are all cameras that use a 16MP Sony sensor "nothing more than a NEX"?

It has more to do with Leica's choice of sensor. The T deploys Sony's entry level sensor, as used in a $300 NEX. And it doesn't even incorporate the sensor cleaning smarts.

 

[Godfrey]

Is there a way to do an AE lock while shooting? This would be a difficult thing to not have.

Also wrt the software correction, from what Jono said earlier, it looks like it's mainly DNG opcodes and not firmware, unless I'm mistaken. This seems in line with the technological direction Leica is taking with an open raw format, which again would seem to be an admirable technological step?

Shutter half-press locks focus and exposure, according to at least one of the reviews I read/watched. If you want focus independent of exposure, go to MF. If you want exposure independent of focus, go to manual exposure. Et cetera.

The lens correction opcode standards were added to DNG in DNG v1.2 or v1.3, originally for Micro-FourThirds which has been using this "lens parameters injected into the raw" design since 2008. It's a tried and true mechanism ... any raw processor that knows how to read and apply the lens correction parameters as integrated into the DNG format will do the job automatically. The lenses transmit their recommended parameters to the body, the body uses them for its internal JPEG processing and pushes them into the raw files for external processing; you don't need to update the body for every new lens that comes along.

Simplicity...

G

 

[lambert]

I think the "made in Germany" is highly overrated today. For example I myself cannot tell any difference between between German lenses and those manufactured in Japan, if they are manufactured up to the quality rules from Germany. Good examples are Zeiss lenses manufactured in Japan.

Or take the Fuji X lenses, they have no German counterpart, but they are at least on the same IQ level as coming from Germany. And keep in mind that also all Hasselblad H lenses are manufactured by Fuji in Japan. Just some examples.

I have the feeling that maybe Fuji also produces the new Leica T lenses. And this would be actually very good. Plus while manufactured in Japan the lenses are maybe half the price than manufactured in Germany. So this can only be to the benefit of the end user, at least as long as quality control is consistent. I have no doubt it is because the samples of the 23 and the 18-55 I tested on the Leica T (both JPEG and DNG developed in LR5.4) were EXCELLENT!

It may be overrated but Leica use it to great marketing effect, continually pushing the "Made in Germany is better" hoo ha. In this instance, their T press release almost infers that the lenses are also made in Germany:

"The outcome was the creation of the Leica T-System, a camera with an exquisite finish ‘made in Germany’ that, together with a portfolio of precise, high-performance lenses..."

Leica T and lenses herald arrival of mirrorless T-system: Digital Photography Review

 

[bradhusick]

Okay, the Leica T is cheap.

Louis Vuitton just introduced a four piece set of carbon fiber luggage for the new BMW i8. The set can be yours for only $28,000.

They're "cleverly calibrated down to the last millimeter."

 

[Guy Mancuso]

It may be overrated but Leica use it to great marketing effect, continually pushing the "Made in Germany is better" hoo ha. In this instance, their T press release almost infers that the lenses are also made in Germany:

"The outcome was the creation of the Leica T-System, a camera with an exquisite finish ‘made in Germany’ that, together with a portfolio of precise, high-performance lenses..."

Leica T and lenses herald arrival of mirrorless T-system: Digital Photography Review

This is exactly what I was referring too. Every product has got that Made In Germany sticker on its face. That's been the marketing for years but this thing with the most important parts it is not but the premium is still there. End of day the resale value will be less compared to products of the M and S. Not that it really matters but something folks need to understand though. I wish them luck with it. It's innovative in design

 

[barjohn]

Frankly, it concerned me mainly because of the high price. We haven't yet seen any measurements made on these lenses and unusual for Leica lenses no MTF charts are published as they are with the M lenses. We all know that some optics are better than others. We usually see this in the DXO optics measurements and lens ratings. I fully expect that better optics will cost more to make than inferior optics. Both can have corrections done in software up to a point. But even the least expensive lenses can have barrel distortion and various CA corrected in software; however, if the distortion to be corrected is significant we don't want to pay a high price. According to Sean Reid, any digital corrections require re-interpolating the image, at least in the area of correction and thus cannot put back what is lost or was never there. The question in my mind is how will these lenses compare to the new Sigma Art lenses that show outstanding performance and are relatively reasonably priced?

I think Leica's statements to the DPR reporter were at the very least deceptively misleading. I guess I don't like politics being played with my photo gear and arguing over what the meaning of is is.

 

[Paratom]

I see 2 important factors here:
a) user interface - The T goes a different route than many others here with a user interface with just few buttons, a large touch screen and a simple/plain approach. I guess it is a personal thing if this works well for someone or not. However I have to say that I allways felt most m43 mirrorless overloaded with buttons/functions and menues.
b) how good is the glass? (no matter where it is made). If it is really good, then this makes a difference compared to some other systems.

As we could see from the X1/2 and X-Vario same sensor supplier doesnt mean automaticaally same output.
In case of the X-Models the IQ is (IMO) better than that what I did get from my X-Pro1 and better than what I could achieve from the Nex 5n and Nex7 and from m43 - in regards to overall look and color-at least for my taste.

 

[Robert Campbell]

Can you explain what a camera for photographers is or means? What is the T missing? Does a camera need a zillion controls and buttons and an 800 page manual? Isn't being a photographer about what you see and how you capture the light?

Can a real real photographer create a winning image with a simple pinhole camera?

If there were one answer to what makes a good camera all cameras would be the same. However, we know that people are different and one tool doesn't fit all.

I like the T because it simplifies the camera back to the basic elements similar to the M's with the benefit of auto focus. But that I guess precludes me from being a real photographer.

Decades ago, I was at a Leica workshop and we were discussing who the users were, professional or amateur; the camera at the time was the R4. The instructor said they were for "photographers". Rather ducking the question, perhaps, and we didn't get any further with him; we were all amateurs.

What, I wonder, was the initial response to the first commercially available Leica in 1924? Was the idea of "miniature photography" seen as a step too far; perhaps even users of plate and half-plate cameras felt that a step down to medium format was too much. And now "full frame" is seen, by many, as the ideal sensor size.

Or the original Issigonnis Mini? It didn't do well for a year or so, until Princess Margaret was seen in one, and it became the accessory to be seen in thereafter. (Though compare the size of the modern reincarnation with the original.)

Leica does have a tradition of bling, with Luxus variants, gold plating and covers in exotic animal skin; personally, I think that's vulgar, but YMMV.

Perhaps some people like cameras covered in buttons; I found that I was always accidentally pushing one or two, and not understanding for a while what had gone wrong. And I don't want to have to carry a manual—or even a CD—around to workout something which should be trivially simple.

I like the idea of KISS, and I like the idea of the T; now, whether I need one or not is a different question. I doubt if it will make my photos any better, but it might well make it easier for me to take them.

And if Leica's target market is the design, marketing or similar professional who is comfortable with an iPad and wants a camera with similar functionality, but much better results, what exactly is wrong with that?

 

[Steve P.]

It has more to do with Leica's choice of sensor. The T deploys Sony's entry level sensor, as used in a $300 NEX.

Because the sensor is surrounded by an entry level camera in the NEX 3, does this mean that the sensor itself is somehow hobbled so that it cannot perform above entry level in a more sophisticated body? My understanding is that Sony sensors are generally held in high regard in digital imaging. Similarly, does the fact that the sensor has been out for a couple of years or so mean that it is inherently incapable of performing well with state of the art camera technology?

 

[ptomsu]

Decades ago, I was at a Leica workshop and we were discussing who the users were, professional or amateur; the camera at the time was the R4. The instructor said they were for "photographers". Rather ducking the question, perhaps, and we didn't get any further with him; we were all amateurs.

What, I wonder, was the initial response to the first commercially available Leica in 1924? Was the idea of "miniature photography" seen as a step too far; perhaps even users of plate and half-plate cameras felt that a step down to medium format was too much. And now "full frame" is seen, by many, as the ideal sensor size.

Or the original Issigonnis Mini? It didn't do well for a year or so, until Princess Margaret was seen in one, and it became the accessory to be seen in thereafter. (Though compare the size of the modern reincarnation with the original.)

Leica does have a tradition of bling, with Luxus variants, gold plating and covers in exotic animal skin; personally, I think that's vulgar, but YMMV.

Perhaps some people like cameras covered in buttons; I found that I was always accidentally pushing one or two, and not understanding for a while what had gone wrong. And I don't want to have to carry a manual—or even a CD—around to workout something which should be trivially simple.

I like the idea of KISS, and I like the idea of the T; now, whether I need one or not is a different question. I doubt if it will make my photos any better, but it might well make it easier for me to take them.

And if Leica's target market is the design, marketing or similar professional who is comfortable with an iPad and wants a camera with similar functionality, but much better results, what exactly is wrong with that?

If you calculate this - till today roughly some 500 Million iPhones were sold: if you can get a maybe 0.1% (1/10th percent) market share of all these users to buy a Leica T then this results in 500k Leica T sold. Add to this the other smart phone users who might be also attracted just by the UI and you can see this is a huge number! Even if you do he math differential and just aim for 1/100th market share of iPhone - it still results in a total market share of 50k+ Leica T potentially sold.

Amazing .... I would have decided similar to develop such a camera concept if I had worked for Leica and be responsible for introducing a new leading model.

Even if these calculations are totally wrong the potential sales numbers for the Leica T are in the 10k area. Which is a lot for a small company like Leica and I doubt in that case they even would be nearly able to fulfill the demand.

 

[ptomsu]

I see 2 important factors here:
a) user interface - The T goes a different route than many others here with a user interface with just few buttons, a large touch screen and a simple/plain approach. I guess it is a personal thing if this works well for someone or not. However I have to say that I allways felt most m43 mirrorless overloaded with buttons/functions and menues.
b) how good is the glass? (no matter where it is made). If it is really good, then this makes a difference compared to some other systems.

As we could see from the X1/2 and X-Vario same sensor supplier doesnt mean automaticaally same output.
In case of the X-Models the IQ is (IMO) better than that what I did get from my X-Pro1 and better than what I could achieve from the Nex 5n and Nex7 and from m43 - in regards to overall look and color-at least for my taste.

I completely agree. while the Fuji files (especially RAW) are very good, from what I tried and tested with the Leica T the files are superior. Especially when it comes to OOC DNG, which results in an image in LR5.4 which almost needs NO corrections. Which one definitely cannot say from either Fuji and/or Olympus m43 RAW output - in NO post processing SW. And I do not even want to compare to Sony NEX, which I never liked from the very beginning. I think that it is at least as important to handle a sensor the right way via in camera processing in order to achieve top results. No doubt for me that the Leica T will top most of the Sony APSC cameras.

And of course this is even improved by optimal lenses, where I have no doubt that Leica is doing their job right (at least from what I tested).

So if this all holds true (and I have no slightest doubts), then this makes the Leica T the definite object of lust for many I think - including myself.

 

[Godfrey]

Because the sensor is surrounded by an entry level camera in the NEX 3, does this mean that the sensor itself is somehow hobbled so that it cannot perform above entry level in a more sophisticated body? My understanding is that Sony sensors are generally held in high regard in digital imaging. Similarly, does the fact that the sensor has been out for a couple of years or so mean that it is inherently incapable of performing well with state of the art camera technology?

Exactly. The APS-C 16Mpixel Sony sensor is excellent quality, and is the basis of several well-regarded cameras (Pentax K5, NEX 3/5n/6, Leica X2/X Vario, amongst others). If I were designing a camera system today and I was not a chip maker, it's one of the top-notch sensors that would be on my short list to consider.

There's so much more to consider in a camera than just what sensor it is using. Unless the point of the new camera is to ballyhoo a brand new sensor design, you're better off picking something known to work, known to be proven, and reducing risk.

G

 

[jonoslack]

It has more to do with Leica's choice of sensor. The T deploys Sony's entry level sensor, as used in a $300 NEX. And it doesn't even incorporate the sensor cleaning smarts.

Yes, indeed, but not quite the same, as it has no AA sensor . . . worth mentioning (as I just realise Godfrey has too ) also that this sensor was also used in:
Ricoh GR
Nikon D7000
Pentax K5 IIs
and other excellent cameras.

All depends how you put it doesn't it?

It's a fine sensor. (although there are more recent 24mp models - which might or might not be an advantage).

 

[Terry]

It's a fine sensor. (although there are more recent 24mp models - which might or might not be an advantage).

If the T was 24MP is might think twice about ordering it. While storage is cheap I don't want files that big for a number reasons including offloading files to an iPad when traveling and sending files to friends.

Also as noted in a lot of places shooting discipline goes up etc.

 

[cam]

Interesting thing about beauty...

I've been shooting with my MM here on holiday, alongside one of my fixed 35mm (why the **** doesn't anyone do a 50mm?) -- either the X100 or the RX1 -- and, unanimously, people get all excited with the black and chrome Fuji. They ask if I shoot film. They want to play with it. They want to pose.

Now, I tend to then pass them the MM just because most have not seen a rangefinder and, well, it *is* unique… but it's the little Fuji with its retro looks and quiet shutter that opens up doors and allows me to shoot with my clunky MM.

I couldn't help thinking about the oohs and ahs the T would draw.

It is unique. It begs people to fondle it. And when people want to fondle it, they are much more likely not to mind you shooting them as long as you give them a play.

If only it had on offer a luscious 50mm Lux (preferably Nocti rather than Summi), I would so be there!

(even as I've come to realise I actually suck at auto-focus, lol)

 

[Terry]

Funny Cam the T doesn't feel small it it makes the M's look sort of large and clunky (no offense to M shooters it's all relative).

But yes a fixed 50mm camera or a 50 prime for T would make me very happy.

 

[Godfrey]

My M-Rokkor 40/2 or Nokton 40/1.4 would do fine as surrogate 50 on the T's APS-C format until such time as Leica provides an AF lens for the task.

It's just right really ... I appreciate AF much more for focusing the wide and ultra wide lenses, by the time I get to a normal I rarely need AF except for convenience.

G