An open letter to Leica (2015)...please share your own thoughts

[Godfrey]

I understand your love for 240 knows no bounds, it's perfect!!! LOL...
{snip the rest of the horsepucky}

Oh, puh-leeze! Don't get snarky and personal like a small-minded twit would. It's a camera, to me, a very good one that IMO fully realizes the M rangefinder in a digital camera. The M8 and M9 series were good, but not complete and lacked a number of the things I expect from an M camera based on the film experience as well as what's possible with digital. The typ 240/246 series achieves them. It's the first of the line worth treating as a long term purchase, for me.

(BTW, I'm just as enthused about the excellent Olympus E-M1 body which I've been using since 2013, and the outstanding Nikon F6 which I've had for a couple of weeks now. Both are top notch camera designs, obviously in it for the long haul just like the typ 240/246 series Ms.)

From this style of armchair engineering perspective, yes, it's close. Don't you think Leica would love it if the M typ 240 was the size of the M3? I'm sure they would. And the M8/M9/M240 cameras, although they LOOK similar to the M3/etc, were fundamentally all designed from scratch. Which is why they are expensive, aside from the low-volume manufacturing and specialized components and large percentage of hand work in assembly involved. Not to mention the fundamental quality of the components, which, if you strip an A7 vs an M9 or M typ 240, becomes immediately apparent—the A7 uses a lot of very cheap components and has some serious shortcomings in structural rigidity, etc.

From here, I would like to see Leica improve upon the M without letting go of what it has achieved. That means, yes, retaining the superb optical rangefinder and full compatibility and operation of all the lenses, adding yet more improved performance and responsiveness, integrating the EVF option better, and, of course, slimming the camera where possible. Lighter weight without losing structural integrity or feel, more buffer, more efficient and economical power management ... all of these things, and more, are welcome. Autofocus ... eh, not important to me, but if it could be construed without otherwise compromising the M camera I have no problem with it.

I had and used the Sony A7 for a year and some. I was reluctant to buy it in the first place due to my past experience with Sony cameras, but I went in open-mindedly and objectively. I found it a good sensor and a decent viewfinder wrapped in a clunky camera. The native lenses didn't thrill me at all. It had just barely enough customizability that I could configure it to use with my R lenses passably, and it produced very good files. But its basic clunkiness and lack of sophistication made using it, relying upon it, sub-optimal. I've sold it now ... the X, the M-P, the E-M1 ... they all produce better results for me and are much more of a pleasure to use.

G

 

[aDam007]

This argument about software corrections for lenses is beyond hilarious to the point of just being sad. Is it really getting in the way of your photography??? Lee Friedlander made photos for years with lenses that even Voigtlander has outpaced by modern standards, with emulsions and developers that would make most of your throw up your hand in desperation. If they can make the flange distance less by a software correction and bring costs/size down, they should do it! If that's really preventing you from making quality photos then you have bigger problems than Leica can solve. The cats outta the bag and its not going back to whatever idea you have in your head of the good old days. I understand that it used to be fun to disparage other non-Leica brands by saying their lenses weren't up to Red Dot standards because of software, but now that you know Leica is playing this game too, maybe you have other questions to ask yourself? Like...are these prices REALLY worth it? Nobody has the answer to that but you.

For the ergonomics, the price of the body is worth it. For the lenses, yes I'm willing to pay a premium because I love the way some of the lenses render. And for certain things, quality is important to me.

Maybe it's my own fault. I get sucked into buying Sony every time a new lens comes out, I buy the latest body, I buy the latest lens.. I use it, I'm disappointed with the results (I think the reviewers are all crazy). I sell it.
Like you, it's probably because I want something that's not available in the market (I'm also waiting for Leica to catch up).. I don't mind paying a premium for it, but it doesn't exist (reasonably priced would be a plus though).
Would I like to be able to buy cheap, light, good bodies? YEP.
Can I? Nope, because Sony doesn't offer me what I want. Realistically, nobody does (though Leica comes close at a premium price point).

As for Sony sensors, I just don't like the colors, the body ergonomics, the bad AF. The fact that something new comes out every few months, but with no real improvements in the areas that matter.. Who is Sony listening to exactly?

I'd much prefer Sony focus on quality over turning out new things constantly. But I guess I'm the minority.

 

[aDam007]

I must have touched a nerve or two here.
So I shall call a time out for myself.

Yah no worries. I think corporate photography just bores me to the point where I fixate on things (like color rendering of sensors)..

And believe me when I say this.. I wish the Leica Q was made with a Sony sensor. Because I love the colors from the camera, and thus one of two things would be evident to me:

1) I am bias towards Leica (an elitist let's say)

or

2) Sony is capable of making a sensor with colors/tones/grain structure I like.

 

[iiiNelson]

Yah no worries. I think corporate photography just bores me to the point where I fixate on things (like color rendering of sensors)..

And believe me when I say this.. I wish the Leica Q was made with a Sony sensor. Because I love the colors from the camera, and thus one of two things would be evident to me:

1) I am bias towards Leica (an elitist let's say)

or

2) Sony is capable of making a sensor with colors/tones/grain structure I like.

Do you like the color in the X cameras? They all use Sony sensors made to Leica specification. Same can be said for most Nikon DSLR sensors. Same can be said for most cellphone sensors.

 

[aDam007]

Do you like the color in the X cameras? They all use Sony sensors made to Leica specification. Same can be said for most Nikon DSLR sensors. Same can be said for most cellphone sensors.

Oh geeze.. Ok, without starting another fight.. No.
I don't like the X cameras. I haven't liked Nikon since the D700 (one of the best sensors ever). And the only time I use my phone is when I'm taking photos of a business card, receipt, or etc.

That's all I'm gonna say

Though I'm curious about something randomly (no real reason), if anyone knows.. Does the D750 share the same sensor as the A99 or A7 or etc?

 

[Speedgraphic]

As for Sony sensors, I just don't like the colors, ...

And believe me when I say this.. I wish the Leica Q was made with a Sony sensor. Because I love the colors from the camera, and thus one of two things would be evident to me:

2) Sony is capable of making a sensor with colors/tones/grain structure I like.

Here's the thing, Sony makes a sensor, but so much goes into the profiling of that sensor beyond the original make. Pentax colors don't look like Nikon colors and Nikon colors don't look like Sony colors but they all use Sony sensors. My D750 has a tweaked version of the same chip that's in my A7, but the output is very different. Pixel level noise is one thing, not sure I have any answers as to that, but colors and tone are all about profiling. That's why my editor can make Nikon files look just like Canon files and vice versa. The Q is obviously outputting some truly sumptuous files, that's what I've been seeing in reviews anyways. The reason for this is because they had a conversation with the provider about what they wanted, and probably even more importantly hired some great people in house to profile the thing with a signature look that Leica deems part of their identity. Even if it was the same sensor as a theoretical Sony RX2, the output would be sufficiently different as to make you think one has Provia and the other has Ektachrome.

 

[iiiNelson]

Oh geeze.. Ok, without starting another fight.. No.
I don't like the X cameras. I haven't liked Nikon since the D700 (one of the best sensors ever). And the only time I use my phone is when I'm taking photos of a business card, receipt, or etc.

That's all I'm gonna say

Though I'm curious about something randomly (no real reason), if anyone knows.. Does the D750 share the same sensor as the A99 or A7 or etc?

I believe it shares a sensor with the A7II. Sony made the D700 sensor as well so there you go. No argument here - your opinion is your opinion. It's valid within reason to where the facts say otherwise.

 

[aDam007]

Here's the thing, Sony makes a sensor, but so much goes into the profiling of that sensor beyond the original make. Pentax colors don't look like Nikon colors and Nikon colors don't look like Sony colors but they all use Sony sensors. My D750 has a tweaked version of the same chip that's in my A7, but the output is very different. Pixel level noise is one thing, not sure I have any answers as to that, but colors and tone are all about profiling. That's why my editor can make Nikon files look just like Canon files and vice versa. The Q is obviously outputting some truly sumptuous files, that's what I've been seeing in reviews anyways. The reason for this is because they had a conversation with the provider about what they wanted, and probably even more importantly hired some great people in house to profile the thing with a signature look that Leica deems part of their identity. Even if it was the same sensor as a theoretical Sony RX2, the output would be sufficiently different as to make you think one has Provia and the other has Ektachrome.

I agree with this. I've purchased profiling software on two occasions. One cheaper and one more expensive then I'd like to admit. I'll say this, results vary more in prints then on screen.

I have also used almost every camera out there. Weird thing is, you can get close, even by eye. But how much effort are you going to put into it before you toss your hands up in the air and just buy the other camera that gets you closer out of the gate?

And that's only color from the sensor. Then you have chip rendering, grain structure, lens color, lens rendering.
And to top it all off crappy web compression (which I still don't have a grasp on, as nothing looks right on the internet).

And BTW thanks. You just inadvertently answered my D750 question. Awesome timing!

 

[aDam007]

I believe it shares a sensor with the A7II. Sony made the D700 sensor as well so there you go. No argument here - your opinion is your opinion. It's valid within reason to where the facts say otherwise.

Sony made the D700 sensor? I was under the impression that Nikon dropped Sony for their D3 then D700 then D3s (all the same sensor). And that Nikon went with an unknown source since it was their flagship camera. To obviously return with tail between legs for other sensors (D4/D800 and beyond).

One point for Sony if I'm wrong. But I would be surprised to find official documentation stating that I am. Please share if you have it.


FYI I only entered Sony professionally at the A99 camera time, so anything before could have been fantastic. And I do vaguely recall using a friends (I think) A900 (one of the reasons I decided to give Sony a shot, ZA lenses being the other).


The A7s has the best Sony sensor. And if it weren't for body ergonomic issues, and slow (hunting) AF, I probably wouldn't have sold mine so quickly.

(EDIT: I still dislike Sony sensors)

 

[iiiNelson]

Sony made the D700 sensor? I was under the impression that Nikon dropped Sony for their D3 then D700 then D3s (all the same sensor). And that Nikon went with an unknown source since it was their flagship camera. To obviously return with tail between legs for other sensors (D4/D800 and beyond).

One point for Sony if I'm wrong. But I would be surprised to find official documentation stating that I am. Please share if you have it.


FYI I only entered Sony professionally at the A99 camera time, so anything before could have been fantastic. And I do vaguely recall using a friends (I think) A900 (one of the reasons I decided to give Sony a shot, ZA lenses being the other).


The A7s has the best Sony sensor. And if it weren't for body ergonomic issues, and slow (hunting) AF, I probably wouldn't have sold mine so quickly.

(EDIT: I still dislike Sony sensors)

I don't have any documentation nor do I have the energy to try to dig any up but Google is your friend. The A900 and the D3X shared the same 24 megapixel sensor tuned differently.

 

[aDam007]

I don't have any documentation nor do I have the energy to try to dig any up but Google is your friend. The A900 and the D3X shared the same 24 megapixel sensor tuned differently.

Ummmm..... I said the D700 sensor was one of the best. The D700 sensor is the same in the D3 and D3s (tuned).. Which is a 12mp sensor. I never mentioned the D3x, and really wouldn't know because I skipped buying it.

 

[Lars]

Designing/developing and manufacturing a sensor are two separate things. It's not unusual for a small tech company to design/develop a chip and then outsource manufacturing. Those chip fabrication lines are ridiculously large investments.

So it's certainly possible for Nikon to design/develop a sensor and then outsource the manufacturing to Sony. Whether that actually happened with the D700 sensor I have no idea.

 

[Speedgraphic]

Designing/developing and manufacturing a sensor are two separate things. It's not unusual for a small tech company to design/develop a chip and then outsource manufacturing. Those chip fabrication lines are ridiculously large investments.

So it's certainly possible for Nikon to design/develop a sensor and then outsource the manufacturing to Sony. Whether that actually happened with the D700 sensor I have no idea.

This is probably correct. On a related note, the manufacturers of the new Logmar Super 8 film camera are using the same European factory as Phase one and Hasselblad. What does this tell you about who-makes-what?

 

[aDam007]

This is probably correct. On a related note, the manufacturers of the new Logmar Super 8 film camera are using the same European factory as Phase one and Hasselblad. What does this tell you about who-makes-what?

This camera looks the part.. Geez.

 

[Vivek]

Ummmm..... I said the D700 sensor was one of the best. The D700 sensor is the same in the D3 and D3s (tuned).. Which is a 12mp sensor. I never mentioned the D3x, and really wouldn't know because I skipped buying it.

AFAIK (very limited knowledge often bordering on speculation), the D2H and D2Hs sensors used Nikon' s very own and well publicized, LBCAST sensors, were designed by Nikon. After that everything was left fuzzy although it is well known that the D70 sensor came from Sony. It has always been Sony supplying sensors to Nikon since then. chip works identifies the sensors, although I am not sure every sensor in a Nikon cam is split open and the results published in the public domain.

 

[iiiNelson]

AFAIK (very limited knowledge often bordering on speculation), the D2H and D2Hs sensors used Nikon' s very own and well publicized, LBCAST sensors, were designed by Nikon. After that everything was left fuzzy although it is well known that the D70 sensor came from Sony. It has always been Sony supplying sensors to Nikon since then. chip works identifies the sensors, although I am not sure every sensor in a Nikon cam is split open and the results published in the public domain.

The Nikon D5XXX sensors are manufactured by Toshiba I believe... At least one of them was anyway. Most everything else is Sony AFAIK.

 

[Vivek]

Correct. The D5XXX with the 24MP variety. Copper circuit wiring to the boot!

 

[rich_]

The DF Sensor is a Nikon made D4 Sensor (i think) rather than Sony. I enjoy how that records an image.

I don't believe that Leica will ever hold their own long term against the Japanese/Korean companies if they churn out tech filled EVF/AF bodies/lenses. They don't have the R&D, budgets or appetite to stand toe to toe with them.
It's great Yr1, but then Sony bring out 3 other cameras. One then has to start defending the purchase price on intangibles rather than best of breed facts.
The lenses also lose the sense of longevity with new mounts, af and electronics, which is the selling point (for me) of the M- My lux is 20+ years old.

I don't wish bad on them or any other brand. I'm sure the effect of launching the AF and fixed lens models will benefit Leica, keeping people interested in the brand and to attract new users to upsell into the other more lucrative product sets.

 

[aDam007]

The DF Sensor is a Nikon made D4 Sensor (i think) rather than Sony. I enjoy how that records an image.

I don't believe that Leica will ever hold their own long term against the Japanese/Korean companies if they churn out tech filled EVF/AF bodies/lenses. They don't have the R&D, budgets or appetite to stand toe to toe with them.
It's great Yr1, but then Sony bring out 3 other cameras. One then has to start defending the purchase price on intangibles rather than best of breed facts.
The lenses also lose the sense of longevity with new mounts, af and electronics, which is the selling point (for me) of the M- My lux is 20+ years old.

I don't wish bad on them or any other brand. I'm sure the effect of launching the AF and fixed lens models will benefit Leica, keeping people interested in the brand and to attract new users to upsell into the other more lucrative product sets.

I guess with the A7rII we'll see if Sony has bested the Leica Q in EVF/LCD/AF/overall speed.. And maybe Sony's new sensor tech might actually be good?

Though I bet the ergonomics, and confusing/unnecessary menu system will still be around.

A few weeks time till we know


EDIT: Oh, and yea the D700 sensor (same in the D3 and D3s) was NOT made by Sony, according to Nikon's chief engineer. So HiredArm I stand firm with my statement that I've yet to use a Sony sensor I like (though the A7s was better then the other sensors).

 

[Paratom]

I am not a fan of skin color I get from Sony cameras.
Also even though they handle fine I find the buttons and menues quite confusing. I cant explane why but even though the A7II is a fine camera I dont enjoy it very much using it.
I think Leica strength are very good colors, and a certain simplicity of the user interface, plus a quality feel of the body. Last not least lens quality.