NEW Leica S-E for $6000

[algrove]

An older CCD is not a good deal to me and the 645Z can be had in the US for around $7k with a 2 year warranty. I prefer having new technology when the choice is offered.

Have any of you read MR's Lula September 2014 review of the 645Z? After a read it just might slow you down. Also remember the Leica lenses will set you back a lot!

 

[RVB]

I'm thinking the same thing. The 007 was a pretty good idea a year ago, before the 645Z came out, but thanks to exchange rates you can now get a Z from Japan for about the same amount as this S-E. You won't get to use S lenses, but a full Pentax kit with several lenses can be had for the same as the S with 70mm.

I love the ergonomics and refined operation of the S, but the tech is kinda old, which wouldn't have been a big minus if weren't so expensive.

The lense tech isnt old and that matters most as bodies come and go,buying into this system now and accessing the great glass allows you to move onto the 007 when the prices fall as they surely will.

Rob

 

[tjv]

While this is true, isn't it also accurate to say that for just as many people the body technology and sensor – in combination with the lenses – is what attracts people to any given system? The S lenses I've tested were / are amazing, but I'd bet that very few people will be willing to spend $25K plus cost of lenses on an 007 body knowing what the competition is bringing to the table. And what about the current S owners? How many can honestly say that they will spend $25K to upgrade to CMOS at the same pixel count, especially considering the old model is now selling for $6K? I'm not saying the 007 will be any worse that the competition performance wise – time will tell on that – but I think this is Leica's problem; it's looking like they'll lose the battle on both fronts, both in retaining current customers looking to upgrade, and new customers seeking the best performance.

This is just my two cents...

 

[Pradeep]

While this is true, isn't it also accurate to say that for just as many people the body technology and sensor – in combination with the lenses – is what attracts people to any given system? The S lenses I've tested were / are amazing, but I'd bet that very few people will be willing to spend $25K plus cost of lenses on an 007 body knowing what the competition is bringing to the table. And what about the current S owners? How many can honestly say that they will spend $25K to upgrade to CMOS at the same pixel count, especially considering the old model is now selling for $6K? I'm not saying the 007 will be any worse that the competition performance wise – time will tell on that – but I think this is Leica's problem; it's looking like they'll lose the battle on both fronts, both in retaining current customers looking to upgrade, and new customers seeking the best performance.

This is just my two cents...

Agree.

I would be quite upset if I just dropped $25K on a camera that was suddenly discounted by the manufacturer to less than 30% of its original price in anticipation of a 'newer' model.

However, the one thing going for Leica is that the lenses, while quite expensive to begin with, do seem to hold their price better in the used market. If you are able to get a good used copy to begin with, it is not difficult to be able to sell it a few years later for the same price. sometimes, for really good glass, the price may even go up!

 

[Landscapelover]

This thread did not start with buying Leica vs Pentax 645Z etc. It is a cup of tea. You like it or not. Lots of people heard about the price of the new Leica and hate it right away without exploring further.

I like my Pentax 645Z but Leica S system is something very special. The body is the best design in my hand and the lenses are the best. I am not a Leica-ian. I've had other cameras too.

I've had both Pentax and Leica lenses and they are significantly different. Look at Matt (mjr)'s pictures and you'll see how special the lenses are. If you like Pentax it's good for you. It has CMOS, best technology, cheap lenses except the latest ones, but you can't use Leica, HCD/HC and Contax lenses (and maintain a great AF). I always believe lenses are the most important factor for IQ. The 2nd is CMOS although CCD still can make decent pictures in hands of good photographers.

Lenses are not as expensive in a 2nd-handed market at all. You can buy the 70mm lens for ~ $2, 000, 120mm ~ $ 3000 etc. on Ebay now. The H adapter ~ $1, 400 and you can use it with a whole set of HC/HCD lenses. Believe it or not, the HC/HCD lenses are more reliable on Leica than on the Hasselblad especially 35-90mm. It's never show an error massages. The AF is as fast. You can also use Contax lenses on it with a C adapter and remain all functions.

The canon 11-24mm costs $2, 999, Pentax 28-45 costs $ 4100-4900, Phase One SK 35mm costs $6500+. Lots of people misunderstand about the cost of Leica lenses. Look for a 2nd hand market and you'll be surprised. In addition, HCD/HC and Contax lenses have attractive prices.

I don't want to start buying Leica or something else forum. If you're interested in Leica S, this is a great entry point to be able to use Leica, HC/HCD and Contax lenses. If you're not interested in, move on to other forums.

It's too late now. The camera is out of stock.

I am out of this thread now. It's not fun any more.

 

[KeithL]

While this is true, isn't it also accurate to say that for just as many people the body technology and sensor – in combination with the lenses – is what attracts people to any given system? The S lenses I've tested were / are amazing, but I'd bet that very few people will be willing to spend $25K plus cost of lenses on an 007 body knowing what the competition is bringing to the table. And what about the current S owners? How many can honestly say that they will spend $25K to upgrade to CMOS at the same pixel count, especially considering the old model is now selling for $6K? I'm not saying the 007 will be any worse that the competition performance wise – time will tell on that – but I think this is Leica's problem; it's looking like they'll lose the battle on both fronts, both in retaining current customers looking to upgrade, and new customers seeking the best performance.

This is just my two cents...

I would say that this is an excellent assessment.

 

[mjr]

There is no right or wrong answer to any camera or system, it doesn't matter to me what anyone else uses as long as it brings them pleasure and they like the result, who cares?

I have used the Z and have run workshops with people using the Z, it does nothing for me at all but that's my personal preference, it's too big, the 2 I saw didn't work in the cold temperatures we worked in and I can honestly say that output wise, the S lost nothing against the Z in how I work. I would love the Z to blow the S out of the water because it would save me some cash but it doesn't and the S has been the cheapest camera I have bought purely because I have made more money with it than any other camera I have used, it has paid for itself many times over but like I said, it's only my opinion and it only has to work for me.

The S lenses can be bought considerably cheaper than list if prepared to look around, I also bought my first 006 body as an ex dealer demo model that looked unused for a huge amount less than advertised, add on a contax adapter and the results are amazing if you want cheaper lenses than leica own. As Pramote suggests, the options for using H, V, P67, all superb on the S if you want legacy glass.

I'm not suggesting anyone buys anything, in fact I'd rather people didn't buy the S because I'd rather be on the other side of what's popular! The Z is a great thing but makes no sense for me, if it does for others then more power to you, now go out and shoot with it!

The price for the SE is amazing, if I can I will buy another body as backup, if the 007 comes out and gives the same quality but adding extra low light capability then I will buy it because it will make me money, it's a business expense written off over 3 years and if I can't make enough to pay for it then I am in much bigger trouble than worrying about resale value.

My advice to anyone is buy what works for you and enjoy it, go for the latest tech if you want, go for what works best regardless of image/age/technology if that's what works for you and ultimately, have enough self confidence to produce the best you can with what you've got rather than spending your time questioning the choices others make when really, it means nothing.

Oh and have a nice day!

Mat

Just as an addition, I don't personally understand the pixel count thing, I have sold huge prints 1.5m wide from single S files cropped to 2x1 and they are unbelievable, lots of people have a genuine need for big prints but I would suggest many more don't, I never measure a system against mp because there is so much great software out there, great printers and the output from almost any camera is good enough to print bigger than the vast majority of normal people have space for in the houses and offices. Never once has a customer said to me, nice pic but not buying it because you used old technology to shoot it, if it had been shot with cmos or shot at 50mp rather than 37, I'd have bought it.

 

[Pradeep]

Mat, thank you for a very well written post.

I agree with you, a camera/lens combo is like anything else one chooses to buy, the first analogy that comes to mind is a motor car. You can buy one that costs $20K or one that costs $100K, both do an admirable job of getting you from A to B. Anybody buying either car would be happy. Who am I to say the $100K car does NOT provide five times the value? It may not for me, but for the guy with the money it is a no-brainer.

Taking it further, as far as performance goes, both cars will be fast enough on our typical city streets or highways, unless you drive on the Autobahn. Which is to say that the humble entry level $500 DSLR with a kit lens will also give you the same print quality as the $40K Leica or Phase system, even when printed fairly large.

So who needs a Leica? Those who can afford it of course! Any other argument is simply self-justification - of which I am as guilty as anybody else

 

[tjv]

Just to be clear, seeing as one or two of you seem to have taken exception to what I've said, I'm not suggesting at all that the S2, 006 or 007 are not great cameras – I have many test files that I shot myself to prove the S system is great. I did state that that S-E is an amazing deal and if offered several months ago I might well have jumped on it instead of a Credo 60. Although I didn't state it, I have always had absolutely zero interest in buying a Pentax Z and after testing both CMOS digital backs and CCD digital backs and choosing a CCD back, I've got less than zero interest in debating which is better technology. It's just a matter of personal wants and needs.

What I am saying is that the 007 is very late to the game and in todays market, relative to all competition, it will be a hard sell for Leica at that price. For those that love and must have the S ergonomics, Leica lenses and and lens accessories in combination with a new CMOS sensor, I'm sure it'll be a happy marriage, especially if one is already in the system. In this case it should be $25K well spent.

What Leica have done here though – if it is actually a Leica promotion and not specific to just one dealer selling off excess inventory – is essentially killed the second hand market and made it a lot more difficult for current S owners to trade up without taking a massive hit in the pocket. This kind of discount is unheard off, save for the recent deep discounts on the Hasselblad Stella. They've certainly never done such crazy deals with any of the digital M models, and I wonder what this will do to effect consumer confidence.

 

[thedigitalbean]

I'm sure there are a set of photographers who will be put off buying Leica new with the cratering the used market is taking (and I am one of those people, I won't be buying any Leica product new in the future), but I suspect Leica may be going after the kind of professional photographer that will structure this is a periodic cost of doing business spread out over time and perhaps they will take care of that clientele with compelling upgrade incentives when the 007 drops.

I don't understand why didn't do this a couple of years ago (discount the body and get people into the system and make a killing on the lenses) since the primary reason to use the S system are the superb lenses.

The 007 is tremendously late to the game and to me, someone with an S system and a bunch of lenses, the $25k price tag is too much to swallow, so much so that I ended up getting a 645Z and slew of lenses for the times I need a CMOS sensor (long exposure, live view and high ISO). Frankly, I'd bail on the Leica S at this time if the used prices hadn't tanked so much that it doesn't seem worth it.

Just to be clear, seeing as one or two of you seem to have taken exception to what I've said, I'm not suggesting at all that the S2, 006 or 007 are not great cameras – I have many test files that I shot myself to prove the S system is great. I did state that that S-E is an amazing deal and if offered several months ago I might well have jumped on it instead of a Credo 60. Although I didn't state it, I have always had absolutely zero interest in buying a Pentax Z and after testing both CMOS digital backs and CCD digital backs and choosing a CCD back, I've got less than zero interest in debating which is better technology. It's just a matter of personal wants and needs.

What I am saying is that the 007 is very late to the game and in todays market, relative to all competition, it will be a hard sell for Leica at that price. For those that love and must have the S ergonomics, Leica lenses and and lens accessories in combination with a new CMOS sensor, I'm sure it'll be a happy marriage, especially if one is already in the system. In this case it should be $25K well spent.

What Leica have done here though – if it is actually a Leica promotion and not specific to just one dealer selling off excess inventory – is essentially killed the second hand market and made it a lot more difficult for current S owners to trade up without taking a massive hit in the pocket. This kind of discount is unheard off, save for the recent deep discounts on the Hasselblad Stella. They've certainly never done such crazy deals with any of the digital M models, and I wonder what this will do to effect consumer confidence.

 

[iiiNelson]

I first saw this late last month. Got me wondering if the competition was affecting sales or if there was just a huge stock of S cameras at dealers? If this were offered a year or two ago I'd be all over this deal as I really like the dual shutters and ability to adapter a few different types of lenses to the S system. I'm sort of holding off on MF for now though as tempting as this deal is.

 

[algrove]

Dealrs have told me that S sales have basically stagnated for many months right now.

 

[iiiNelson]

Dealrs have told me that S sales have basically stagnated for many months right now.

I actually don't doubt that they have with many world economies suffering and rapidly evolving 35mm technology that are often proving to be "good enough" in most situations. Luxury items are usually the things that "go" first.

 

[mjr]

I often hear people call these luxury items, it seems to be those that haven't used it or can't justify it themselves that resort to the name, it's like an odd reverse snobbery, anti equipment that doesn't make financial sense to them, seriously, it's just kit! I find it really strange when people find a solution that fits their own individual requirements and rather than be content to get on with it, seem to not be happy unless everyone knows that they have made the best choice and confirms with them that they are indeed brilliant for choosing whatever they've bought, it's madness!

The S is a seriously flexible piece of equipment that suits my photography better than any other camera I have tried, I have zero interest in luxury, I just want performance. It doesn't mater to me who makes the S, I would buy the exact same thing no matter what badge was on it, it's a tool for producing photographs and making money. There will always be people who think they are making a statement with what they buy, at all levels of price point but it's certainly not all of us. If it doesn't suit you then ignore it, if it does than you can get it a really good price, everyones a winner!

On stagnating sales, of course, they have announced a new body, people will wait for it. How many A7r's are flying out the door with the A7r2 now announced? Is it big news that their sales have stagnated? Probably not.

Mat

 

[miska]

Does anybody know if these "deals" have propagated to Europe ? On my Leica dealer's page, a used S2 still goes for 6500 Euros, and a new S-E is 15000 Euros. Of course you can "talk" a bit, but for the moment I haven't see this level of prices in Europe :-(

 

[Pradeep]

I often hear people call these luxury items, it seems to be those that haven't used it or can't justify it themselves that resort to the name, it's like an odd reverse snobbery, anti equipment that doesn't make financial sense to them, seriously, it's just kit! I find it really strange when people find a solution that fits their own individual requirements and rather than be content to get on with it, seem to not be happy unless everyone knows that they have made the best choice and confirms with them that they are indeed brilliant for choosing whatever they've bought, it's madness!

The S is a seriously flexible piece of equipment that suits my photography better than any other camera I have tried, I have zero interest in luxury, I just want performance. It doesn't mater to me who makes the S, I would buy the exact same thing no matter what badge was on it, it's a tool for producing photographs and making money. There will always be people who think they are making a statement with what they buy, at all levels of price point but it's certainly not all of us. If it doesn't suit you then ignore it, if it does than you can get it a really good price, everyones a winner!

On stagnating sales, of course, they have announced a new body, people will wait for it. How many A7r's are flying out the door with the A7r2 now announced? Is it big news that their sales have stagnated? Probably not.

Mat

Mat, this is an old debate. How much is anything worth? Whether it is a painting or a house or a car or a camera, the answer is the same - whatever somebody is willing to pay for it.

The 'value for money' question is also relative. Your value lies in the images you can create with the camera, which as you said so rightly, is in the end just a tool to help you get there. Towards that goal, the money becomes less relevant because within the range, it is something you can afford to spend.

I am not being facetious and absolutely do not mean to argue with you at all, but just for debate, would you pay $60K for the same Leica S? At what point does the cost become too prohibitive? I am addressing this to all of us here, not just you.

There are many on this forum who would happily pay $25K for a good camera, heck even $40K. But what if it costs $100K or $150K? There is always the law of diminishing returns which determines what each or any of us is willing to pay for anything we purchase.

Simply from that perspective, I suspect, the debate about 'luxury' goods and higher end cameras comes up time and again.

When funds are limited, people buy a cheaper product and congratulate themselves on being wise and frugal, berating the rich fool who is easily parted with his money. When you are better off, you buy an expensive version of the same product and look down upon those who have to make do with a lesser model. You then justify the quality of that product to be 'worth the money' for you.

I am not pointing fingers at you or anybody here, heck, I am as guilty as anyone else of having done both.

In the end, as I've said earlier in this thread, it is all about how much money you have.

Pradeep

 

[stephengilbert]

"When funds are limited, people buy a cheaper product and congratulate themselves on being wise and frugal, berating the rich fool who is easily parted with his money. When you are better off, you buy an expensive version of the same product and look down upon those who have to make do with a lesser model. You then justify the quality of that product to be 'worth the money' for you."

Of course there's also the possibility of congratulating yourself or looking down on others without doing it on the internet.

 

[mjr]

Pradeep

You aren't being facetious and definitely not arguing with me, it would be pointless on a discussion of a subject that is entirely down to the individuals viewpoint!

I don't think about how much I personally would pay for things, only what I have to pay, I try lots of cameras fell completely for the way the S handles and the files it produces then worked very hard to get to a point where I could afford it, I honestly, hand on heart, couldn't care any less than I do about how people view me for my choice or how people come to their own conclusions for buying what they buy, it means nothing, less than nothing to me, it shouldn't matter to anyone! Honestly, do you feel that your photography is affected by the camera that someone else uses? Of course not, apart from maybe if they produce inspirational work.

Your final statement doesn't sit with me at all to be honest, in the end it's all about how much money you have, in my case not even slightly, I made huge sacrifices to get what I wanted and now i have it I can happily afford to pay for the latest phase or whatever but it doesn't interest me, if you feel your photography is down to how much you spend on a camera then I feel you and I look at things in a very different way, nothing wrong with that of course.

The reason I posted above is because there are so many people who seem to like to force their opinions on others, mock those who make different choices and almost berate people who don't agree with their own choices, I find it ridiculous and praise the huge amount of choice we have at all price ranges. I am not pro leica, pro medium format, I am pro finding the thing that fits with you whatever it may be and definitely anti the complete nonsense that is so often a major part of internet forums. Obviously my choice to get involved as I have here!

Anyway, I have expelled more than enough energy on this with very little chance of gaining knowledge or understanding or even seeing something inspirational so I shall bid you a good night!

Mat

 

[Pradeep]

Pradeep

You aren't being facetious and definitely not arguing with me, it would be pointless on a discussion of a subject that is entirely down to the individuals viewpoint!

I don't think about how much I personally would pay for things, only what I have to pay, I try lots of cameras fell completely for the way the S handles and the files it produces then worked very hard to get to a point where I could afford it, I honestly, hand on heart, couldn't care any less than I do about how people view me for my choice or how people come to their own conclusions for buying what they buy, it means nothing, less than nothing to me, it shouldn't matter to anyone! Honestly, do you feel that your photography is affected by the camera that someone else uses? Of course not, apart from maybe if they produce inspirational work.

Your final statement doesn't sit with me at all to be honest, in the end it's all about how much money you have, in my case not even slightly, I made huge sacrifices to get what I wanted and now i have it I can happily afford to pay for the latest phase or whatever but it doesn't interest me, if you feel your photography is down to how much you spend on a camera then I feel you and I look at things in a very different way, nothing wrong with that of course.

The reason I posted above is because there are so many people who seem to like to force their opinions on others, mock those who make different choices and almost berate people who don't agree with their own choices, I find it ridiculous and praise the huge amount of choice we have at all price ranges. I am not pro leica, pro medium format, I am pro finding the thing that fits with you whatever it may be and definitely anti the complete nonsense that is so often a major part of internet forums. Obviously my choice to get involved as I have here!

Anyway, I have expelled more than enough energy on this with very little chance of gaining knowledge or understanding or even seeing something inspirational so I shall bid you a good night!

Mat

Mat, I never meant to belittle your efforts in any way, or those of anybody else.

Just FYI, I too have had a major struggle in life. I can laugh now, but in 1997, after having acquired two degrees and three diplomas and having spent 18 years of my life in various forms of 'postgraduate' training, I found myself without a job or money in the bank, two kids in high school and a mountain of debts. Cameras and photography though a lifelong passion were far from my mind. I worked extremely hard, over 60 hrs a week as I had for the previous 18 yrs since I graduated from college. It took many more years before I became solvent and gradually developed the means to be able to indulge in my passion again to my satisfaction.

My comments above were a reflection of my own life as I acknowledged earlier.

I will stand by them, yes it is all about how much money you have. I have seen wedding photographers with an entry level DSLR, making a living as best as they can. I've also seen pros with Phase one gear, again getting the most out of their equipment. You cannot buy what you don't have the means to buy, no matter how good the equipment may be.

You said it yourself, 'you made enormous sacrifices to get what you wanted and now you can afford to buy Phase or whatever.....' Which is exactly what I am saying, no different. Whether you are a pro or not, you buy the best you can afford to buy and are happy with it.

I was happy when I had a crappy pentax film camera, I am happy now when I have a great MF pentax rig. I was NOT happy when I had the Phase, not because it was expensive but because it was not worth the cost for ME. I would gladly pay the same amount again if there was a camera that was, to my mind worth it. My Canon 600 cost me $13K and it was worth every penny for me. I have bought other things in life that have cost me a lot more, and have been happy with my decision because to me the returns were good enough.

I am sure there are plenty of people who have the money, have bought the Phase (or whatever) and are very happy with their purchase, but again, it is all about how much money you can spend on a given object. That has never changed in human history and never will.

But, this discussion is indeed pointless as everybody has their own take on the subject. Apologies for ruffling any feathers.

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I never considered buying the A7r for a single second. Why? Because I knew it was old technology. The camera I had at that time and still have was the Sony Alpha 99, that had the same technology as the one in the A7. It had on sensor phase detecting AF, and Electronic First Shutter Curtain (EFCS). So I felt the A7r was backwards, not having the same features. So it was a no buy for me. Later it was found that the A7r had dismal AF performance and shutter vibrations reduced it's resolution to about 24 MP levels, in the shutter speed range I use most of the time.

Now, the A7rII adressed all those issues, so I ordered it ASAP when it was released.

Just to make it clear, I never considered that A7r to be a good design for a single moment, in my view the original A7 was more attractive.

Best regards
Erik

On stagnating sales, of course, they have announced a new body, people will wait for it. How many A7r's are flying out the door with the A7r2 now announced? Is it big news that their sales have stagnated? Probably not.

Mat