It's that time of the year again

[k-hawinkler]

Oh yes, an a9R would do nicely, but imagine the price ... :bugeyes: :banghead: :shocked:
I'll bet you could buy an M10 instead ... :angel:

Thanks Bart. Yup, I probably could, but I won't.
Somehow I have lost interest in Leica cameras.
Their shoddy quality control and repair service has put me off.
Though I still use some of my Leica lenses, mainly M and R.
My Visoflex gear just collects dust, as does my M9.

You are correct though.
Sony seems to have taken a page out of the Leica prices book for the A9.
For the A9 Sony must have gone to the limits of current chip and fab technology.
I find it to be an exceptional camera with its fairly short sensor read out time.
It will take time before an A9r will become feasible - even at the elevated prices.

 

[iiiNelson]

Thanks Bart. Yup, I probably could, but I won't.
Somehow I have lost interest in Leica cameras.
Their shoddy quality control and repair service has put me off.
Though I still use some of my Leica lenses, mainly M and R.
My Visoflex gear just collects dust, as does my M9.

You are correct though.
Sony seems to have taken a page out of the Leica prices book for the A9.
For the A9 Sony must have gone to the limits of current chip and fab technology.
I find it to be an exceptional camera with its fairly short sensor read out time.
It will take time before an A9r will become feasible - even at the elevated prices.

Nah... Leica is still charging FF prices for APS-C and MF prices for FF...

You can actually get a A7RII and 28/2 right now for about the same price as the new CL body alone. You can get the A7RII and the 24-105 for about the same price as the CL with the 18/2.8... it’s absolutely ridiculous but I have no doubt it’ll sell to many Leicaphiles. Everything in me tells be the A7RII is an infinitely better camera.

On the side note though... now we see the hypocrisy of silence from those that belittled Sony for not having a fully fleshed out system at that 5 year mark when development was split between APS-C and Full frame. As for Leica, I actually believe they have fewer lenses than Sony did for either system at this point. Just 7 lenses (that amount to a bunch of kit lenses and moderate to fast primes) for APS-C and 3 native (2 zooms and a 50) full frame lenses... I don’t know.

I think it makes much more sense now to me that it was a great decision for me when I dropped my Leica kit and went with Sony. Not to make it a brand war or anything - it’s just an observation. I loved my M9’s and rangefinders in general but this shows me that when you’re out of touch with potential customer base then you’re out of touch. I know people have claymores for over 2 years of how they’d like to see an interchangeable lens Q that accepts M-mount lenses and we get the CL/TL2/SL... none of what people asked for.

 

[Knorp]

Nah... Leica is still charging FF prices for APS-C and MF prices for FF...

You can actually get a A7RII and 28/2 right now for about the same price as the new CL body alone. You can get the A7RII and the 24-105 for about the same price as the CL with the 18/2.8... it’s absolutely ridiculous but I have no doubt it’ll sell to many Leicaphiles. Everything in me tells be the A7RII is an infinitely better camera.

On the side note though... now we see the hypocrisy of silence from those that belittled Sony for not having a fully fleshed out system at that 5 year mark when development was split between APS-C and Full frame. As for Leica, I actually believe they have fewer lenses than Sony did for either system at this point. Just 7 lenses (that amount to a bunch of kit lenses and moderate to fast primes) for APS-C and 3 native (2 zooms and a 50) full frame lenses... I don’t know.

I think it makes much more sense now to me that it was a great decision for me when I dropped my Leica kit and went with Sony. Not to make it a brand war or anything - it’s just an observation. I loved my M9’s and rangefinders in general but this shows me that when you’re out of touch with potential customer base then you’re out of touch. I know people have claymores for over 2 years of how they’d like to see an interchangeable lens Q that accepts M-mount lenses and we get the CL/TL2/SL... none of what people asked for.

Exactly, I want a 36MP M-camera without the rangefinder (mind you), but with integrated EVF and diopter (very important) that takes both current MF and new AF M-mount lenses :wtf: ... pretty please Santa Leica !

:chug: :chug: :chug:​

 

[k-hawinkler]

I hope your wish comes true Bart.
For me, nah, I stick with my Olympus and Sony gear. :thumbs:

 

[jdphoto]

I sold my A7r2 when a new Sony was announced. I wanted to get a jump on the inevitable price drop for (A7R2) models after the new Sony camera announcement. My main concern about the A7r2 was it simply lacked 2 SD card slots. I was shooting weddings and engagements and needed the security of two cards. The Sony A9 was actually the camera that was launched and I didn't need those features (or price). I switched to the Fuji Xt2 because it literally had all the features I needed from fast FPS to 2 SD slots to the amazing lens selection and shooting in extreme cold, wet climates. The 56mm 1.2 and 16mm 1.4 are simply some of the best lenses i've ever used. I did, in anticipation, preorder the A7r3, but am rethinking that decision after looking at some comparisons between the A7r2 vs A7r3. The A7r2 actually looked sharper ( same sensor ) in a resolution test at DPR and the Fuji Xt2 holds up to the Sony at my print sizes. I once said i'll never be a beta tester for a new camera, but cognitive dissonance got the best of me!
With the decision to stay with Fuji I feel so liberated from unburdening this desire to need the latest and greatest. The Fuji Xt2 and A7R2 are perfectly good cameras with tech far beyond my digital sensibilities. The Sony's are amazing cameras as are most of today's digital, but for now, my clients like film!

 

[Knorp]

I hope your wish comes true Bart.
For me, nah, I stick with my Olympus and Sony gear. :thumbs:

Nah - I'm too old to still believe in Santa ... :scry:

 

[iiiNelson]

I sold my A7r2 when a new Sony was announced. I wanted to get a jump on the inevitable price drop for (A7R2) models after the new Sony camera announcement. My main concern about the A7r2 was it simply lacked 2 SD card slots. I was shooting weddings and engagements and needed the security of two cards. The Sony A9 was actually the camera that was launched and I didn't need those features (or price). I switched to the Fuji Xt2 because it literally had all the features I needed from fast FPS to 2 SD slots to the amazing lens selection and shooting in extreme cold, wet climates. The 56mm 1.2 and 16mm 1.4 are simply some of the best lenses i've ever used. I did, in anticipation, preorder the A7r3, but am rethinking that decision after looking at some comparisons between the A7r2 vs A7r3. The A7r2 actually looked sharper ( same sensor ) in a resolution test at DPR and the Fuji Xt2 holds up to the Sony at my print sizes. I once said i'll never be a beta tester for a new camera, but cognitive dissonance got the best of me!
With the decision to stay with Fuji I feel so liberated from unburdening this desire to need the latest and greatest. The Fuji Xt2 and A7R2 are perfectly good cameras with tech far beyond my digital sensibilities. The Sony's are amazing cameras as are most of today's digital, but for now, my clients like film!

I’m happy you found a system that works for you and the XT2 is a winner. My cousin shoots one for personal use and Canon for paid jobs. I wouldn’t put much stock in DPR shots... they make every camera look average. I will say some of the A7RIII press shots looked pretty decent and possibly slightly better than the A7RII IMO. In any case either of these can produce great shots and if you aren’t printing large then the differences are smaller between APS-C and FF.

 

[iiiNelson]

Exactly, I want a 36MP M-camera without the rangefinder (mind you), but with integrated EVF and diopter (very important) that takes both current MF and new AF M-mount lenses :wtf: ... pretty please Santa Leica !

:chug: :chug: :chug:​

They might as well go for a 50 megapixel camera at this point for the price they are selling lenses for. I have no doubt they should be able to resolve that sort of resolution. My fear is that Leica will either slowly die off as users get even older over the next couple of decades, be bought by a venture capitalist firm, or be absorbed by another camera maker if the long term strategy doesn’t change. I’m sure it’s a profitable company for now BUT they do have a marketing and recognition problem with newer photographers. I get it’s a luxury brand and I’m not saying to not have “halo products” but having accessible and relevant products matter as well. I will pay $4-5k for a slightly overpriced stripped down FF camera... I won’t pay $3k for the APS-C version. I would stick “affordable” Summarit, Zeiss ZM, used Leica, or Voigtländer lenses on said $4-5k camera... I’d buy a Fuji X or Sony FE before the CL/TL2 or whatever.

And again? How can leicaphiles understand the need for a TL2 or CL but not a Sony A5000/6000? Hmmm...

 

[ken_vs_ryu]

I'm w you.
For Landscape work there is no need to upgrade to the model III.
In fact, if you are looking for a screaming bargain the A7RII is one right now.
A brand new one can be had for 2K.
Opposed to around 3500 for a new RIII.
Is the RIII 1500 dollars better ?
Kinda doubt that.

The difference is around $1k atm. I think and hope the rii price will drop further.

$1k gets you.

Better EVF
Better battery
Better AF
Better IBIS
Better memory cards
Better resale value


Whether I can afford it is another story.

 

[The Ute]

The difference is around $1k atm. I think and hope the rii price will drop further.

$1k gets you.

Better EVF
Better battery
Better AF
Better IBIS
Better memory cards
Better resale value


Whether I can afford it is another story.

And the same image quality and DR.
The IBIS is not better it's exactly the same other than the software which makes it do pixel shift.
Extra batteries batteries are tiny and easy to carry.
The AF is not necessarily better it's just faster.
I have never gone thru a 128 GB memory card. Easy to carry a 2nd anyways.
Resale value is not better.
It will drop in price just like the model II when the next model comes out.
The only thing you mentioned of any value to me is the slightly better EVF and it's not 1k better.
Knock yourself out by all means.
I see little to no extra benefit for Landscape shooters.

 

[Pradeep]

Nah... Leica is still charging FF prices for APS-C and MF prices for FF...


I think it makes much more sense now to me that it was a great decision for me when I dropped my Leica kit and went with Sony. Not to make it a brand war or anything - it’s just an observation. I loved my M9’s and rangefinders in general but this shows me that when you’re out of touch with potential customer base then you’re out of touch. I know people have claymores for over 2 years of how they’d like to see an interchangeable lens Q that accepts M-mount lenses and we get the CL/TL2/SL... none of what people asked for.

I too was a Leica user for a while, had the M9 and then the M10 too, felt that somehow, someday the magic would kick in. It did not, for me at least and when the a7r first came out I went for it even though it was still not a fully fleshed out system. Never been happier.

With the a9 and the a7r2 and all the lenses my cup was almost full. In anticipation of the a7r3 I sold my r2 yesterday. With the new camera, my line-up will be complete and my cup will be running over......

Still got some Canon gear to sell...

 

[Pradeep]

...............In any case either of these can produce great shots and if you aren’t printing large then the differences are smaller between APS-C and FF.

Actually, IMHO unless you are printing beyond 24" there is not that much difference between most cameras, this issue has been dealt with several times on various forums. I would say with today's resolution, even higher print sizes are possible with any camera. Just see the hoardings of iPhone prints all over the world.

People buy a new version of what they own because

1. They can afford to
2. They feel certain features are a compelling upgrade because they were lacking in the current model and are important to their style of shooting.


More often than not, it is number 1 why people either upgrade - or not. We can all justify our reasoning to ourselves. "She Who Must Be Obeyed" always asked me 'why are you buying this new camera, you already have a perfectly good one'? I used to go into lengthy explanations and she would knock me down with 'just say because you want to'. In the end, that is indeed the truth

 

[iiiNelson]

And the same image quality and DR.
The IBIS is not better it's exactly the same other than the software which makes it do pixel shift.
Extra batteries batteries are tiny and easy to carry.
The AF is not necessarily better it's just faster.
I have never gone thru a 128 GB memory card. Easy to carry a 2nd anyways.
Resale value is not better.
It will drop in price just like the model II when the next model comes out.
The only thing you mentioned of any value to me is the slightly better EVF and it's not 1k better.
Knock yourself out by all means.
I see little to no extra benefit for Landscape shooters.

Well there are some differences in IQ. The JPEG engine is different (if that matters to you), the DR aid at least 1/2 a stop better and Sony says 1 stop better... I don’t know how much that matters to all but most landscape shooters I know want more if possible. AF is more accurate and faster but as you said it may not matter for landscape shooters. IBIS give you an additional stop as well. Dual memory cards and the new batter are nice to haves for me but not necessary to be honest for me personally unless I shot this next to an A9. The EVF and lack of blackout seems to be serious benefits but that’s a subjective decision for sure.

 

[The Ute]

Well there are some differences in IQ. The JPEG engine is different (if that matters to you), the DR aid at least 1/2 a stop better and Sony says 1 stop better... I don’t know how much that matters to all but most landscape shooters I know want more if possible. AF is more accurate and faster but as you said it may not matter for landscape shooters. IBIS give you an additional stop as well. Dual memory cards and the new batter are nice to haves for me but not necessary to be honest for me personally unless I shot this next to an A9. The EVF and lack of blackout seems to be serious benefits but that’s a subjective decision for sure.

It's personal of course but what you detailed does not add up to 1000-1500 dollars for me.
I can take the same great landscape photos w the A7RII as I would be able to do w the III.
Not only that I make use of the Play memories apps and they do not work on the III for now from what I hear.
As you were saying each to their own.