Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Leica T Review

minimallyminimal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 105 posts

Re: A Leica T Review

#91

Post by geoka9 »

TheMagicHorsey wrote: post #41

Having used a great many different cameras what I think about Leicas is that their primary advantage is the state of mind they create in the photographer, which isn't really connected to any tangible usability in design, or engineering marvel in the camera performance. Just the fact that some photographers know they have a Leica in their hand, makes them feel more liberated and ... how shall I say it ... "photographe…

> I want to suggest that the success of the Go programming language is about aesthetics at this point.

Or rather the lack of them, it least in my case (just look at the site).

There is so much emphasis nowadays placed on the form and the looks that many tech products end up being praised for their design, but once you start digging, the insides make you cringe because of the sloppy work and lack of substance it tries to cover.

It's become so bad that I automatically go into a "tread lightly" mode whenever I have to approach a piece of technology with a stunning and trendy design.

Maybe that's why I was immediately drawn to Go when I saw its web site :)

Re: A Leica T Review

#92

Post by vl »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #70
curiousDog wrote: post #47

Is that Seattle/Bellevue? But then there's a porsche with Eurpoean plates below :)

The first batch of photos are from Seattle (around the market). I don't recognize the second city, but it appears to be somewhere in Europe.

Second city is Bellevue. Shots inside the building - Seattle Public Library. Then Public Market in Seattle. Shots with greens to skyscrapers - Bellevue Downtown Park. Shot across highway to two white skyscrapers - Capitol Hill across I-5 with Queen Anne in background (Facebook Seattle rents few floors in one of these buildings) Interior shots - his own apartment. Mercedes - his car? Porsches - looks like some Porsche exhibit (and this might explain euro plate on one of them?) Neighbourhood/street shots - one of them looks like Bellevue (intersection against the sun), rest - Seattle.

Re: A Leica T Review

#93

Post by vl »

lemming wrote: post #85
k2enemy wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuji's X cameras are also great in this regard. I ditched my DSLR setup for the X system and haven't regretted it for a second.

Yeah, I really love the X system - I have the X-Pro1 and the X100S. Unfortunately I use them much less after the birth of my daughter, the autofocus is too slow and the video is really annoying. We ended up buying a Sony Alpha6000 which is the perfect child camera IMO. For still images I still love my Fujis though.

Looks like X-T1 got much faster autofocus. I have it and now impatiently waiting for X-T2 so it would be "even better" :) Also, Fuji, ship these new zooms finally!!!

Re: A Leica T Review

#94

Post by lips »

potatolicious wrote: post #66
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #59

Allow me to preface this by saying that I currently own four cameras, two digital and two film. My digital cameras are a Fuji X100s and a Fuji X-T1 (I used to have a Canon 5D Mk II, but decided to go all in on mirrorless digital cameras). My film cameras are a Leica M6, and a Hasselblad 501C/M. I use all four cameras on a regular basis, and have made photos with each one within the last week. I love my Leica M6. It's…

Not to mention Leicas were far more accessible in their heyday than they are now - there is a widespread misbelief that Leica has always been crazy-expensive, as a justification for their current prices. The Leica M3 was $288 USD in 1955. That's $2560 in today's dollars. New Leica bodies are $7000. The original pricing of the Leica, before they became a piece of jewelry, is in line with modern prosumer cameras, not t…

^All of this. As a stalwart Leica shooter of 10 years, it's not bitterness or jealousy I feel, but sadness at their having moved on from making tools to what amounts to more or less "just another camera," albeit of a rarified form.

The key moment for me was the M7, when they reversed the direction the shutter speed dial rotates. Though it seems rather innocuous, but as a daily "lugger" with 2 other older bodies, it basically said "Goodbye, we don't care about your type any longer."

That they couldn't really keep up with the immense digital R&D budgets of more mainstream camera companies was not entirely surprising, and I accepted long ago that a Leica purchase would consist of high cost, and performance (though not necessarily image quality) that equals a generation or two back as compared to Canon/Nikon.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if this camera was immensely successful for them. The avant-garde design (as compared to the current retro-schtick) has cachet, Leica has been, for many years, not a single monolithic philosophy as manifested in equipment, but a company navigating a rapidly changing market. For a time they found a sizable market that echoed my wants, but no longer. Such is life, and Leica is not alone. Plaubel-Makina and numerous other companies were less fortunate or capable.

My "cred": 15+ years shooting/Leica CL/M3/M6/M7/M9:Canon/AE-1/D30/D60:Nikon/FM-3/F100/D90/D700/D3/D800:Fuji/X100S

Re: A Leica T Review

#95

Post by Theodores »

abat wrote: post #69
ricardobeat wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does take some amazing images though. I can't think of any similarly portable alternative that can match it.

The Leica T has an outdated Sony sensor they used in one of their lower end mirrorless cameras (NEX 5). The NEX 5 was even more portable and you can use a large number of first party lenses and use many other brands via converters. It's not clear that the Leica T's image quality is any better than an NEX 5, and I would expect the more recent Sony cameras to be better image wise. The Sony A7 would give you a newer, la…

That is good to know.

To go automotive analogy, a bit like a deluxe sportscar manufacturer, e.g. Lotus, that have a good looking product that goes nicely, handles great, has heritage yet has some Toyota engine inside...

For this reason I think I would want to give the Sony product a try. Sony make the whole thing from lens to screen for stills, video and film. Their products seem more about being part of that whole thing rather than some guy spending ages hand polishing aluminium. For me Leica are doing it wrong but they know their market and they don't have the capability of a Sony to develop their own sensors.

Re: A Leica T Review

#96

Post by ricardobeat »

abat wrote: post #69
ricardobeat wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does take some amazing images though. I can't think of any similarly portable alternative that can match it.

The Leica T has an outdated Sony sensor they used in one of their lower end mirrorless cameras (NEX 5). The NEX 5 was even more portable and you can use a large number of first party lenses and use many other brands via converters. It's not clear that the Leica T's image quality is any better than an NEX 5, and I would expect the more recent Sony cameras to be better image wise. The Sony A7 would give you a newer, la…

I'd rather have less MP if it means a better noise profile, and AFAIK there is a a fair amount of parameters affecting image quality other than the sensor itself.

These samples from the A7 don't seem to come close in color reproduction or dynamic range: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_A7/sample_image...

I don't own either so this is just armchair judgement.

Re: A Leica T Review

#97

Post by vparikh »

SeanLuke wrote: post #88
vparikh wrote: post #54

The Leica T ($1850) + Summicron T 32mm ($1950) = $3800 The Sony A7 ($1499) + Zeiss 55m f1.8 Sonnar ($999) = $2498 Thats a differential of $1302 Now lets get a few things out of the way -- Yes the Leica is a 35mm equivalent and the Sony is a 55 mm equivalent. But I wanted to compare the best prime lens in each setup (in Leica T system, that is the only prime lens available so far) - The 55mm is arguably currently the…

> Summicron T 32mm ($1950) Did you mean 23mm?

Yes -- I stand corrected. Thank you

Re: A Leica T Review

#98

Post by lips »

ams6110 wrote: post #56
caycep wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or stash up on a lifetime supply of M6 Classics and a freezer full of Tri-X and x-tol (or ascorbic acid) developer solution...I'm not sure what the going price of a M Monochrom is but I'd bet you'd be able to get at least 5 M6's for that price. Spare parts!

True, but that assumes I'd want to do all the chemical processing that comes with film photography. I used to do some of that, but it's not anything I'd want to get back into.

You can still generally get negs+contact sheet+scans for ok prices. I do negs+contact sheet at a pro lab, and then shoot them with my D800 on a lightbox, and import into Lightroom. With the proper curve and adjustment presets, they're higher quality than my best film scanner scans.

Re: A Leica T Review

#99

Post by pesto88 »

I have always lusted over Leica cameras and lenses. All of my favorite photographers have used them at some point or another.

I finally got a great deal on M6 with a 50mm Summicron. Now I have a M9P.

For a while, Leica was the only camera company to produce cameras with the same ergonomics of older film cameras. It may have been stubbornness on their part, but I loved the fact that I could have a digital camera that allowed me to control aperture with my left hand, change shutter speed with my right, and have all lenses have focus markings on the top.

I feel that Leica is in danger due to companies such as Fuji, who are creating cameras that have even more options for control than ever before.

Want manual focus markings? There are lots of new lenses from Fuji and Olympus that allow you to shoot with auto focus, then pull the barrel back and enter manual mode so you can do things like zone and hyperfocal focus.

Want to change aperture on the lens and shutter speed on the top? The xt1 and x100s both have it.

Sorry for hating, but if Leica's answer to cameras such as the Fuji xt1 is to throw up a camera resembling a Sony NEX 3 with a "better touch screen" is kind of a joke really. They're coming from totally left field with this one.

They can try and hold on to their legacy of amazing lenses such as the Noctilux, but Zeiss(sony) and Sigma are doing a lot of innovation on fast glass, and will soon probably come out with a 50mm f/.95 or faster lens just to shove it to Leica.

You can view my photos at "moarbokeh" on flickr if you're curious.

Re: A Leica T Review

#100

Post by leoc »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #59

Allow me to preface this by saying that I currently own four cameras, two digital and two film. My digital cameras are a Fuji X100s and a Fuji X-T1 (I used to have a Canon 5D Mk II, but decided to go all in on mirrorless digital cameras). My film cameras are a Leica M6, and a Hasselblad 501C/M. I use all four cameras on a regular basis, and have made photos with each one within the last week. I love my Leica M6. It's…

> So basically, you have to have more money than sense to want to own this camera. I get it.

That seems less fair as a judgement on the T than the M*s, though. As lips said https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8187669 , the much lower price point probably makes a significant difference. There have to be a significant number of amateurs who a) genuinely love taking photos, b) can afford to spend about $2k on a camera that is a pleasure to use and makes them look stylish, and c) don't really need the very best DSLR performance that that money could buy. If buying an M7 is like a trust-fund playboy buying an F350 for the occasional weekend joyride, buying a T is possibly more like a professional buying an Audi for his regular commuting: certainly not the most cost-efficient solution, but still a reasonable answer to a practical need.

Post reply on HN