Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica General Discussion / News / Rumors

View Poll Results: Why did you decide NOT to buy a digital Leica M?
it is too expensive 328 60.07%
there are other (digital) camera options that suit me better 126 23.08%
I am using only film cameras 139 25.46%
other reason ... [explain] 76 13.92%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 546. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 01-24-2018   #361
shimokita
白黒
 
shimokita's Avatar
 
shimokita is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Japan, Tokyo
Posts: 790
I don't buy into the "too expensive" option... if you compare the price of new black body Leica Monochrom (digital) vs a new black body Leica MP (film) the difference is about 366 rolls of film developed at a lab. Shopping around, self development, etc might get you 500 rolls of film... whatever, there will be a break point.

Many of us already have a film Leica (apples to apples), so the question might rather be one of additional gear vs. "benefit". It's no longer a quality issue, in fact... and I ignore the post processing cost issue for the moment (it's a real issue, but we don't live in isolation from other daily requirement, we need a computer - the cost is incremental and decreasing). Skip a couple of lattes...

There are other digital camera options... gear does make a difference so it comes down to personal preference (PROs have their own approach to the equipment choices).

At this point I don't have a digital Leica, most likely the reason is that "it's a timing issue" ; )
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-24-2018   #362
narsuitus
Registered User
 
narsuitus's Avatar
 
narsuitus is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by narsuitus View Post
I currently use four digital compact cameras; none of which have all the features I desire. Some have some of the features but all lack certain features I need (such as rangefinder manual focusing).

The digital Leica M cameras also lack some of the features I need (such as dependability). Plus, the digital Leica M cameras cost a heck of a lot more than the four digital compacts I am using.

Therefore, I voted for "there are other (digital) camera options that suit me better."

https://flic.kr/p/m4M9Rd
UPDATE:

Back in 2014, I cast my vote for, "there are other (digital) camera options that suit me better."

However, I recently decided to buy a Leica M10 digital camera to use with my Leica M6 film camera.


Leica Rangefinders by Narsuitus, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2018   #363
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,745
They are two great cameras. Congratulations. I have the M6 and the M9 but not the M10.
__________________
- Raid

________________


http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2018   #364
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 62
Posts: 518
Truth be told, I bought a film Leica BECAUSE I was curious about the digital, and as a film cameras the M4-2 and M6 TTL that I picked up offered a possible path to a digital camera I might eventually own. Emphasis on "might".

Of course the trick is that I've found film such an engaging challenge, I guess it's fair to say I've spent far more money on chasing dead-end film cameras (mostly Medium Format), a Nikon scanner, a Jobo, etc. I didn't plan on that, but the film infrastructure takes a bit of nurturing that ... well... I might have saved a bunch of dough if I'd just swung for the digital Leica. Emphasis on "might" as though it were an exclusive but unlikely proposition to NOT have done both film and digital. So for anyone who suggests film is cheaper, I have to say, "How? Sure hasn't been for me. More fun, more frustrating, more challenging and more rewarding... maybe... but cheaper? Not!" Go figure.
__________________
-JW Mersereau ("Skip")

"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
“There’s nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.” Ansel Adams
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-19-2018   #365
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwolf View Post
Maybe a related question: "Why did you decide to buy a digital M after deciding NOT to buy a digital M?"

I've been there a couple times and now feel it coming on again.

John
Hey John,
Thinking M 10?

Maybe when things slow down for me a bit we can grab a cup of joe and you can check mine out.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-19-2018   #366
Deardorff38
Registered User
 
Deardorff38's Avatar
 
Deardorff38 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 813
Shimokita....that's a lot of lattes for a $6.9k M10 body !
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-19-2018   #367
edodo
Registered User
 
edodo's Avatar
 
edodo is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by narsuitus View Post
UPDATE:

Back in 2014, I cast my vote for, "there are other (digital) camera options that suit me better."

However, I recently decided to buy a Leica M10 digital camera to use with my Leica M6 film camera.


Leica Rangefinders by Narsuitus, on Flickr
Beautiful cameras! I too love the titanium M6. It's a M4 top plate with meter!

It's the only brass top plate meter leica that is the size of the M4! M7 and letzen 999 M6 are taller! Lot's of flack about the M6 titanium not being titanium, but the thruth it's a beautiful camera, better finish that the zinc ones!

It's look very tall compared to the smaller M6. I thought M10 was same size as the film classic M!
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-19-2018   #368
edodo
Registered User
 
edodo's Avatar
 
edodo is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 697
For me I will not buy a digital M because it's a copy of a film camera. The film M is form and function, curves like the film roll, rangefindered in order to have the possibility to use beautiful symmetrical wide angle optical designs. Or having the most useful manual focus system in the universe enough said!

The M digital are mimicing the curves but it's lacking form and function. The whole camera is a pale transfiguration of the film M that is a hundred years of design in the making, industrial empirical and photographical design that is the only motivation to have the digital M.

Sure I would love to have a M10 or hopefully a M11 (cheaper, made in China, same size as M6 vanilla), so I can calibrate the Contax Zeiss Hologon that I DIY converted to leica M for use with my M6! ^^
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-19-2018   #369
NickTrop
Registered User
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
NickTrop is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,063
DXO Mark sensor scores highest rated full frame Leicas:

Leica SL $7450 Score: 88
Leica M10 $6895 Score: 86
Leica Q Type 116 $4250 Score: 85
__________

Cameras I currently own:

Nikon D600 full frame price paid $670 (used, 8,000-ish actuations) Score 94.
Nikon D5300 (crop sensor) $290 (refurb'd) Score: 83

Other current Nikons

D850 $3,300 Score 100
D800 $3300 Score 97
D750 $2,300 Score 93

That's why.

Last edited by NickTrop : 04-19-2018 at 13:40. Reason: adding
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2019   #370
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,745
I have a Nikon D700, Nick. Is its sensor also a high rated sensor like the D600?
__________________
- Raid

________________


http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2019   #371
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 933
Not the cost for me.
I got bonus for the last year and wife suggested- go and buy what you want.
I was looking and thinking... considered Monochrome, etc... and bought Sony a7S2 in the end. And love it.
There is just really no rational reason that I could find to have digital Leica over something like Sony. None.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-12-2019   #372
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,556
I recently unexpectedly had this experience. Having come into a little money I decided to upgrade my M8 and buy an M240. But as it happened the shop had a mint Leica Q with accessories for the same price. The deciding factor was the af mated to a superb lens albeit a 28mm one so the Q is what I got. My eyes are not what they once were and I am fed up with missing shots as I try to find optimal focus.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-12-2019   #373
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
I was looking and thinking... considered Monochrome, etc... and bought Sony a7S2 in the end. And love it.
There is just really no rational reason that I could find to have digital Leica over something like Sony. None.
I feel the same .
OK the Sony menus could be better organised but that was no reason to pay the extra for a Leica body.

As a digital back for my manual focus lenses the Sony is more then adequate and has additional advantages over a Leica that easily mitigates the poor menu system .
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-12-2019   #374
telenous
Registered User
 
telenous is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Not the cost for me.
I got bonus for the last year and wife suggested- go and buy what you want.
I was looking and thinking... considered Monochrome, etc... and bought Sony a7S2 in the end. And love it.
There is just really no rational reason that I could find to have digital Leica over something like Sony. None.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Markey View Post
I feel the same .
OK the Sony menus could be better organised but that was no reason to pay the extra for a Leica body.

As a digital back for my manual focus lenses the Sony is more then adequate and has additional advantages over a Leica that easily mitigates the poor menu system .

Asking from a position of near ignorance (my only digital cameras are very old Canon DSLRs): if you have a slew of Leica lenses, isn't it better to get a Leica M digital body? Am I wrong to think that Sony A7x cameras do not always work well with lenses of other systems (esp. wide angles)?
__________________
- Alkis

flickr
instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-12-2019   #375
NickTrop
Registered User
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
NickTrop is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,063
Leicas were and are simply too expensive. There are simply much better options out there. In fact, in the case of their digital cameras, their sensors lag far behind Nikon and Sony. This is according to DxO. Say what you will about DxO? But they do do sophisticated tests, in labs, with real lab equipment. Their site is ancillary to their business. They are not paid off. They perform these tests in order to develop their software. Of course, this produces backlash when the Canon and Leica cults are confronted with the inconvenient truth that their coveted gear is simply not keeping up. In Leica's case, the highest-rated sensor on one of their new full frame models barely edges out the consumer Nikon D5300 I had. It doesn't touch even seven year old full frame cameras from Nikon like the entry-level full frame D600s from 2012 I bought used for $650. Nor does it come close to Sony. So, if I can get a camera with a better sensor and a body with more features that's very well-made for this price, thousands less, why bother with the red dot?

So, a sensor is not the only thing that makes a camera? Here again, Leica brings nothing to the table. In fact, they lag. Leica stopped innovating decades ago.

And I've always thought what Leica should do is farm all their digital out to a Japanese company -- Panasonic, Toshiba, Sony whomever and focus on making lenses in other mounts. Leica was never an electronics company. They -- from a realistic standpoint, can't compete with those who are electronics companies. But they sure make a heckuva lens.

What does Leica make that's great? It is no longer their cameras, sad to say. The more camera's go/went electronic? The more Leica lost its edge to the Japanese -- and this goes back to the later days of the film era with Leica lagging even to include a built-in meter. Few care about "mechanical perfection" these days. But imagine the demand for a Cron in a native Canon, Nikon, or Sony mount. They would sell like hotcakes. A Lecia body and a Cron might be out of reach. But I might be able to spring for a Cron for my Canon body. Sigma, Tokina, Zeiss, Tamron and many others have done it (until recently with the exception of Zeiss on the budget end).
Why not Leica?

It I was CEO of Leica, I'd point the ship in that direction.

From a consumer standpoint. Film Leica? Sure. Digital? No way. Not unless I've invested heavily in Leica glass, refuse to sell it, and was "trapped" in the Leica system.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-12-2019   #376
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickTrop View Post
Leicas were and are simply too expensive. There are simply much better options out there. In fact, in the case of their digital cameras, their sensors lag far behind Nikon and Sony. This is according to DxO. Say what you will about DxO? But they do do sophisticated tests, in labs, with real lab equipment. Their site is ancillary to their business. They are not paid off. They perform these tests in order to develop their software. Of course, this produces backlash when the Canon and Leica cults are confronted with the inconvenient truth that their coveted gear is simply not keeping up. In Leica's case, the highest-rated sensor on one of their new full frame models barely edges out the consumer Nikon D5300 I had. It doesn't touch even seven year old full frame cameras from Nikon like the entry-level full frame D600s from 2012 I bought used for $650. Nor does it come close to Sony. So, if I can get a camera with a better sensor and a body with more features that's very well-made for this price, thousands less, why bother with the red dot?
People that buy an M buy it because they like a Leica M... not because they want the norm. Some people want less features. And let's be honest, the sensor in the M10 is just fine for photography even if it doesn't stack up in a lab test.

Quote:
So, a sensor is not the only thing that makes a camera? Here again, Leica brings nothing to the table. In fact, they lag. Leica stopped innovating decades ago.
Leica doesn't make its own sensor. However, they have the only mechanical rangefinder camera (digital and film) and a wide range of rangefinder lenses made specifically for that camera. Might not be important to you (or even me), but it is to some.

Quote:
And I've always thought what Leica should do is farm all their digital out to a Japanese company -- Panasonic, Toshiba, Sony whomever and focus on making lenses in other mounts. Leica was never an electronics company. They -- from a realistic standpoint, can't compete with those who are electronics companies. But they sure make a heckuva lens.
Uhm... Panasonic / Sigma / Leica have an alliance, so...

Quote:
What does Leica make that's great? It is no longer their cameras, sad to say. The more camera's go/went electronic? The more Leica lost its edge to the Japanese -- and this goes back to the later days of the film era with Leica lagging even to include a built-in meter. Few care about "mechanical perfection" these days.
But enough care for them to make $ and have luxury boutique stores.

Quote:
But imagine the demand for a Cron in a native Canon, Nikon, or Sony mount. They would sell like hotcakes. A Lecia body and a Cron might be out of reach. But I might be able to spring for a Cron for my Canon body. Sigma, Tokina, Zeiss, Tamron and many others have done it (until recently with the exception of Zeiss on the budget end).
Why not Leica?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-Mount_Alliance

Quote:
It I was CEO of Leica, I'd point the ship in that direction.
https://l-mount.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-12-2019   #377
Imagesfromobjects
Registered User
 
Imagesfromobjects's Avatar
 
Imagesfromobjects is offline
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: philadelphia
Posts: 30
Cost / depreciation and resale value / sensor tech evolving very quickly.

I'll be using an a7S until it falls apart. Hoping Sony makes a FF rangefinder style body at some point. More than likely I'll never buy a Digital M. Even if I hit the lottery tomorrow, it just wouldn't make sense to me.
__________________
One chord is fine. Two chords is pushing it. Three chords and you're into jazz.

-Lou Reed
Flickr - Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-12-2019   #378
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by telenous View Post
Asking from a position of near ignorance (my only digital cameras are very old Canon DSLRs): if you have a slew of Leica lenses, isn't it better to get a Leica M digital body? Am I wrong to think that Sony A7x cameras do not always work well with lenses of other systems (esp. wide angles)?

I find the Sony bodies work very well .
The widest I shoot is a 28 Summicron ASPH and don`t see any issues.

I also use it as a second body to my Canon DSLR with Canon 85/1.2 ,70-200/2.8, 35/1.4 .

It does vignette with my Pentax 50/1.2 but overall much more versatile than an M body would be and I prefer focus peaking to the RF .

I like my manual lenses but these days prefer using AF so sinking the extra into a Leica digital for what ? just doesn`t make sense .
I still use Film Leicas 1955 M3DS , 1960 M2 and 1969 BPM4 but there are better cheaper digital options for me is what I`m saying .
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-12-2019   #379
dtcls100
Registered User
 
dtcls100 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 459
Friends of mine have digital Leicas. Very nice cameras, but are overpriced and don't have nearly the capability of a good number of other digital cameras. A friend's experience having his M9 sensor corrode and Leica's poor customer service sealed the deal for me in not ever planning on getting one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-13-2019   #380
telenous
Registered User
 
telenous is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Markey View Post
I find the Sony bodies work very well .
The widest I shoot is a 28 Summicron ASPH and don`t see any issues.

I also use it as a second body to my Canon DSLR with Canon 85/1.2 ,70-200/2.8, 35/1.4 .

It does vignette with my Pentax 50/1.2 but overall much more versatile than an M body would be and I prefer focus peaking to the RF .

I like my manual lenses but these days prefer using AF so sinking the extra into a Leica digital for what ? just doesn`t make sense .
I still use Film Leicas 1955 M3DS , 1960 M2 and 1969 BPM4 but there are better cheaper digital options for me is what I`m saying .
Thanks for the detailed reply, Michael. I've read about Sony A7 sensors smearing detail in the borders when in use with non-native wide-angles. Your experience puts all that in perspective. A friend handed me briefly his A7 and I found focus peaking revelatory. My eyesight has recently, and quite abruptly, deteriorated in the near range so I can appreciate whatever focus assistance there is.
__________________
- Alkis

flickr
instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-13-2019   #381
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,150
Hi Alkis.

The sort of problems reported with smearing ect may be there on wider lenses indeed if you look closely they may possibly be there with my 28 but I don`t scrutinise my pictures that way or that closely.

It`s not an exercise in perfection for me just getting the shot and hopefully a reasonable composition.

I`ve used an A7S and A7R2 with Contax/Yashica lenses and the A7R2 currently has a 1940 35 Elmar on the front using a Voitlander close focus adapter.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2019   #382
telenous
Registered User
 
telenous is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,579
By and large, I am the same. Not going to pixel peep to find what is not obvious, no point to, at least with my photos. Thanks again for taking the time to give me your thoughts.
__________________
- Alkis

flickr
instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #383
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
 
Pál_K's Avatar
 
Pál_K is online now
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Gig Harbor
Posts: 66
Didn't buy a digital Leica because I'm saving money for the apex of Leica cameras: M6 Royal Danish Wedding.

Not really.

So, to me a digital Leica is a big yawn. For the Leica experience I have film Leicas. If I want or need to use digital equipment, I'll use my X-Pro1 or D700.

Quote:
Originally Posted by narsuitus View Post
UPDATE:
...
However, I recently decided to buy a Leica M10 digital camera to use with my Leica M6 film camera.
...
Interesting that the M10 is larger. Because of battery?
__________________
"Great photography is about the visual effect upon the viewer, not sharpness." - Stephen Gandy, Cameraquest
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #384
Rayt
Registered User
 
Rayt's Avatar
 
Rayt is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pál_K View Post
Didn't buy a digital Leica because I'm saving money for the apex of Leica cameras: M6 Royal Danish Wedding.
The happy couple have since divorced. Can you buy it at half price?
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #385
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
 
Pál_K's Avatar
 
Pál_K is online now
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Gig Harbor
Posts: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayt View Post
The happy couple have since divorced. ...
Oh, crap. Now I have to wait for Leica to make the M6 Royal Danish Divorce.
__________________
"Great photography is about the visual effect upon the viewer, not sharpness." - Stephen Gandy, Cameraquest
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #386
Bingley
Registered User
 
Bingley's Avatar
 
Bingley is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 5,690
There were reports of problems w/ some of the early Leica full-frame digital cameras, which didn't seem right for a camera that cost so much. But it sounds like the M240 has been much more reliable. Still, $6000 is and was too much to plop down on a digital camera, for me at least.

But $4000? For a new M240, weather sealed, and with a warranty? And no features that I don't want? Hmmmm. Also, I'm paying $20/roll locally for prints and scans of C41 film. I've got a bunch of newish and oldish (mainly oldish) M- and LTM-mount lenses, and I like being able to shoot them on a digital camera w/out having to deal w/ a crop factor; although I bought into the m4/3ds system some years ago, I found myself using native rather than legacy lenses with the system. Soooo.....

So, when Leica announced the new M-E type 240, I ordered one, and it arrived a couple of weeks ago. A nice, solid camera, beautiful vf, and I can shoot it just like my other M bodies (i.e., no auto anything). Still getting the feel of the camera but early results are very promising. I can see pairing the M-E 240 with my IIIc (loaded with bw) for a two-body travel kit with the ability to exchange lenses back and forth. So having now bought a digital Leica, I guess this post is Off Topic... LOL!!
__________________
Steve

FS: Zeiss-ZM Planar 50 plus hood, Pentax MX, Voigtlander Ultron 40/2.0 SLII in Pentax K-mount, Takumar 100/2.8 and 35/3.5 lenses: See my ads in Classifieds

M3, M2, R2A, IIIc, IVSB2, & T, and assorted LTM & M lenses
Minolta XD11, Pentax ME Super, and assorted MD Rokkor and Takumar lenses, Rolleicord III, Rolleicord Vb, Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS

My Flickr
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #387
CSGreene
Registered User
 
CSGreene is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3
For me, digital Leicas are simply too expensive for what they are unlike their older film cameras (I have an early M4 and 5cm DR lens). I would love to experience shooting with the M10 line but, as an amateur, I cannot justify the cost of Leica's digital bodies. I will continue to make do with Fuji and Nikon for my digital experience.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #388
Rayt
Registered User
 
Rayt's Avatar
 
Rayt is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,894
I am primarily a film shooter but the M8.2 comes in handy in low light. I don’t like the look of pushed b/w film and 1600iso after b/w conversion still looks pretty good. Someday when I go digital it will be with a Leica rangefinder preferably a later generation monochrom. Cost of entry will be high but if I can amortise it with 10 years of use then it’ll be worth it. My M8.2 is still going strong.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 15:32.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.