How could any camera geek resist Leica Q?

[Godfrey]

Originally Posted by GaryLH

I guess a better way to put it if u sum it all up..my idea of digital rot..is...though I may hang onto a specific digital camera for as long as I can, eventually it cannot be repaired for one reason or another.

On the other hand, I have some film cameras that date back to the early 1930s that I can still find people that know how to repair them (if u are willing to pay). I have other film cameras that are part of the electronic era, where the components are EOL and right now if I need a repair, it can only happen if the repair person can canibilize from another camera. That is an example of not really digital rot but electronic rot as it relates to anolog film cameras such as a Minolta cle.

Oh, eventually all these little machines die and need service. I agree with that. I was thinking more that you might mean the sensor gives up the ghost, or something like that, in a gradual and unhappy way.

My old film cameras have cost me more in service and repair than any of my digital cameras. The Oly E-1 (my benchmark cam) has never had a single problem. It was manufactured in Oct 2003, I got it used in 2003 with 3200 exposures on it. Nothing. I've put 12,000 more on since, still nothing as it was designed for 150,000 actuations MTBF. I suspect it will keep going until I just can't use it any more.

I feel the same will be true of the Leica M-P I acquired recently. Unlike the M9 which always felt fragile to me, the M-P feels like a solid, reliable tank that will last nearly forever.

But back to Q stuff... ;-)

G

[shadowfox]

Having used Ricoh GR series (both film and digital), I am used to 28mm fixed focal length.

And the Q has that cute M9-spliced-and-put-back-together -look

Price-aside, I'll gladly use one.
Price-considered, I can't cough up 4K for a camera even if it's a Leica M-mount full-frame the size of Ricoh GR1 that can shoot both film and digital and spits out Platinum prints (heh!)

[YYV_146]

Originally Posted by Austerby

It feels like buyers remorse is setting in quite quickly with the Q - the first reaction was very positive but now I'm reading more considered opinions, which is right and proper when you consider the actual cost.

Personally, I have an X100s and an M8 and am still trying to decide whether I need an upgrade on either of these. I'm edging towards the A7ii but the Q for me isn't the one that I want, though I look forward to seeing what people do with it.

I actually played with one yesterday. The EVF color and resolution is very nice but I don't feel that it's noticeably better than the A7 EVF. The A7 EVF has less of a "screen door" effect and is just a touch more responsive.

I also don't like Leica's way of cooking the EVF specs to make it sound more impressive than it actually is, just as I don't like Sigma calling their Quattro sensors "33 megapixels".

Operation-wise it is a step up from the M240 and X cameras, everything just feels a tiny bit faster...

[thegman]

The Q looks like a lovely camera, but a bit big for fixed lens. I also don't really see a point in a FF fixed lens camera, the image quality difference would seem insignificant compared to the size difference vs. an APS-C sensor. Unless you're using lenses made for a full frame sensor/film, then it's kind of an arbitrary measurement in a fixed lens camera.

Nice though, and I can certainly see why someone would want one, not me though.

[David Hughes]

Hi,

How can I resist it?

Well, as we say, practice makes perfect and I've had lots of practice resisting Leicas out of the dozens and dozens of models and lenses available. It's easy after a while...

Regards, David

[jsrockit]

The only thing that stops me is that $4250 is too m uch for me to spend on the 28mm focal length. I would splurge if it was a 50mm.