Sony a7 a threat to Leica according to German newspaper WELT

Hm.

Not impressed. The reporter still assumes that all the world wants a camera with the best specs and the lowest price, but Leica are selling lots of their expensive camera's to China were buying cheap translates to being perceived as poor and unlucky.

Also thinking Leica will invest more in tailoring image quality to their specific esthetic views while Sony will always use newest technology at best price level and the end users will have to sort image quality esthetics out for themselves.

Once I tried to get information on the option of servicing a Konica Hexar from Sony Netherlands. This was about a year after Sony acquired Konica-Minolta. Five customer support employees were clueless. Leica still answers questions on gear that is 50 years old and can repair most of it.

Back in my days Sony produced walkmans and headphones that were desirable but lost their initial quality very soon and their suggestion was to buy a newer model. I don't feel much has changed in those 25+ years.
 
I think the truth will lay in the middle somewhere. There will be some who simply want a relatively inexpensive digital body to use their Leica glass on. For some, only a range finder will do.

I must say my experience with Sony products tends to be pretty good, but tech. support is almost non-existent.
 
Do not trust Axel Springer press, all I can say.

Anyway .. here is me hoping the A7 will get the used prices of M9s down to a area where I might be able to afford one
 
The author of the above cited article states that due to Sony`s advance in sensor technology the picture quality will be better compared to Leica. It will be really interesting to see how the sensor of the new Sony can hold up against Leica`s M240 or M-Monochrome when lenses like the 50/2.0 APO or 21/1.4 are used.
 
Don't trust Axel Springer +1 although I would say don't trust any review in a newspaper or photo mag. To me it's amazing how they claim that a Sony Evil attacks Leica's niche RF furthermore they completely forgot that nearly all sensors (APS-C and up) are sufficent these days and the image results are more limited by the lens than the sensor. They also forgot the human factor Leica is a luxury brand and Status symbol, Sony not so much.
 
johannielscom said:
Hm.
Also thinking Leica will invest more in tailoring image quality to their specific esthetic views while Sony will always use newest technology at best price level and the end users will have to sort image quality esthetics out for themselves.
Click to expand...

i dont understand this at all. from the m8 to m9 to monochrome, all ive seen is how the end user has to 'sort out IQ aesthetics for themselves'. die hard leica users happily claim that owning a $7000 monochrome demands the end user to 'sort it out'.

further, while china is a big market, its not 'the whole world'. a lot of the rest of the planet indeed looks for the most bang for the buck, especially when dealing with inherently transient technology. i'm no sony fan, in fact ive purposely steered clear of sony gear. but sometimes youve just got to give the devil his due.
 
maddoc said:
The author of the above cited article states that due to Sony`s advance in sensor technology the picture quality will be better compared to Leica. It will be really interesting to see how the sensor of the new Sony can hold up against Leica`s M240 or M-Monochrome when lenses like the 50/2.0 APO or 21/1.4 are used.
Click to expand...

cant that statement be generally true, but not for the two lenses you cite? why do two examples by themselves, even if true, disprove that statement?
 
There will be no threat to Leica. I don't think there are many people who by a Leica because it is a particularly useful camera, they buy it because it is a Leica and all that entails.

Lets face it, the Leica's have a history of really being built to last. I'm not sure about the latest crop digital cameras, but we can certainly say this about the older film cameras.

I get great pleasure of taking my 50+ year old Leica M2, for a walk, knowing it still functions perfectly after all these years.

As nice and useful as that little Sony is, I doubt it will be much use in 50 years. It likely won't be much of an heirloom.....but my M2, in another 50 years.....who knows?
 
There is no doubt that the new Sony cameras will easily outperform the M240 in terms of sensor performance, color fidelity, and responsiveness/speed. Using native Zeiss AF lenses gives also the advantage of the cameras' intelligent AF.

Of course, if you want to use M lenses on the Sony, manual focus with image magnification and focus peaking can be very accurate but frustratingly slow, so definitely the M240 still has a huge advantage there.
 
Hasselblad-Solar-camera_zpsc994b282.jpg
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbelyell
i. . . a lot of the rest of the planet indeed looks for the most bang for the buck . . .


Roger Hicks said:
And indeed, those who buy on price alone will generally get exactly what they pay for.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

roger your posts and insights are one of the main reasons i so enjoy this forum. but i think you know that my point was not about 'buying on price alone'. bang for the buck combines quality, user experience, IQ AND price in a rationally comparative way.

if they are garbage, these sonys will fail. assuming theyre garbage either because theyre sony or because theyre not leica, or because a couple of lenses may look better on an m240, is irrational. that was my main point. perhaps rationality is not what we're after here?
 
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137308

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137308

Leica would worry if it had a real viewfinder, a rangefinder, Optical, not green band peaking,whatever, a backup service, almost worldwide, a sense of quality, not just "camera of the week", a price tag under $500 and a true status symbol.
Another "wanna-be".
icon10.gif
 
My kid says she "needs" a camera that takes video, and the Canadian photog who reviewed the a7 shot the whole thing using an a7 - looked superb to me, and sound quality was excellent. That may be my excuse to invest in a body that will also take my legacy lenses.

One thing about the M9 through M240 - I understand they will NOT take my Summicron DR, nor play nicely with my SuperAngulon f/4, so that is a bummer to say the least. When I experimented with Ricoh GXR it accommodated both those lenses, and I bet the A7 will as well.

Randy
 
rbelyell said:
. . . i think you know that my point was not about 'buying on price alone'. bang for the buck combines quality, user experience, IQ AND price in a rationally comparative way.. . .
Click to expand...
Quite. And, at that point, enough people find that the Leica delivers enough "bang for the buck" to keep the company in business. "Bang for the buck" then pretty much ceases to be a rational argument, because everyone has a different view of "quality, user experience, IQ AND price"

Of course with the Leica you can add "prestige" to "quality, user experience, IQ AND price" but I don't think I'm deceiving myself when I say that I don't recall ever buying anything on the grounds of prestige. Except perhaps an engagement ring, once.

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top