5 ms·

I imagine so. At the risk of angering Leica fans: they’re shipping not exactly state of the art technology at very high prices, with a lot of the R&D actually

I imagine so. At the risk of angering Leica fans: they’re shipping not exactly state of the art technology at very high prices, with a lot of the R&D actually being done by Panasonic. (Or, in the case of their Lux compact cameras, they’re literally shipping Panasonic cameras with a different sticker on them.) Look at the Leica Q2: it costs $5000. The Fuji X100V costs $1300. I know there’s a bigger sensor in the Q2, but, c’mon, there’s not $2000 worth of magic hiding in there.

Youden 6y ago
> they’re shipping not exactly state of the art technology at very high prices I think that misses the point: when you buy Leica, you're not buying technology. It's not a technology company, it's a luxury brand. You buy Leica over Canon, Fuji or Panasonic for the same reason you buy Rolex over Casio, Swatch or Seiko.
- perardi 6y ago
  Oh I am fully aware of “Leica as jewelry”, I just didn’t want to immediately wallop that straw man.
buildbot 6y ago
There's an interesting relationship between Leica, Sinar, and Panasonic for sure - Panasonic is seems to be behind the firmware in even the older Leica M series cameras, which are definitely made by Leica. The SL2 is essentially a Panasonic SR1 with a nicer body. The Leica S series medium format cameras use similiar looking firmware, and the the internals of the newest S3 power the Sinar S30|45 digital back. The Lux Cameras where just a different sticker though. The Q2, while also probably built by Panasonic, has no actual equal in terms of lenses. The lens they put on that body is stellar. Having used an M camera briefly, they aren't worth the price new, but used they are really great values that are built like nothing else. When you tire of them, you can sell them back for what you paid, sometimes more!
- krooj 6y ago
  Agree on M models not being worth the money new. I've always bought gently used bodies 2 years after release. Still, the M-system is capable of nothing that any other non-rangefinder can do: which is to capture the decisive moment. There's no blackout period and you see what's beyond the framelines, such that you can anticipate the composition. The Fuji X100 comes close.
  - miskin 6y ago
    Fuji X-Pro line is direct Leica competitor. I never owned Leica, but I love my X-Pro cameras. Rangefinders are so interesting to use and X-Pros give you variability - you can use optical rangefinder, mix of optical/digital rangefinder with focus peaking, fully digital view finder or back screen, if desired. This gives you a lot of flexibility as different things works best for different lenses. Physically, camera is very nicely built and joy to handle, because all important settings can be set mechanically.
krooj 6y ago
Ehhhh... I've owned a bunch of digital Leica gear, and I'll flatly say that the M lenses produce some of the best images you'll see from a raw optical pipeline. A 50mm APO Summicron is an exceptional lens for its optical characteristics; same goes for most of their 'cron and 'lux models. By contrast, Leica's digital M bodies have always been at least a generation behind... at their time of release. The way you deal with this is correct exposure discipline, such that there's less to deal with in post. Newer M bodies have gotten much better, however. The Q is a really interesting line, since I assume it's a collaborative project between Panasonic, Tower Jazz, and Leica. Frankly, the images for both the Q and Q2 are outstanding, and I'd throw down another $5k for a 50mm Q2. If you seriously think an X100V can compete with a Q2 for full pipeline imaging (capture to print), you're nuts. I've personally seen large prints come out of my Epson P800 from an XE-3 + 23/1.4 and my Q2 and the noise reduction artifacts inherent to the X-trans filter are noticeable on paper. If all you're doing is posting to IG or Flickr, Fuji is amazing for the money.
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  You can just use M lenses on other bodies. With autofocus, even.
- astrostl 6y ago
  > By contrast, Leica's digital M bodies have always been at least a generation behind... at their time of release The M9 was revolutionary in 2009, an 18MP full-frame sensor in a peer-comparatively tiny body. The M Monochrom in 2012 is the only major first-party camera to release w/o a Bayer filter with massive increases in resolution and sensitivity. They've been riding the "classic rangefinder experience" for some time since with incremental improvements, but the early digital M bodies were anything but behind. The recent M10-R and M10-M are also competitive sensor-wise.

Youden 6y ago

> they’re shipping not exactly state of the art technology at very high prices I think that misses the point: when you buy Leica, you're not buying technology. It's not a technology company, it's a luxury brand. You buy Leica over Canon, Fuji or Panasonic for the same reason you buy Rolex over Casio, Swatch or Seiko.

perardi 6y ago
Oh I am fully aware of “Leica as jewelry”, I just didn’t want to immediately wallop that straw man.

buildbot 6y ago

There's an interesting relationship between Leica, Sinar, and Panasonic for sure - Panasonic is seems to be behind the firmware in even the older Leica M series cameras, which are definitely made by Leica. The SL2 is essentially a Panasonic SR1 with a nicer body. The Leica S series medium format cameras use similiar looking firmware, and the the internals of the newest S3 power the Sinar S30|45 digital back. The Lux Cameras where just a different sticker though. The Q2, while also probably built by Panasonic, has no actual equal in terms of lenses. The lens they put on that body is stellar. Having used an M camera briefly, they aren't worth the price new, but used they are really great values that are built like nothing else. When you tire of them, you can sell them back for what you paid, sometimes more!

krooj 6y ago
Agree on M models not being worth the money new. I've always bought gently used bodies 2 years after release. Still, the M-system is capable of nothing that any other non-rangefinder can do: which is to capture the decisive moment. There's no blackout period and you see what's beyond the framelines, such that you can anticipate the composition. The Fuji X100 comes close.
- miskin 6y ago
  Fuji X-Pro line is direct Leica competitor. I never owned Leica, but I love my X-Pro cameras. Rangefinders are so interesting to use and X-Pros give you variability - you can use optical rangefinder, mix of optical/digital rangefinder with focus peaking, fully digital view finder or back screen, if desired. This gives you a lot of flexibility as different things works best for different lenses. Physically, camera is very nicely built and joy to handle, because all important settings can be set mechanically.

krooj 6y ago

Ehhhh... I've owned a bunch of digital Leica gear, and I'll flatly say that the M lenses produce some of the best images you'll see from a raw optical pipeline. A 50mm APO Summicron is an exceptional lens for its optical characteristics; same goes for most of their 'cron and 'lux models. By contrast, Leica's digital M bodies have always been at least a generation behind... at their time of release. The way you deal with this is correct exposure discipline, such that there's less to deal with in post. Newer M bodies have gotten much better, however. The Q is a really interesting line, since I assume it's a collaborative project between Panasonic, Tower Jazz, and Leica. Frankly, the images for both the Q and Q2 are outstanding, and I'd throw down another $5k for a 50mm Q2. If you seriously think an X100V can compete with a Q2 for full pipeline imaging (capture to print), you're nuts. I've personally seen large prints come out of my Epson P800 from an XE-3 + 23/1.4 and my Q2 and the noise reduction artifacts inherent to the X-trans filter are noticeable on paper. If all you're doing is posting to IG or Flickr, Fuji is amazing for the money.

sudosysgen 6y ago
You can just use M lenses on other bodies. With autofocus, even.
astrostl 6y ago
> By contrast, Leica's digital M bodies have always been at least a generation behind... at their time of release The M9 was revolutionary in 2009, an 18MP full-frame sensor in a peer-comparatively tiny body. The M Monochrom in 2012 is the only major first-party camera to release w/o a Bayer filter with massive increases in resolution and sensitivity. They've been riding the "classic rangefinder experience" for some time since with incremental improvements, but the early digital M bodies were anything but behind. The recent M10-R and M10-M are also competitive sensor-wise.