Spearhead Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 <blockquote> <p>How else did a $2,250,000 Bugatti Veyron have viability leading the path to a new "Chiron" model?</p> </blockquote> <p>Bugatti is owned by Volkswagen. It's a vanity product for them. Leica appears to be similar except that they don't have a sugar daddy if this sells the same number as the Bugatti Veyron.</p> Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 <p>Just think a Q with a Leica M mount with a sort of reasonable price tag....what a bad boy...think of all those sales.</p> <p>M folk love their rangefinders others do not....but love the Leica thing.</p> <p>Why spend fortunes on RD on cameras that nobody really wants...love my M8 with all that brass and weight and feel. Takes wonderful photos.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 <blockquote> <p>How else did a <a href="http://www.caranddriver.com/bugatti/veyron" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">$2,250,000 Bugatti Veyron</a> have viability leading the path to a new "Chiron" model?</p> </blockquote> <p>A $2m Bugatti is light years ahead of a $20K Ford. The Leica SL is NOT light years ahead of the latest Sony A7. </p> <blockquote> <p>Just because so many can't afford it, doesn't mean that we shouldn't celebrate this advance towards perfection...</p> </blockquote> <p>I can afford it, I could go out and order a handful of them tomorrow. But why would I? It simply does not make any sense at that insane price. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bebu_lamar Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 <p>The price makes in not affordable to me but I can say that about any Leica. So price aside this one doesn't look good. If a Leica that doesn't look good then it's not worth it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 <p>All Leicas are expensive - comes with the territory. Leica produces for a niche market and has certainly figured out what the market can bear and how much they need to make from each item sold to make it worth their while. <br> First and foremost, a camera should be judged based on its merits. Naturally, at one point, the price enters in the form of the value question - and higher-priced items will be judged a bit harder on that aspect. Is the SL good value? Compared to a A7RII? D810? 5DSR? Leica S? Judge for yourself - for me, the answer is crystal clear - and affordability doesn't even come into play. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumpton Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 <p>If Leica was serious about the need of an alternative body to the RF M240 why did they not provide an M mount for the SL? Probable answer: They wanted to create and sell new optics, forcing Leica photographers to invest in another system if they want the possibly small additional advantages of the SL. At 6900 Euros (or possibly also dollars) and expensive additional (to M) optics, GOOD LUCK! The so-called Leica advantage is growing very thin.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 <blockquote> <p>why did they not provide an M mount for the SL?</p> </blockquote> <p>They did. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_smith110 Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share Posted October 22, 2015 <blockquote> <p>All Leicas are expensive - comes with the territory. Leica produces for a niche market and has certainly figured out what the market can bear and how much they need to make from each item sold to make it worth their while. </p> </blockquote> <p>I completely agree with this, and it has mostly worked for them up until now. The thing is when you have a unique product, such as a digital rangefinder, and you can wrap it up in a bunch of HCB mystique while combining it with some very nice glass you can get away with charging very high, esoteric prices for your product.</p> <p>The problem with the SL is that Leica has placed this camera in a market situation where it is most definitely <em>not</em> unique. In fact, it now sits alongside three incredibly capable FF mirrorless cameras which offer significantly lower prices then what Leica is asking for their product.</p> <p>The way I see it, you are paying for two A7RII's and getting an A7. Will it still sell? Of course, there are people who are willing to pay this amount of money for products like this because they either need or want it. I hope it works for them, because competition is good. But I just don't see this as being a real world contender for the FF mirrorless market in a way that will either 1) drive innovation or 2) be readily available for the masses to partake in.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 <blockquote> <p>1) drive innovation</p> </blockquote> <p>Maybe not - but the SL has two things that put it at the top of the mirrorless pack for the time being: the largest, highest resolution EVF and the highest frame rate for a full frame sensor with that many MP (11 fps). A 24-90 as sole lens - and a variable aperture one at that - does not lend itself to shooting anything that would require 11 fps though. Even if the 90-280 was already available - there's still plenty of sports that would need a longer focal length and a faster aperture.</p> <p>Would really like to know how many professional photographers will be opting (or have opted by the end of 2016 when at least three lenses are available) for an SL. Certainly, there will be some that own R, M, and/or S lenses and will add the SL to their bag. But I am talking about those who have been using Canon, Nikon, or Sony full frame cameras and switched over to Leica because of the SL.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 <p>If they just put an EVF and autofocus in an M style camera with an M lens mount it would be an instant hit. That's why the Leica Q is such a success. Surely Leica would know that. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 <p>I'm not hearing a stampede for the Leica SL 601. Perhaps the size, weight and cost are holding things back, not to mention a single dedicated lens with only two more promised sometime in 2016. Professional is what professional does, to borrow a phrase from Forrest Gump. There are a lot more things to photograph than professional sports, perfectly suited to the Sony A7ii and A7Rii. There are twenty dedicated lenses for the Sony, with more in the pipeline from Sony and Zeiss alike. Leica lenses fit the Sony too, but why would anyone bother considering the issues and alternatives? (Leica lenses shorter than 50 mm don't work all that Leica digitals either.)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_smith110 Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share Posted October 22, 2015 <blockquote> <p>Perhaps the <strong>size</strong>, weight and cost are holding things back...</p> </blockquote> <p>Dear god you are right.<br> http://www.photographyblog.com/news/leica_sl_vs_sony_a7r_ii_side_by_side_comparison/</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumpton Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 <blockquote> <p>why did they not provide an M mount for the SL?</p> <p>They did.</p> </blockquote> <p>The L mount is not native for M!</p> <p>Like other non L mount lenses on the SL, it is compatible with M lenses only with an expensive adapter (L to M = 395$)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 <blockquote> <p>The L mount is not native for M!<br> Like other non L mount lenses on the SL, it is compatible with M lenses only with an expensive adapter (L to M = 395$)</p> </blockquote> <p>It's not native, but they did provide an M mount for the SL. $395 for an adapter is chicken feed when you've paid $7500 for a camera without a lens.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 <p>nice camera, but i can think of better ways to spend $12,500. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumpton Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 <p>Leica and an adapter for their own optics, whatever the (relative) price, is simply nonsense. It shows the respect (or lack of it) for those who have supported the company for decades. An L mount adapter to take the previously orphaned R lenses makes sense, like they did with the M240, but for M?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 <blockquote> <p>It shows the respect (or lack of it) for those who have supported the company for decades.</p> </blockquote> <p>I totally agree. I've said all along that a digital M camera with an electronic viewfinder and autofocus would be a top seller, especially as it would natively accept all other M lenses. Instead they present us with an extortionately priced new camera with an all new lens mount at an insane price and with lower resolution than much cheaper competitors. Whoever buys the SL is crazy.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 <p>if this was truly a do-everything camera, it might have warranted $5000. 11fps is nice, but no pdaf means inconsistent focus in low-light (which is too bad because hi-ISO performance looks impressive), and in-body stabilization would have been better for using legacy lenses. as a studio camera, it's under-specified compared to 36-50 mp DSLRs, plus you have to wait a year to get another native lens for it. the video options seem nice, as does the EVF and touch screen. im sure its a great camera in some ways, but at that price point it looks a little fluffy. Leica either should release a 48mp successor next year at the same price point, or make a $3500 model with a smaller form factor and some small fast primes at launch. on the bright side, the Q now looks like a bargain compared to this bhemoth. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Williams Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 <blockquote> <p>Dear god you are right.<br /> <a href="http://www.photographyblog.com/news/leica_sl_vs_sony_a7r_ii_side_by_side_comparison/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">(link)</a></p> </blockquote> <p>From the link: "As you can see, the Leica SL body isn't that much bigger than the Sony A7R II"<br> My eyes must be deceiving me, then!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Taylor Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 <p>Get a Sony, Leica has lost the plot.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 <p>"Get a Sony, Leica has lost the plot."</p> <p>A Leica M with the option of auto focus without a silly 240 name thing...just called an M. A Q type autofocus camera with interchangeable M lenses both cameras at sensible prices.</p> <p>There Leica how simple is that to understand. PS your photo was poor at best... pay for a photographer not someone's mate.</p> <p>Hello! planet earth to Leica ...</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 <p>www.youtube.com/watch?v=D67kmFzSh_o </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_smith110 Posted October 24, 2015 Author Share Posted October 24, 2015 <p>Lol. :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_smith110 Posted October 24, 2015 Author Share Posted October 24, 2015 <p>I hate to send anyone to this website, but this image just defies belief. Can this combo really be this BIG? It has to be seen to be believed.</p> <p>WTF?</p> <p>http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7448206943/a-lot-to-leica-hands-on-with-the-leica-sl-typ-601?slide=2</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bebu_lamar Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 <p>If they keep the M mount then the SL can't be AF. The biggest problem with the SL that besides the red dot there is nothing on it looks like a Leica. For better or worse Leica success depends on the fact that a Leica looks like a Leica. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now