roger_michel Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 there are conflicting reports about usa delivery date for leica CMs. does anybody have any info on this subject?? my fear is that this new camera will not be nearly as good as the two year old T3. for starters, it will not accept filters or hoods. isn't that an essential feature for any serious amateur/professional camera?? the Ts have always had this!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torben_daltoft Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 Here in Europe we seldom use filters -only hoods! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brien_m Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 Only the T3 and the TVS (not sure if it was both the I and II) had filter compatability. I agree it is too bad as that is the primary reason I replaced my minilux with the T3. However you would think it would be an easy task to make a filter/hood adaptor that slips over the lens when extended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccrevasse Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 FWIW, reports are that the T3 hood seems to have no effect on picture quality regardless of the light. As for filters, they may be useful for B&W, but the only useful filter for color work, IMO, is the polarizer, which isn't all that practical except on an SLR. For me, an advantage of the CM over the T3 is the 40mm lens on the CM versus the 35mm lens on the T3. Also, the T3 has a recurring problem with the take-up spool. The Minilux, of course, had its own recurring problem with the E03 error -- something to do with the electronic connection with the lens or shutter, I believe. I guess we'll see how good the CM is once it's been in use for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watts Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 <i>isn't that an essential feature for any serious amateur/ professional camera??</i><br><br>I would argue that the whole point of a quality P&S is that it is meant to be easily carried around and made available for the odd interesting grab shot. Alternatively, it is meant to be suitable for use by people who simply don't want to do anything other than point and shoot. Messing around with lens hoods and filters seems to me to be inconsistent with either objective.<br><br>I guess it's a sign of the times (digital, etc.) but I'm surprised by the lack of interest in this new compact. I used to own a Contax T2 and used it take all manner of stuff that still holds up pretty well for my 'grab shot style' stock work. I sold it to part fund a digital SLR a while back and have regretted it ever since. I for one I'm quite interested in the CM as a potential T2 replacement. The T3 seems to me to be too small and menu driven for my liking. The CM, however, looks to be much more T2-like with a good spec (1/1000 shutter, etc.). All in all it could be a pretty useful way to carry around a quality 40mm lens package - even at 1000 euros or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 <<for starters, it will not accept filters or hoods. isn't that an essential feature for any serious amateur/professional camera??>> Where did you get the notion that this camera was directed at that market? And what do you want from Leica for only $1000? This camera is for three types of people: 1. Those who want a simple P&S that they think will fool other people into thinking they're great photographers because they use a Leica. Of course most people don't know what a Leica is or care, so in essence these people are really trying to fool themselves or won't admit it. 2. Those who want to involve their non-photographer significant other in "Leica Photography" to get them off their backs regarding their purchases of expensive Leica gear. 3. Those for whom age has made using a manual rangefinder camera difficult or impossible but who still want to use a "Leica". Please don't suggest that this is meant as a backup camera to an M outfit. That's what CL's, Bessa R2's and beater M's are for--any of which are much less expensive than the CM/Minilux. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_shihanian Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 We can always count on you Jay, to look at the bright side, can't we? I still think A LOT of "M" users will grab a CM to keep in their bags or when they don't want to even take along a bag of gear, just what they use a CL for now. Have you had a look at used CL's asking prices with the 40mm lens? Do so and then compare to the CM. Many sellers are asking around $750-$850. That's for a certainly used example that's approaching 30 years of age. Also don't forget you're comparing that to a brand new CM of $1000. Who knows what the used price will be in a year? Certainly less than $1000, which will make it hard to resist, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin m. Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 How bout this, Jay? <p> 4. Fairly well-heeled film enthusiast wants the convenience of a pocketable camera <i>but</i> with the option of manual control and is willing to pay to get it. <p> Of course, that supposes that someone who disagrees with you might have logical reasons for doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_r._fulton_jr. Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 It's pretty light at 300grams (10.6oz). When you consider this camera weighs less than a 50mm Summicron it might be a backup of sorts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_michel Posted October 10, 2003 Author Share Posted October 10, 2003 jay -- while you are doubtless an authority on this subject, i will merely offer a few observations: 1. the original hexar, the contax T cameras, and (to a lesser degree) the nikon 35/28Tis all attracted a large serious amateur/pro following. indeed, these were more often than not serious cameras for serious photogs. maybe leica no longer wants to cater to this niche, but it seems like they could/should. further, the manual settings/standard hot shoe arangement, etc. suggest, in fact, that they are trying to target this group. why not go whole hog?? 2. as for "what i expect for $1000," the features i am talking about are, essentially, zero cost items. in fact, leica would make money thru the sale of accessories. 3. the cm is certainly not a backup for an M (i.e. a camera to use when the M breaks down), but virtually every news photog i know carries a yashica t4 or similar in his bag as a last-chance camera. i covered the last thirty minutes (i.e. the only part anyone cares about) of the miss america pageant several years ago with a borrowed olympus stylus after an overzealous state trooper confiscated my "suspicious" camera bag when i popped out of my seat for a few minutes. the shots were indistinguishable from those taken with my f100s of course. as for the notion that filters have little real utility in general photography, b&w or color, i can only sigh and shrug my shoulders. intellegent use of filters, like intellegent use of lighting (real and artificial) is often what separates proessional from amateur results. get a set of color filters, some graduated neutral density filters, a polarizer (easy to use with RF), a few color warming filters, and a 16X or 32X neutral density (for shallow depth of field in bright light), use them for a few months, and then try to get along without them. god bless you if you can!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip_williams Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 <<for starters, it will not accept filters or hoods. isn't that an essential feature for any serious amateur/professional camera??>> I agree with Jay's comments in general. 95%+ of the buyers of this camera will never consider the use of a filter or a hood. Most will buy it as a posh P&S. Too many of us take ourselves too seriously with Leica products and our opinions of the feature sets. This is a fashion/snob camera, not one designed to out-feature Contax. How many Contax T? users has anyone seen with a filter on their camera? Unless you were at a photo club or something, I'd suggest the answer is NONE! They don't care. In fact, how many times have you seen any a normal consumer with an SLR with a non-UV/1A filter on their lens? I could count them on one hand over the past 5 years. I once saw a lady that had a polarizer over her zoom while shooting indoor with her kids. I asked why she would do this and she said that she had bought the camera/lens with the filter on several years before and had never taken it off! (I didn't say anything else.) I also wish I could count the number of times that I see people using their SLR zoom lens with the tulip hood still reversed on the lens; they don't even know what it's for, much less that it actually is supposed to go on the lens pointing outwards! Now you're going to tell me that the target audience for the CM is going to use it with a hood or a filter? I don't think that the Leica marketing/sales or the camera-store sales guy will make any sales with that feature. Unless it's sales of hoods and filters. :-) (sorry about the soap box rant, but it's reality) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_michel Posted October 10, 2003 Author Share Posted October 10, 2003 again, it's a zero cost item. why not do it?? even if it only improves the camera's street cred. as for who uses filters with these cameras, i will only point out that filter adapter kit for the T3/tvs is frequetly sold out at b&h (as is the hood). the same is true of the adapters/filters/hoods for the ricoh gr cameras. they are often very hard to get. literally billions of people use cameras. few of them are experts, and that's fine. but that doesn't mean that leica, whose name is synonomous with non plus ultra cameras has to cater to the lowest common denominator. was contax and ricoh insane to include the filter option in their very highly regarded cameras?? why would leica go another way?? finally, given the rough treatment that p&s cameras get, even the ability to mount a UVa filter and leave it there is quite useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin m. Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 "(sorry about the soap box rant, but it's reality)" Funny how often you hear 'reality' or 'facts' or 'tellin' it like it is' used to justify a mean-spirited rant. Here's reality: Most cameras, whatever their features, are under-utilized. Just make sure yours isn't one of them. Seems like a better use of free time than creating straw men to knock over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen_w. Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 Is the CM a film or digital camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_michel Posted October 10, 2003 Author Share Posted October 10, 2003 funny you should mention that. it is a film camera, but the size and placement of the LCD screen (and the surround for same) makes it look perfectly suited to serving as the housing for a digital CM (along the lines of the digital TVS which so resembeles the film T cameras). anyway, it is a film camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen_w. Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 Thanks Roger, I guess I'm not current with the new Leica news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip_williams Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 << Funny how often you hear 'reality' or 'facts' or 'tellin' it like it is' used to justify a mean-spirited rant. >> Actually, your comments are not really funny to me. I wasn't trying to be mean-spirited. I didn't insult anyone. I didn't degrade anyone's opinion. I didn't drag religion, politics, race, sex, or basic beliefs into the the thread as has been done so many times. I also tried not to over-emotionalize the post. I just recounted what I've seen in my little corner of the western world. If your experiences are different and you're surrounded by a different breed of consumers, then by all means, say so....but don't call me mean, that's just not nice. BTW, where was I wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_hall1 Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 Welcome to the club, Skip! Those of us (me included) who didn't believe Kamol needed all that help, also earned that moniker. ;-) Sorry Kevin, I don't mean I earned it from you. :o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin m. Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 "BTW, where was I wrong?" You make your argument with one anecdotal incident, the rest is just straw men erected for the purpose of being knocked over. How many Contax T users have you seen, personally? How do you know the users you saw didn't screw on a filter just moments after being observed by you? I'd say your experience is too limited to draw any worthwhile conclusions. The New Leica is a "fashion/snob" camera? Again, how do you know this? Were you at the Leica marketing meeting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_rivera5 Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 Kevin, With all due respect and not trying to be mean, if you think for one minute that Leica marketing doesn't spend a whole lot of time on the fashion/snob factor of their products well...oh never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 <<Actually, your comments are not really funny to me. I wasn't trying to be mean-spirited. I didn't insult anyone. I didn't degrade anyone's opinion.>> All you did to provoke Kevin into one of his juvenile attacks was make the statement "I agree with Jay's comments in general." He didn't even read past that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 <<I still think A LOT of "M" users will grab a CM to keep in their bags or when they don't want to even take along a bag of gear, just what they use a CL for now.>> I don't think anyone will carry a CM who uses the M for the usual cliched reasons (which if you base on this forum is most people)such as fast interchangeable lenses, mechanical battery-independent, quiet cloth FP shutter, precise manual rangefinder focusing. <<Have you had a look at used CL's asking prices with the 40mm lens? Do so and then compare to the CM. Many sellers are asking around $750-$850 >> Who said anything about the 40mm lens? The CL is a compact backup that takes the users existing M lenses. <<Also don't forget you're comparing that to a brand new CM of $1000. Who knows what the used price will be in a year? Certainly less than $1000, which will make it hard to resist, IMO.>> Even if the used price in a year is $500 it's more expensive than a brand-new Bessa R2. And a lot more can go wrong with it, more even than taking a chance on a $700 M4-2 that hasn't had a CLA recently. The point of a backup is that it should be at the ready when needed, and fill in for the main body. A CM needs batteries, has a fixed 40mm lens, and the "manual focus" is along the same lines (using the AF sensor with a graphic display)as the Contax G2 that Leica users continually point to as a horrible drawback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cd thacker Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 As fond as I am of all things Leica, I can't for the life of me figure out why, or under what circumstances, I'd want to spend $1000 for a camera like the CM. If a grand meant absolutely nothing to me, then maybe. <p> If I <i>had</i>, for some reason, to have a P&S that (unlike my favored Stylus Epic) offered manual control, I could think of any number of options that cost less than $1000. Any of those Jay mentions, plus several others.<p> The CM has to be targeted at the Leica diehard <i>in extremis</i> new money camp. People who buy silk scarves at Hermes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_h Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 I agree that the general public who may buy a new CM is probably not a �serious� photographer, but then again there is money to be made selling to the masses so is that really a surprise? I also don�t think it is strange that those who visit this forum would like more control and/or features as we here are enthusiasts, whether we are beginner, Pro, amateur, Wank... :-) On the specifics of filters for P&S cameras I don�t/didn�t plan to use them on my T3, and probably still won�t, but yesterday was outside and thinking of taking some shots of some friends during some afternoon high winds with lots of blowing sand and dirt, not uncommon to the high desert Great Basin I call home. I decided not to use my T3 for some unimportant grab shots as I didn�t care to invite grit into the lens. Regarding the Contax T3: As some know, after some input from the forum and some on-line shopping and study I bought a used (mint) T3 from Rich Pinto at The Photo Village for a reasonable (though admittedly still expensive for a �P&S�) $400.00. In my use over the past 10 days (thee rolls; 1 color, 2 B&W) I like the T3 very much! Best �P&S� I have ever had. I have carried it in a shirt pocket a couple time, but prefer the leather belt pouch it came with. As others have noted, the T3 has enough features to require the use of the manual, though I read the manual and adjusted the custom functions before taking my first shot. I have referred to the manual a few times to study a couple of finer points but I think I have a good grip on it (in spite of its small size :-). I don�t find the menus too complicated; it is certainly has less �features� and is less complex than my Canon (film) SLRs an be. I have set the flash to be �off� when I turn on the camera, set the exposure compensation dial to +1/3 stop for my negative films and it is 99% ready for me to turn on and shoot in either �P�-program or aperture priority, which I prefer. Because of the aperture priority I was able to take the shot below of a flowing river. Nothing stupendous but hard to do with a regular P&S that selects everything for you and doesn�t tell you what the settings are (or approximately). Or the other shot of a fallen firefighter statue with limited DOF of a large aperture and the close focusing ability of the T3. I'm very happy with what I have been able to do with my Leica Ms over the past year+, but the T3, or a similar �high end� camera can offer creative opportunities for those willing to carry and use them for taking pictures. P.S. Long live the Photo.net Leica Forum!<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_h Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 Firefighter 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