Leica CM Review

terry_rory · December 12, 2003

Robin you must have had a faulty GR1. My GR1-V is bang-on with AF in both normal and spot mode. It is a passive AF so it looks for textures/lines etc to focus on rather than some IR beacon. There are compromises with both systems (active / IR systems are hopeless with shiny metal & glass or focusing on something through glass whereas passive has problems with featureless, textureless surfaces) but I havent found any occasions yet where AF/spot AF or manual have lost me a shot using the GR1-V. The advantage of the AF on the GR1-V is that the L bracket, R bracket, centre box indicator and the distance symbols between them tell you exactly what has been found to focus on (eg. nose tip or eye or single leaf etc.) AND if the focus were to fail to find something it would still take a shot at a default focus of 8.2 feet if you pressed the shutter home. In other words the camera would'nt stop you getting your shot. (Although this has'nt happened to me yet.) I see no issue with having filters for my GR1-V. I use UV for protection or 81b for dull days or orange with B&W film for darkening skies. Using a filter doesnt make a GR1-V into a big or cumbersome system so.... "then you might as well take your "real" kit." is a stupid comment. The GR1-V is definitely 'Real kit'.

Also, how does a little 30.5mm filter UV to protect a lens become.... "worrying about filters"? They take about 5 seconds to change over (including setting filter compensation) no worry at all.

You may as well say... "having exposure compensation on a P&S for backlit situations means you may as well take your SLR with you"

Robin Smith · December 12, 2003

Trevor

OK - but I don't find mine is a fast focusser at all. I usually use it on spot and it is a catalog of frustration. It is better on non-spot but then it seems to always picks the one thing you don't want focussed on (the closest). I don't think there is anything wrong with the camera, but on city streets, say, in dull conditions I do not find this is its strong point. Any manual focus camera is so much faster. It is true it does at least not lock the release until it has found focus, but this is not a lot of consolation if the image is not sharp.

You like to use filters on a P & S - good for you. My point was I think they are a pain in the ass and that therefore Roger's comment that not being able to fit them on a P & S was a deal breaker does not apply to all of us. I shoot mainly color with mine so I find no need for any filters - so this would be of no consequence to me in considering a CM (not that I am). The GR1V is an ingenious camera, but I do not find mine a pleasure to use in the focussing dept as soon as the light begins to fail.

brien_m · December 12, 2003

Thanks for the review David. It sounds tempting because of the fast focus and quiet operation. I use both the T3 and the GR1s and they make a lot of focus and winder noise (particularly the GR1), which I am finding more and more irritating. Ergonomically the T3 isn't good and feels cheap compared to the T2. I would get rid of my T3 because I prefer the 40mm focal length, but for $1K and no filter/hood ..... even by Leica standards this will be a low volume sales item.

terry_rory · December 12, 2003

OK Robin I take your points. I guess it is true that none of us are identical in the way we use our cameras or what we expect of them.

The use of filters on a P&S is not essential to me (not a deal breaker as you say, just nice to have) so the lack of filters on the T2 or Minilux or CM would not really be an issue.

icuneko · December 12, 2003

'Tis the Season to be Jolly, so don't take this post as Scrooge's. Granted, the CM pics are fine, and it does say Leica on the body, but US$1,000 or the equivalent for a P&S? C'mon now.

john15 · December 12, 2003

Does anyone know anything about the Rollei AFM? It seems to be made to similiar standards as the T3 but cost less than half the price at B&H. Maybe it's because of the lower price that it's shunned, you know, how could it be any good for a mere $300? Leica seems to have learned that lesson pretty well. Charge twice what it's worth and some people will be convinced that it must be a superior camera because, after all, don't you get what you pay for? {Anecdote: afriend was going to treat himself to a very expensive German sports car now that all the kids had finished college and the mortgage was paid off.As it happened, he met the parts manager for the expensive German auto dealer at a Christmas cocktail party who told him, simply, don't do it. If it was a fun to drive, well designed roadster that he wanted, said parts manager advised him [rather strongly, though his words may have been lubricated by strong libation] to give serious consideration to the Mazda Miyata.

mathias_tornqvist1 · December 12, 2003

It seems that almost everybody thinks of cameras such as the Leica CM, Hexar, T3 as

point-and-shoot cameras, and therefore less worthy of spending ones money on,

regardless of quality. Not fair!

Compare the CM to, for example, the Contax G series. On the G2, most people will

use the autofocus, use aperture priority, perhaps lock focus and exposure, and press

the shutter. It's how I work 80% of the time on my Canon D60. And it's how I'd use a

CM, a TC-1, a GR-1, etc. When is comes down to it, what you're calling a P/S only

really seem to be lacking two things - lens interchangablilty and fully manual

exposure (although the Hexar has this). Most of them have manual focus (sometimes

awkward guess-the-distance focus, a bit like the Rollei 35).

For some uses I'd happily exchange size for lens interchangability, and with AE lock

and exposure compensation, how much do you really need full manual?

So compare cameras on their own merits, not on how you can get a Stylus Epic for

$79 and argue that since they are both P/S cameras, $800 must be a ripoff.

john15 · December 12, 2003

Actually, I was not comparing the Stylus Epic with anything. I wonder, though, if Olympus chopped out a titanium box and stuck the guts for the Epic in said tiianium box instead of very practical but plebian high impact plastic case if people would then regard that camera as a high end P&S worth several hundred additional dollars? Most or my photography these days involves carrying a camera with me most of the time. I am not very interested in interchangable lenses; my Nikons have plenty that I almost never use. I would be happy to spend the money on a really well designed, well engineered, well consructed camera. Range finder, P%S I don't give a fig. The Rollei 35 [i own two] is a very easy camera to use and focus. It's greatest liability is that it's old and parts are hard to come by when it needs them. And as far as Iam concerned, just because something is made in Germany does not automatically makr it superior in any way whatsoever. Rather the other way around: the Japanese seem to have better QC than most German products or, at least, Leica GMBH. I can't understand why someone willing to spend the bucks cannot find a really fine fixed lens, auto focus camera that will last the years [Like Leica used to]. Any ideas greatfully accepted.

george_shihanian · December 13, 2003

I thought all you Leica shooters hated things like autofocus, autoexposure, batteries, electronic shutters, etc. Or is that all a smokescreen because your 50 year old cameras don't offer you those things?! SO- Why is the CM worth $1000 to you? I know I'm viewing these shots on a computer screen, BUT... if I could live with the slight distortion that is evident with a close subject, and softness wide open, I'd just buy another Olympus XA for $50, yes, an XA. Shots from my XA will look at least as good as these look.

john15 · December 13, 2003

This forum is sometime quite perverse. The Leica "M" is what it is: a rather small RF camera, pretty well made [usually]. But it is not the kind of camera that you can really call a "pocket camera", at least not in any of my pockets. I know, you can put a collapsible Elmar on it, etc, etc. Still not a pocket camera. There are those who carry their Leicas dangling around their necks where ever they go. Not even Hank Bresson did that. And neither will I. So what's left out there that has any kind of real quality to it? The T2 [no longer in production], The T3 [faulty design], CM [who knows], Rollei AFM [where's the flaw?]. Let's get away from that "Leica Mystique" b.s.for awhile and try to be helpful. Or maybe all the really portable cameras out there are crap. And I doubt that Konica is going to take a chance on designing and producing a high quality AF film camera these days. But if they do, I'll be among the six people who will buy one!

icuneko · December 13, 2003

"Hank" Bresson? Mon Dieu!

terry_rory · December 14, 2003

I got the Contax T2 delivered from Ffordes yesterday and it was'nt just Mint it was unused. All the packaging was completely unopened including battery, strap, case, instructions and warranty card. The little removable insert inside the camera had never been removed either! Not a scratch or fingerprint or mark of any description. It functions perfectly. At half the UK price of a Leica CM (or a T3) I am very happy.

Does anyone want a Leica CM press pack folder with sample 12x8, DVD, and brochure etc? I have now lost interest in getting one.

robert goldstein · December 15, 2003

In judging the Leica CM, one must be aware of the fact that it is still a compact

camera that falls within the category of Point and Shoot. Hence, one should not

expect to find all of the features that might be present in a larger, more complete

camera. For instance, Roger bemoans the fact that the CM does not actually

achieve focus and metering at the time that they are set manually. Basically, he wants

it to functions like an M camera. While that might be nice, bear in mind that the CM

has autofocus and autometering, which, if sufficiently fast and accurate, largely do

away with the need for pre-setting the camera.

I own a Contax T2, which I love dearly. The T2's viewfinder and ergonomics make it

a pleasure to use. Moreover, the lens is superb and takes pictures that rival those

from my G2. But I see the T2 as a lovely supplement to my G2, not a replacement, so

I am willing to accept its shortcomings. I believe that this his how most owners will

come to see the CM, i.e. a very capable camera that can do most, but not all, of the

things that an M can do.

leicamshooter · December 19, 2003

Thank you for the review Mr. Bolduc. My hesitation with the CM was that the auto-focusing/winding would be obtrusive and loud, but if you feel that it is relatively quiet, then this camera very much appeals to me. I have an M3 with a 50 summicron. It's all the camera gear I have. It's easy to travel like this. I think the CM would be perfect for those times when even my small outfit is too much.

BH photo is listing the camera already --but doesn't have it in stock yet-- and it comes with a 4 year warranty! To me 4 years is a nice and secure thing when spending $1K on any camera! The Minilux only came with a 1 year warranty if I'm correct? The manufacture no doubt feels much more secure about the realiability of the CM than previous models.

kipling · January 12, 2004

1. Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a

laxative on the same night.

2. There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental

illness."

3. Never lick a steak knife.

And last but not least:

You should never say anything to a woman that even remotely

suggests that you think she's pregnant unless you can see an

actual baby emerging from her at that moment.

Besides that, I'm not sure if it's my monitor but the photos from

Dave seem a bit over exposed. Is this the camera or my

monitor? Anyway, thanks for the reveiw, I'm staying with my T2!

bobtodrick · January 22, 2004

I'm always amazed how many people like to bitch when they here how others wish to spend their money. GET A LIFE!!!

brian304 · January 22, 2004

Hello,

Thanks for the info on the CM. When you press down on the shutter, does it make a noise from focusing? I tried a Contax g2 but found the whir sound to be a bit annoying.

thank you

Brian

david_bolduc · January 23, 2004

From what I can remember, everything was very quiet. The CM would be an ideal camera to use at a wedding or any other function where you wanted the minimal of noise. By comparison, I recently got to try out a Rollei AFM35 which was much louder (more like my old Olympic Stylus). Of course, the AFM35 took nice pictures too at less than 1/3 the price of the Leica. Still, whenever I show pictures from both cameras together, people seem to pick out those from the Leica as being "better". Go figure it. Next I'd like to try a Contax T3 to see how it compares to the other two cameras.

brian304 · January 24, 2004

Thanks David. I will head to a dealer.

Brian

john_mccormack · January 24, 2004

Just got the following email from B&H Photo/Video:

"Dear Customer

Thank you for your inquiry for this item:

Leica - LECM - CM Camera. We would like to inform you that this item is now available from bhphotovideo.com.

Check it out:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/sitem/sku=302882&is=REG&bi=E15 "

john15 · January 24, 2004

I understand that the CM has a focal plane shutter. Is this an advantage over the between the lens shutter that most PnS cameras have? Is the shutter made of cloth or metal? I like the CR123 power cell, longer lasting than the smaller CR2 and easier to find outside of photo stores. Is the camera made wholly in Germany or are the finishing touches done there and the basic unit put together in Asia and if it is made mostly in Asia how come the heavy price tag?

ted_clutter1 · January 31, 2004

I bought a Leica CM from B&H Photo sight unseen, even after reading the nasty assumptions by Leica Club Nitpickers on this PhotoNet.com page. After running about 10 rolls of film through the camera, I find it worth every penny of the $1,000 paid for my purposes. To correct some misperceptions and "apples and oranges" comparisons with chincy point and shoots in other reviews by complainers who have not even seen the camera yet, the Leica CM is definitely not a point and shoot - it is a compact camera. In actual use, I have observed the following (besides the fact that the camera has a leaf shutter in the lens, not a focal plane).

1) Leica build quality - No disappointment here. My past compacts were the Yashica T4 (a truly amazing piece for the money), and the Contax TVSII (beautifully built, but larger than pocket size, and no variable diopter). The Leica beats them both, and I like the leather covering and other subtle Leica design accents. It fits the hands well; is comfortable (ergonomically correct) to frame and hold steady; the viewfinder comes up quickly and accurately to the eye; the LED display is simple and intuitive.

2) Compact, pocketable size, exactly the same as the venerable Yashica T4. The Contax T3 is smaller and offers many of the same features, but its size creates complications in use for those of us without pencil points for fingers. The Leica CM will fit into a dress shirt pocket easily. I use a small camera bag (Lowepro) that just fits the camera, and wear it around my neck, resting on my chest. This makes the camera instantly accessible, while affording a large measure of protection.

3) Clean, sharp viewfinder with variable diopter (which is not offered on cheap point and shoots). This is necessary for us "old farts" who cannot see very well through most point and shoot viewfinders. Since I have used SLRs for most of the last 40 years, I like to see through viewfinders clearly - without a variable diopter I am lost. The Leica CM diopter is right on!

4) Improved (coating) Leica Summarit Lens, proven on the Minilux for years as a superior piece of glass. The fixed 40mm focal length is perfect for my style of shooting. No matter what their defenders say, even the best zoom lenses are always inferior to the best fixed focal length lenses. Zooms also require more mechanization, add weight and are a major culprit in relation to battery drain. For most applications I like a moderate wide angle because it by necessity puts you into the action, which for me means better shots. If I need to "zoom," I use my legs. In addition, lack of a zoom requires less fiddling with the machine and more attention to composition and exposure.

5) Powerful flash for its size (GN 30 with ASA 100) that covers the picture area without hot spots and other problems. I have found exposure right on with the Leica CM flash, and in its various modes it works beautifully with longer exposures as fill light (including second curtain flash).

6) There are 15 shooting modes in all. This might sound daunting and confusing, but not the way Leica has worked it out. The five "most used" modes are available with a simple button push on the camera back and a rotation of a very conveniently located selector knob. With a little "dry run" practice, it becomes quite intuitive to select the mode you want.

7) The Leica CM has manual focus, which I have found to be right on the money. My only wish for the camera lies here - it would be nice if the focus wheel had a lock. But even if it is accidentally engaged, you can't miss the warning in the viewfinder. So no big deal.

8) The camera has aperture priority set by a very convenient and logically located thumbwheel. I currently am using the Leica CM in the flash off mode (when turned on).

9) Autofocus - this is one of the loudest complaints I read about the camera - its lag time when taking a picture. The Leica CM is no different in lag time than the Yashica T4, which admittedly is slow. When you press the shutter button (which is very smooth, by the way), the camera must focus before it fires. The complainers in this thread compare the CM to their autofocus SLRs or larger rangefinders, which is unfair. Those cameras innately have much more room for heavier and faster components. I believe the Leica engineers did their best with the CM. I also do not believe its "slow" response time is a big deal, because it still focuses faster than I can, and if you are shooting a moving object, you can always prefocus and hold with the "half button" shutter approach. While this also holds the exposure measured at the same time, I see few practical situations where this would create any real problem.

The Leica CM is a beautiful compact camera that I am sure will suit my needs. My only question is how it will hold up, but time will tell, and a 3-year warranty is a big consolation. My message to the complainers is: "Get a Life." If you don't like the Leica CM, don't buy it. But if you want a compact camera with its "big brother" features, a beautifully sharp lens, diopter viewfinder, etc., don't be afraid to spend the money. And I have to say it. Digitals are still crap with their fiddley camera bodies, extreme zoom ranges, memory cards too small for truly quality work, cost in time and money, etc. In fact, digital is the �Big Lie� out there now, as many who �went digital� are coming back to film for all of its advantages.

And my final point: How is it that so many of the complainers in this thread can form such egotistical, self-righteous opinions about a product they have never seen? And even more importantly, think that they have all the answers? The design and manufacture of a complex machine like the Leica CM (or any other professional camera) is a lengthy battle of concepts, trials, and detailed considerations by some of the best engineers in the world. For everything they do and choice they make, there are endless evaluations and group criticisms. Add to that the need to get the product up to speed and to market at a reasonable cost, and to design a manufacturing and repair process around it all. Think about it. Everything these so-called �experts complain about was more likely than not thought through several times and accepted/rejected for important reasons that their small minds cannot even begin to comprehend. For most �photographers,� the machine they hold in their hands is more of a work of art than anything they will ever produce with it.

ted_clutter1 · January 31, 2004