Leica M series digital ? (1 Viewer)

[Lenny HB]

My new phone has twin Leica lenses.

 

[Go Humberto!]

I used to own a Titanium M6 with a couple of lenses I loved it and must have put a thousand of rolls of film through it. these mechanical Leicas were stunningly well engineered. But I wouldn't by a digital Leica. No more than I'd by a digital Rolex. Though I would like my old M6 back

Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to bait Alistair33. Actually I think Jim's post is a better reflection of what I was trying to say.

There WAS a clear reason to buy mechanical, 35mm film, Leicas. They were of unparalleled quality (and heavily copied once the Russians got their hands on the factory).
Just like a mechanical/automatic Rolex there is true craftsmanship in building a precision mechanical device (I have a couple of mechanical/automatic watches for that very reason but neither is as accurate as a £10 Casio).

Modern Leicas aren't the miraculous mechanical masterpieces of old. Technologically they really are a bit backward. People seem to love them because of their quirks and the way they handle.

Unfortunately their lack of some features you'd expect on a camera costing £1,000 seems bizarre when you consider they cost £6,000 and more (except when you consider they are made in Switzerland perhaps).

It seemed very strange to me that someone prepared to buy the most expensive of cameras wasn't sure what lenses to buy for it. Personally I'd be consulting a Leica dealership or a Leica owners forum because each Leica lens could be a £3,000 mistake if it's not the one for you.

Anyway, point taken. I should have recommended a lens (Leica Summicron-M 35mm F2.0...because I love the 35mm lens POV) or stayed out of it, it is after all, Alistair33's £10,000 to spend on a camera and lenses as he likes.

 

[Jim]

Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to bait Alistair33. Actually I think Jim's post is a better reflection of what I was trying to say.

I thought you were rather condescending in your post,

If you don't know what lenses you need then why would you be buying a Leica?

They are the most expensive cameras, for what you actually get, on the planet.

If you need advice, on a Motorhome forum, about what lenses to get for a £3000-£5000 camera, then you shouldn't be buying that camera.

It's like asking Motorhome owners what tyres they'd recommend for a Bugatti Veyron.

The thread was old and he’s bought and enjoying his Leicaand lenses The tone of your post was no excuse for his response but telling him what he should and shouldn’t be buying or where to get advice clearly rubbed him the wrong way as it would most people including yourself probably.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Neckender]

I have a problem with my camera as it cuts peoples heads off when I take their pictures.

John.

 

[Floydster]

I have a problem with my camera as it cuts peoples heads off when I take their pictures.

John.

Just photograph shorter people....

 

[Geo]

I have a problem with my camera as it cuts peoples heads off when I take their pictures.

John.

I know just what you mean

Just photograph shorter people....

It hasn't helped

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Steve and Denise]

So to put this in a nutshell
If you can not tell the time buy a TIMEX,
When you learn to tell the time buy a ROLEX,

 

[dabhand]

So to put this in a nutshell
If you can not tell the time buy a TIMEX,
When you learn to tell the time buy a ROLEX,

Your not trying to be a “banker” are you Steve?

 

[davejen]

So to put this in a nutshell
If you can not tell the time buy a TIMEX,
When you learn to tell the time buy a ROLEX,

Ah, but can you take a piccy with one??
Cheers, Dave

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[movan]

Your not trying to be a “banker” are you Steve?

I don't know but I'm sure someone will be along soon who can tell you.

 

[EuroTrotters]

I did not realise they cost so much!

 

[Silver-Fox]

So to put this in a nutshell
If you can not tell the time buy a TIMEX,
When you learn to tell the time buy a ROLEX,

Ahh Rolex
All fur coat and no knickers
IMHO

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Steve and Denise]

Never had the need for knickers but am learning how to tell the time with my sun dial, its a CEMEX, Had it delivered in a mixer.

 

[Langtoftlad]

...especially as Rolex are 90% image driven by advertising.
In the 50's Rolex was a good watch but nothing special.
The average worker would have to spend about 3 weeks wages to own one. Now in comparison that same worker would have to spend the equivalent of 5 months wages.
There haven't been many technological upgrades to the movement to justify such a hike in prices - some aficionados view the Rolex movement as... "agricultural".
Nevertheless, had you bought a Rolex Submariner in the 60's, stuck it in the safe - you'd be looking at a tidy profit now.

Good for Leica if they've hung onto their brand image despite the decimation of film in the onslaught of digital. Obviously, digital or film - the glass, the lens is paramount.

But I do wonder - if Leica can charge £3k for a lens, how come my budget Panasonic Lumix Bridge camera has a Leica lens ???

 

[tinkering]

In 1968 I paid just over three month wages for a automatic Rolex,I bought it in Jersey
Unfortunately I found that although it worked perfectly well on my right wrist I could never get it to wind up properly when it was on my left

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[DBK]

In 1968 I paid just over three month wages for a automatic Rolex,I bought it in Jersey
Unfortunately I found that although it worked perfectly well on my right wrist I could never get it to wind up properly when it was on my left