The Rise, Near Demise, and Rebirth of the Leica Camera

Cool video report (about 6 minutes) on the Leica and its continuing legacy. Wish I could afford one!
http://www.petapixel.com/2013/01/05/the-rise-near-demise-and-rebirth-of-the-leica-camera/

dan c

 

As McCartney says: Love your Biker Leica Nikon.

 

The folks at Leica have had a very busy year, culminating in one of their largest lineup changes in ages.

They announced a new 35mm film camera called the M-A, priced at a mere $6,495 (don't worry, they throw in a roll of Kodak Tri-X for ya! Shaves off $5...). That's right, a FILM camera. Very cool, but it's priced for people who don't actually ever shoot photos...

https://fstoppers.com/film/leica-lo...-fully-mechanical-35mm-film-rangefinder-37486

They also introduced something weirder than a new film camera this day and age. A new digital camera without a screen. Yup. It's a retro, purist old-school rangefinder that happens to capture digitally. You've gotta wait to get to your computer to see what you've done (or maybe use an Eye-Fi card to send photos to your phone/tablet).
http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/16/6182703/leica-m-edition-60-announced

Both cameras are so pretty. It would be nice if working documentary photographers and photojournalists could afford them though.

dan c

 

Beautiful, but at $15k I reluctantly have to pass.

 

File under: New cameras marketed to rich fetishists.

A small niche, to be sure.

A digital camera without a screen reminds me the Polaroid PDC-2000:



$2500-5000 in 1996. SCSI connectivity. 1600x1200 resolution. And did autofocusing by SONAR (!!) (which meant that you could autofocus in the pitch dark), although possibly not know what you'd focused on).

I had one of these, purchased as a closeout for maybe $500. Thankfully sold for, as I recall, a little more than I paid for it, a little while later.

 

Heck with Leica. Go for the Hasselblad H4 D200:



It's only $45,000! For that price, buy two, and don't skimp on the lenses.

 

Pretty much. If someone gave me a choice between one of these and a bunch of Zeiss lenses adapted to my Minolta XD11 SLR body, I'd choose the latter. But I'm a working photographer with my own very sideways take on gear. This kind of stuff leaves me cold.

 

Fits nicely in the 'camera as a fashion accessory'- market, I think. Like the Nikon Df:

What puzzles me about these camera's is; they have a great build quality, but who wants a camera that lasts 25 years when the technology will be bettered in 5?
For more practicality I'd go for the Fujifilm X100T, but that's me.

 

In the same category of the Maserati that I will never own.

 

Now THAT is a trippy artifact from the dark ages of digital! Wow. I loved the Polaroid sonar autofocus technology. What a clever piece of engineering. It was great on their SX-70 TimeZero cameras, though it kind of cluttered up the gorgeous look of the original design. Such a shame they couldn't transition to the digital age. So innovative.

You're spot on about fetish gear. The new Leica stuff never suffers the indignity of dust or rain or fingerprints. It's kept safely inside the trophy NYC condo on Central Park.

dan c

 

No one is buying this Leica stuff to use it, and it's not that great-I hate to say it-anyway. I think if someone made a good clone of the original M3 at a reasonable price they'd sell a fair number though.