
A Leica T Review - constantinum
http://www.minimallyminimal.com/blog/leica-t
======
aaronbrethorst
Allow me to preface this by saying that I currently own four cameras, two
digital and two film.

My digital cameras are a Fuji X100s and a Fuji X-T1 (I used to have a Canon 5D
Mk II, but decided to go all in on mirrorless digital cameras).

My film cameras are a Leica M6, and a Hasselblad 501C/M.

I use all four cameras on a regular basis, and have made photos with each one
within the last week.

I love my Leica M6. It's really a thing of beauty, and is impeccably designed.
That said, the amount of unthinking worship I see Leica given makes me roll my
eyes.

    
    
        Leica has always been a brand of
        uncompromised quality and craftsmanship.
    

This is a company whose first digital M camera suffered from serious issues
with color fringing from infrared light. Leica's solution for this problem
with their $5000 flagship camera was to ship their users a screw-on UV/IR
filter.

    
    
        The reason Leica’s products are expensive
        isn’t because of a deliberate attempt to
        overcharge for the products. It’s a side
        effect of making a beautiful object of desire.
    

This is the other problem I have with Leica fans. I love owning a beautiful
camera (both the Hasselblad and Leica are stunning devices), but I'm far more
interested in the quality of images that I can capture than I am in whether or
not the camera body was designed by Audi. Many Leica owners, on the other
hand, appear to be more interested in having a beautiful camera to admire on
their shelf than a tool for creating art
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M6#Leica_M6_special_editi...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M6#Leica_M6_special_editions))

    
    
        To truly understand the T, you have to fit
        into the type of photographer that the
        camera really aimed at. You have to know
        what you’re doing but the camera is also
        going to be underpowered for a pro. It’s
        a niche product for a specific consumer
        but also aesthetic preference.
    

So basically, you have to have more money than sense to want to own this
camera. I get it.

~~~
potatolicious
Not to mention Leicas were far more accessible in their heyday than they are
now - there is a widespread misbelief that Leica has always been crazy-
expensive, as a justification for their current prices.

The Leica M3 was $288 USD in 1955. That's $2560 in today's dollars. New Leica
bodies are $7000.

The original pricing of the Leica, before they became a piece of jewelry, is
in line with modern prosumer cameras, not the $7000 neurosurgeon wrist-
decorations they are today.

Oh, and the 50mm f/2 Summicron was $159 in 1955 ($1400 today). They are now
between $2400 and _$8200_.

I shoot a M6 also and have some pretty great, old glass. But modern Leicas are
status items that are _vastly_ overpriced for what they are.

~~~
lips
^All of this. As a stalwart Leica shooter of 10 years, it's not bitterness or
jealousy I feel, but sadness at their having moved on from making tools to
what amounts to more or less "just another camera," albeit of a rarified form.

The key moment for me was the M7, when they _reversed the direction_ the
shutter speed dial rotates. Though it seems rather innocuous, but as a daily
"lugger" with 2 other older bodies, it basically said "Goodbye, we don't care
about your type any longer."

That they couldn't really keep up with the immense digital R&D budgets of more
mainstream camera companies was not entirely surprising, and I accepted long
ago that a Leica purchase would consist of high cost, and performance (though
not _necessarily_ image quality) that equals a generation or two back as
compared to Canon/Nikon.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if this camera was immensely successful for
them. The avant-garde design (as compared to the current retro-schtick) has
cachet, <2K is a more reasonable price-point than the M models, it apparently
performs adequately, and a new lens mount gives it plenty of "retail therapy"
potential. This really is a page out of the Apple playbook.

Leica has been, for many years, not a single monolithic philosophy as
manifested in equipment, but a company navigating a rapidly changing market.
For a time they found a sizable market that echoed my wants, but no longer.
Such is life, and Leica is not alone. Plaubel-Makina and numerous other
companies were less fortunate or capable.

My "cred": 15+ years shooting/Leica
CL/M3/M6/M7/M9:Canon/AE-1/D30/D60:Nikon/FM-3/F100/D90/D700/D3/D800:Fuji/X100S

~~~
lips
After reading the reviews linked below, I take back any positive prediction
for this thing. Looks like Leica missed an opportunity to make a camera that's
competitive with other current models in respect to usability and speed. C'est
la vie.

------
TheMagicHorsey
Having used a great many different cameras what I think about Leicas is that
their primary advantage is the state of mind they create in the photographer,
which isn't really connected to any tangible usability in design, or
engineering marvel in the camera performance.

Just the fact that some photographers know they have a Leica in their hand,
makes them feel more liberated and ... how shall I say it ... "photographery".

I think it cannot be denied that with a suitable picture style, you could
shoot JPEGs on a 5D MkIII that look similar to what a Leica produces without
processing. I bet you most people would be hard pressed to tell the difference
between the JPEGs with their naked eye, and even fewer would be able to pick
out which one was from the Leica, and which from the 5DMkIII.

Leicas remind me of French Wine. Everyone waxes poetic about them until they
are asked to pick out the Leica photos from a lineup in a double blind test.

At that point everyone then says the Leica is about intangible things like
"superior UI".

In the end, I think the Leica is a brand first, and then a camera with certain
characteristics next.

A camera made from a solid carved piece of aluminum is just damn attractive.
But people feel the need to imbue the Leica with more qualities than it
actually has, because maybe they feel embarrassed to have chosen the tool of
their trade based on its looks, rather than its utility.

I for one think designers should not apologize for choosing a camera just
because it looks good. Design is their whole trade, and they need to surround
themselves with inspiration to get into their creative space.

I look at Leica as the cost of doing business for a designer. That is the way
their brains work.

And lest programmers develop some superiority complex about their rationality
... I want to suggest that the success of the Go programming language is about
aesthetics at this point.

~~~
caycep
In the film days, it really made a difference. You can use a Leica M4 or 6,
yeah it'd cost you a little more but your camera took amazing photos at 1/4
the weight and size of say, a Nikon F3, with a shutter that is whisper quiet.
You can go closer and shoot more unobtrusively; while a given Nikon has equal
optics, if different characteristics, it couldn't go where a Leica could. At
least that's my take on it.

Granted, you could get the same effect from, say, a Canonet or a Yashica but
still...

Nowadays, though - I am assuming mechanical precision and design is a more
commoditized skill amongst companies whereas EE design - semiconductors,
sensors, etc is more of a differentiator. In the age of tiny mirrorless Fuji's
and Sony's, Leica's value proposition is more or less destroyed.

I think it's the classic story of an original innovator sitting on their asses
while a disruptive tsunami -- modern electronics and computer science --
passed them by. Granted, they sat on their asses for arguably 4 full decades,
so they had plenty of time to go "oh shit" and adapt, and the fact that they
didn't leaves me with little sympathy.

Them and Eastman Kodak.

~~~
potatolicious
I agree with your general point, though I disagree with the history.

Japanese SLRs wiped the floor with Leica - Leica's competition wasn't
originally with SLRs, it was with more cumbersome "portable" cameras of their
time - TLRs. Leica was the first major 35mm player to actually make the
cameras usable with the featureset professionals wanted.

Leica's Golden Age was in an era where 35mm SLRs _didn 't exist_. SLRs like
the Nikon F3 were in fact the cameras that ultimately toppled Leica from their
throne.

People loved the WYSIWYG SLRs, they were cheaper to manufacture, and had lower
maintenance requirements (rangefinders drift over time/use). Even pros
practically completely switched over by the 80s - look at the cameras being
used by journalists in the 50s vs. the 80s and you'll see a complete collapse
of Leica.

Yeah, Leica was an original innovator who sat on their asses and got disrupted
- but the SLR was the disruptor, not really electronics/CS.

That said, the electronics/CS component of it did contribute. After all, the M
cameras didn't get an aperture priority mode until 2002. I'm not sure when Av
mode was invented, but the Canon AE-1P brought it to the mainstream in _1981_.
Leica was literally 20 years late.

~~~
caycep
Leica definitely was at a disadvantage in the marketing arena vs. SLRs. But
the arguments that M rangefinder still had photographic advantages to SLR's in
a number of situations still held weight. Sadly, I think even that selling
point has been erased in this day and age.

------
vparikh
The Leica T ($1850) + Summicron T 32mm ($1950) = $3800 The Sony A7 ($1499) +
Zeiss 55m f1.8 Sonnar ($999) = $2498

Thats a differential of $1302

Now lets get a few things out of the way -- Yes the Leica is a 35mm equivalent
and the Sony is a 55 mm equivalent. But I wanted to compare the best prime
lens in each setup (in Leica T system, that is the only prime lens available
so far) - The 55mm is arguably currently the Sony FE mount best lens. Also, I
will address the "Leica Way" later in this post.

So what are you getting in the Leica that is much better then the Sony?
NOTHING. The Sony is a FAR superior as a camera.

Sony:

\- Full sensor vs Crop. This has been debated to death, but everyone will
agree --> bigger sensor = better image IQ \- Faster Autofocus \- Better LCD
display \- Better EVF \- Better build (weather sealed) \- Better control (Two
dials + exposure compensation)

And the most important quality --- \- BETTER IMAGE QUALITY

Now before you guys go ranting about how Leica has a quieter shutter, better
ergonomics, helps me slow down, is a photographic style. Please.

That all applied in the film days -- I have a Leica MP with a Leica 50mm f1.4
and that is the greatest film camera every made. It is worth every penny. But
those were the film days.

The playing ground is completely different in the digital world. Leica does
not make its own sensors, and their for will never offer "the best image
quality".

What it is selling today is a reputation it has earned during the film days
and fashion icon for the rich hipsters out there.

Nothing wrong with that, and if you have the money and you value the
aesthetics and the feature set, great. Go buy one and enjoy it!

But please, stop with the how the Leica is the pinnacle of photography. It is
simply not true in the digital landscape.

~~~
SeanLuke
> Summicron T 32mm ($1950)

Did you mean 23mm?

~~~
vparikh
Yes -- I stand corrected. Thank you

------
bane
I dunno, I've thought about getting a Leica every once in a while, then I see
reviews like this with pictures from the camera and I'm always so "meh" about
how they look. Everything looks like there's a 2-5% grey filter on it, and
anything with any kind of luminescence always looks blown out. Most of the
sample galleries I've seen on the have the added minus of all looking just
slightly out of focus.

There's a definite "Leica look" for certain, I'm just not sure I've ever liked
how it looks.

On the other hand, the B&W photos I've seen taken with it look fantastic.

Looking at other reviews, this is a _heavy_ camera and really slow and clumsy
to work with. If I'm going to lug around this much, I may as well just lug
around a regular old DSLR and a decent lens.

Online reviews are pretty scathing for something in this price range

[http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/30/5755088/leica-t-
mirrorless...](http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/30/5755088/leica-t-mirrorless-
camera-review)

[http://reframe.gizmodo.com/leica-t-review-a-camera-should-
no...](http://reframe.gizmodo.com/leica-t-review-a-camera-should-not-be-a-
luxury-object-1591617449)

[http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2460584,00.asp](http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2460584,00.asp)
Some more sample galleries

[http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/leica...](http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/leica-
t-typ701-preview-samples-gallery#page=1)

[http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/30/5764700/leica-t-sample-
pho...](http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/30/5764700/leica-t-sample-photos)

[http://www.gizmag.com/leica-t-review-sample-
images/31990/](http://www.gizmag.com/leica-t-review-sample-images/31990/)

It seems like this is something people buy only because they want to be seen
with a Leica, not because they like photography.

 _edit_ I shoot mostly with a now ancient and well worn D60 that appears to
outperform this Leica in almost every measure despite being 7 years old.

~~~
ams6110
If money were no object and I were to buy a Leica for B&W it would be the M
Monochrom. A true monochrome sensor and a lot more choice in lenses.

[http://en.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Leica-M-
Monoc...](http://en.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Leica-M-Monochrom)

~~~
caycep
Or stash up on a lifetime supply of M6 Classics and a freezer full of Tri-X
and x-tol (or ascorbic acid) developer solution...I'm not sure what the going
price of a M Monochrom is but I'd bet you'd be able to get at least 5 M6's for
that price. Spare parts!

~~~
ams6110
True, but that assumes I'd want to do all the chemical processing that comes
with film photography. I used to do some of that, but it's not anything I'd
want to get back into.

~~~
lips
You can still generally get negs+contact sheet+scans for ok prices. I do
negs+contact sheet at a pro lab, and then shoot them with my D800 on a
lightbox, and import into Lightroom. With the proper curve and adjustment
presets, they're higher quality than my best film scanner scans.

------
Luc
Looking at the archives of this blog is amazing. It's the ultimate Connoisseur
Consumer in action. Every new product differs in only the minutest details
from the previous, bit it's all oh so important. Until the new version arrives
and obsoletes the previous one...

------
dammitcoetzee
I think there's too much focus these days on what you can get for the money,
and not what you can get.

You have one life, why fill it with particle board and Chinese plastic smell?
Why not save up and buy things that last. That bring joy to your life and
enrich it. Why buy a three dollar Chinese screwdriver with an imprecisely cut
point that strips every fifth screw, when for ten dollars you can get a
precision cut, tempered, and coated american made screwdriver that feels
weighty and good in your hands. That doesn't strip those screws and makes your
job a little more joyful.

America needs to bring back the craftsman and the appreciation for
craftsmanship. The LVL1 hackerspace in Louisville just moved into an old
factory and I am constantly stunned by the workmanship that went into that old
building. The architect filled the place with light using angled windows, but
it doesn't get hot. Even the wood floors are beautifully made (and this was
for factory work).

Surrounding yourself with crafted things allows you to think on a higher
plane. You know what is possible because you are surrounded with it.

If you surround yourself with cheap replaceable junk you become capable of
crafting and expecting only cheap replaceable junk. That's why I can buy so
much expensive furniture off craigslist for pennies. People have lost the
ability to tell that that slightly scuffed up dresser couldn't be purchased
for under eight grand new.

~~~
bane
I don't disagree with your main premise - in fact I very much agree with it.
Beautiful tools are inspiring to work with.

But this doesn't actually seem to be that good of camera no matter how you
look at it and looking at other serious reviews it doesn't seem to be all that
well crafted either.

There's a difference between good, but sometimes funky, craftsmanship and
gimmicks. The T seems to be more on the gimmick side of things.

~~~
dammitcoetzee
I agree, but, have you looked at the cars today? I can honestly not tell the
difference in silhouette between a mustang and an acura these days. You can
stick as much chrome on the outside of the thing you want in different
patterns, but they are the same car.

It's not that I don't know that the Leica isn't a super great camera, but the
fact that they tried to make something to a higher design goal than, "it
should just work" carries some weight. Just working is very important, but you
can go past it. There were tons of mp3 players that just worked before the
ipod. Arguably my rio mp3 player worked and sounded better than the ipod.
however, the ipod was something that resonated with people. When you put soul
into something your soul responds. I hate saying metaphysical junk like that,
but anyone who has experienced a truly well designed object or seen a to a
perfectly executed musical performance knows this feeling.

I mean, design these days is boring and unenriching. Go to amazon and search
for water filtering pitchers. Do any of those inspire you? Are any of them
beautiful? Are any of them even nice to use? If you read the reviews they are
full of, "it filters water alright, but": the lid is awkward, the handle
cracks off after a few months, the old version had more thought in it, the
edges of the plastic are sharp, etc.

Something can fully and completely fulfill it's primary purpose and still be
poorly designed. Still be a joyless disposable object.

~~~
bane
Yeah, I know what you're saying. It's like getting into an old MG Roadster.
Not very fast, unreliable, noisy. But damn if it isn't fun and beautiful to
get around in. It's inspiring and it does what it's designed to do, give you a
dramatic, noisy, wind blown time out in the country.

[http://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/dealer/mg/b/1673922.html](http://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/dealer/mg/b/1673922.html)

But this camera seems more like something people buy who want to be seen with
it, a fashion-vanity item. And I think that's an important distinction to
make.

------
Fede_V
When discussing image quality, I found this paragraph hilarious:

"The Sony is a brilliant camera with incredible clarity but lacks soul and
comes off as being purely engineering driven. There’s nothing wrong with these
things, it’s what makes Sony great."

I can understand people who enjoy beautiful design, but when it comes to
taking pictures, everything is literally engineering.

------
ARothfusz
For some reason, every time I read "as a designer" and appeals to some magical
designer "auctoritee", I cringe. If I can't tell you're a designer from the
terms you're using and the points you focus on, well, don't club me over the
head with it. As a pedant, I notice details like this.

As for the camera, two programmable knobs seems like a nice feature.

------
BuffaloSmoe
The Leica T is simply a rebranded Sony in a tighter package. If you look
around at these guys, you'll see its even a Sony sensor and guts. Hassleblad
does the same thing - simply look at the Lunar series. It's basically a Sony
RX100 and NEX-7 w/ a wood handle. ([http://www.hasselblad-
lunar.com/](http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/)). Don't be impressed by this,
from a technology perspective. Be impressed by its machining and "re"-design
of the Sony consumer brands (by now well under 1,000$ USD). I think they are
junk, but when you have two lambos you want bling at the party.

~~~
caycep
I think this is a function of how dependent cameras are on semiconductor and
sensor design, and in this day and age, the pillars of expertise have shifted
first to Japan, and now to Taiwan/Korea...and possibly in the future to China.

Leica was amazing when machining and optical precision were the key factors in
how good your camera is; but in this day and age, that's a solved
problem...anyone can set up a factory that equals that sort of precision. But
I think Canon, Sony, Samsung and others saw where things were headed
strategically a decade or so ago, and dumped money into the R&D needed for
chip fabs and EE design teams.

------
pesto88
I have always lusted over Leica cameras and lenses. All of my favorite
photographers have used them at some point or another.

I finally got a great deal on M6 with a 50mm Summicron. Now I have a M9P.

For a while, Leica was the only camera company to produce cameras with the
same ergonomics of older film cameras. It may have been stubbornness on their
part, but I loved the fact that I could have a digital camera that allowed me
to control aperture with my left hand, change shutter speed with my right, and
have all lenses have focus markings on the top.

I feel that Leica is in danger due to companies such as Fuji, who are creating
cameras that have even more options for control than ever before.

Want manual focus markings? There are lots of new lenses from Fuji and Olympus
that allow you to shoot with auto focus, then pull the barrel back and enter
manual mode so you can do things like zone and hyperfocal focus.

Want to change aperture on the lens and shutter speed on the top? The xt1 and
x100s both have it.

Sorry for hating, but if Leica's answer to cameras such as the Fuji xt1 is to
throw up a camera resembling a Sony NEX 3 with a "better touch screen" is kind
of a joke really. They're coming from totally left field with this one.

They can try and hold on to their legacy of amazing lenses such as the
Noctilux, but Zeiss(sony) and Sigma are doing a lot of innovation on fast
glass, and will soon probably come out with a 50mm f/.95 or faster lens just
to shove it to Leica.

You can view my photos at "moarbokeh" on flickr if you're curious.

------
antics
I apologize for my ignorance, but does anyone know the brand and model of that
unusual watch about a third of the way down the page?

~~~
drtse4
[http://www.minimallyminimal.com/blog/issey-miyake-to-by-
toku...](http://www.minimallyminimal.com/blog/issey-miyake-to-by-tokujin-
yoshioka)

($1400)

~~~
antics
Ah, thanks! I tried a reverse image search, and Googling various versions of
"watch with chrome face", and looked around the site, but nothing.

~~~
DanBC
I often see watches (mostly in movies) and I kind of wish there was a good
site to get wardrobe info from.

Include the female wardrobe information; and affiliate links.

A quick search shows the desire for this kind of site, but nothing that does
it well.

------
Htsthbjig
Oh, Good news!.

I love photography but I hate so much having to carry enormous cameras just
because analog were so voluminous and they put a digital sensor on an old
analog case.

I bought different Sony NEX cameras for this reason and I use those a lot.

Good news to see other camera makers(canon,leica) listening.

~~~
k2enemy
Fuji's X cameras are also great in this regard. I ditched my DSLR setup for
the X system and haven't regretted it for a second.

~~~
lemming
Yeah, I really love the X system - I have the X-Pro1 and the X100S.
Unfortunately I use them much less after the birth of my daughter, the
autofocus is too slow and the video is really annoying. We ended up buying a
Sony Alpha6000 which is the perfect child camera IMO. For still images I still
love my Fujis though.

~~~
vl
Looks like X-T1 got much faster autofocus. I have it and now impatiently
waiting for X-T2 so it would be "even better" :) Also, Fuji, ship these new
zooms finally!!!

------
Aloha
For the less money, I'd go buy a cannon fixed lens point and shoot - or for
about the same money I'd go get two real cameras, and EOS-1 Film, and a EOS-5D
with a 50mm f/1.8 to share among them.

Leica makes a very pretty camera - but not one I'd purchase for the task of
making pictures.

~~~
jchrome
Yea. Leica makes jewelry. They are great cameras. But they are also jewelry.

------
Zigurd
Unlike the M series, which remains unique in many ways, this seems
unimpressive compared to some other interchangeable-lens cameras.

A 16MP APS-C sensor was available in the NEX-5 several years ago, and the tiny
magnesium body of the NEX-5 is sexy as hell.

I would look at the Sony and Samsung compact interchangeable lens cameras if
you want the best sensors, lens choice, and UI. The Sony a6000 is an awesome
camera by any measure. Some of the new Samsungs have a "Google logo" Android
complete with Google's suite of proprietary apps, and Google is doing some
interesting things with the camera APIs.

~~~
jchrome
The M series is Leica's defining camera series. These offshoots are just more
revenue streams.

Sony has really come out strong. I still shoot film but if I made my way back
to digital I would go with a A7.

------
kybernetyk
> The T costs $1850 and the Sunmmicron-T 2/23 ASPH $1950. Yes, the Leica isn’t
> exactly a bargain.

I'm surprised it's that cheap. The M8 did cost somewhere around $4500 (without
a lens) when it was introduced.

~~~
photoGrant
It's this cheap because it's a Point and Shoot and not a Rangefinder.

~~~
jchrome
I don't think "Point and Shoot" is the correct term. Those refer to cameras
with fixed zoom lenses.

This has interchangeable lenses and therefore is within the "mirrorless"
category.

------
VeejayRampay
For film cameras at least, the best bang for the buck brand is Cosina
Voigtländer. I own a Bessa R4A with a Cosina Voigtländer Color Skopar 21mm
f/4.0 Pancake and seriously, what a great camera package for around $1000.

------
caycep
The big bugaboo on the wall is: is it any better than the Fuji X100S....

------
applecore
The review was well-written, but the photographs are simply
beautiful—especially the desaturated color and serene feeling of the imagery.

------
nandreev
Nice design. Still, I prefer a viewfinder (as a built-in EVF/OVF, not as a
$600 accessory)

------
curiousDog
Is that Seattle/Bellevue? But then there's a porsche with Eurpoean plates
below :)

~~~
aaronbrethorst
The first batch of photos are from Seattle (around the market). I don't
recognize the second city, but it appears to be somewhere in Europe.

~~~
vl
Second city is Bellevue. Shots inside the building - Seattle Public Library.
Then Public Market in Seattle. Shots with greens to skyscrapers - Bellevue
Downtown Park. Shot across highway to two white skyscrapers - Capitol Hill
across I-5 with Queen Anne in background (Facebook Seattle rents few floors in
one of these buildings) Interior shots - his own apartment. Mercedes - his
car? Porsches - looks like some Porsche exhibit (and this might explain euro
plate on one of them?) Neighbourhood/street shots - one of them looks like
Bellevue (intersection against the sun), rest - Seattle.

------
not-hacker-news
How did this make it into "Hacker News" ?

~~~
wyager
Alt. title: "Hipster News".

But seriously, good question. I like stuff like this, but I have no idea how
it fits the content of this site.

~~~
dang
There is no "content of this site". Interesting is not a subject.

