[shoplink 40718 ebay]
[/shoplink]
In two weeks from now Leica will launch a completely new system camera with new mount. And it can be considered to be the real first Sony Full Frame E-mount competition. The Leica camera will be mirrorless and not(!) a rangefinder Leica M. It will be Full Frame, have a new mount, full autofocus support and EVF. And according to MirrorlessRumors.com the camera name will be “Leica SL”. This because the design is inspired by the [shoplink 40718 ebay]Leicaflex SL film cameras (like the one you see on the picture on top)[/shoplink].
The one big thing that will make it NOT a Sony competitor is the price. The body only will cost 2-3 times more than a Sony A7 camera!
162 Responses
First!
Congratulations!
Hey man, I just want to say, that um, like, you’re my hero and stuff. Can I get your autograph?
The typical users on these forums 🙂
Truly inspirational photography artists…
Don’t talk bad about Pancanikonpus. He is a half god, an icon.
Sony a7rii/a7sii costs 3 times a7, no need for Leica to overprice things
Exactly. If Leica made it for 3x A7, it would sell like hotcakes and Sony would have a real problem. However, Admin probably means a more expensive A7 model.
The price is rumored to be $8000 bundled with a 50mm f2 Summicron. The MF version of the lens is around $2K, I expect an autofocus Summicron to be more expensive than that so I would guess the body goes for around $5-5.5K.
To my knowledge, no digital Leica, except the Leica M, was selling like hotcakes in the past. If one thing is impossible in this world, then it is a Leica priced equally to a direct competitor. Last time that happened in the 1950’s.
I know, but at the price point suggested, it will is all I’m saying. That’s why I corrected it.
Leica selling hotcakes!? Exciting, yeh!!? ):
Non sony rumor.
Chill out.
He can’t get the sony rumors correct so shifting to Leica rumors.
I wonder:
– What is its flange distance? If it has a longer flange than E mount (e.g. about the same as M mount to facilitate conversion), somebody could make an auto-focussing adapter to use its lenses on E mount.
– How think is the glass on its sensor stack?
– What will it do better than a Sony for the extra money? It’s pretty much impossible to have worse menus than Sony, and it’s not hard to beat Sony’s button/dial ergonomics, but I doubt that’s enough.
The menu’s are your opinion. You can set up Sony cameras so well that you don’t need to enter the menu often. On ergonomics I agree, there Sony can improve.
Stack thickness is almost sure to be same as with Leica M so existing M lenses would work.
I’ve heard not, perhaps not immediately..
Sony destroyed its own ergonomics with the a7 series; but I have yet to see any decent menu on a digital camera.
What Leica will offer more for the extra money? Best case scenario – heavily diminishing returns in IQ with some lenses. Worst case scenario? …
It would be great if Leica went back and recaptured their Minolta partnership. In other words, produce a mirrorless full frame FE mount camera. This would be a win for everyone involved. People who like Leica will have lenses that they can use on other bodies (which will boost the sale of Leica lenses). They will boost sales of their body as well, since many people like what Leica stands for. And this could provide even more (and great) lenses for the FE mount.
Yes, the idea is nice. But I never ever expect Leica to allow even the possibility to mount a lens such as the FE28-70 (Which is alright except at wider fl’s) on their cameras.
If they are going to do a new mount, might as well do what they used to do. The Minolta XE7 was a great camera, as was the XD11. The Leica offshoots were nice cameras, as a result. More expensive, but nice cameras.
Exciting news at first sight. However, there was a time were Leica was state of the art, but now they are way too late in any of their digital cameras (except the Leica S, maybe). And this at insane prices.
The only camera that stands out is the digital Leica M which is very special in it’s position, bringing one of the greatest camera systems of all time to the digital age. Which makes it the only Leica were it doesn’t matter if it comes too late or with a subpar sensor. At least in my eyes.
There will be definitely some who prefer a Leica SL (w. Q-ish sensor) with Summicron 50/2 to a A7Sii or A7Rii with Zeiss 55/1.8 for double the price, but how many I wonder?
I don’t own any Leica, but from what I’ve read, the Leica Q seems also up to date for me, IQ, AF, responsiveness
As someone who has sold 5DM3 and A7S and now owns a Q – I can certainly agree with this.
It may be up to date, but it is not competitive due to its price point. There will always be some true believers, like Daniel Cook below, who pay the premium (which I understand because it’s an awesome camera), but this is not enough to make a camera successful for the manufacturer.
Not many – if you take the cost of the new Leica lenses into account, there won´t be many people who would buy the Leica SL. It might be enough for Leica to make the SL profitable but not enough to be competition for Sony.
I think what stands out are the Leica Q and Leica T. Great tries to adapt, I hope they succeed. The Leica M is just an underfeatured overly expensive camera.
I think Sony need to revamps A7 series with more manual dial control for shutter speed and ISO, not a useless PASM dial. And of course revamps the menu UI too. Do that on A7 mkIII and pretty much this Leica will be beaten for ergonomics. It’s true the A7 is an excellent camera with reasonable price (I have the original A7) but for the “easy and fun to use” I think my old Fujifilm X100 (first gen) beat Sony A7 by much (except for UI menu, yeah that’s odd but I prefer A7 than X100)
Agreed, PASM dials are useless.
There is a lot more real competition comming soon.
Canon is rumored to be realeasing a new mirrorless m mount in october…rumors are an entry level apsc, but I suspect either it is thier new ff, or that thier new ff should come by around the end of the year.
Nikon is also probably going to introduce a new high end ff by around the end of the year..although while Canon and Sony have been getting a lot of attention Nikon has been very quiet.
This is the calm before the storm, soon all the major players will be in an intense battle for mirrorless market share.
Meanwhile there are rumors that Canon is trying to buy Sigma….I do not know if this rumor is true, but if true it would not be good for consumers.
I dont see Canon going FF mirrorless. Not for a long time anyway. Would be an interesting proposition to but Sigma though. Could ART lenses become the next Canon L?
Canon will not be left behind by Sony.
Till now Canon has not considered Sony a major competitor and has not directly geared its marketing or products to competing against Sony…there has been no need…
With the introduction of the a7rii sony has launche an attack on the 5ds/r with very succesfull results. But this is just a single battle, and the sleeping giant is now awake.
Canon will definitely be competing in mirrorless, both ff and crop.
Question is how big competition is A7RII to Canon’s 5D line. Because rumour and photography forums is one thing and real usage and selling statistics is another one.
With the current market and mindshare Canon has, probably not huge competition. But one thing is sure, Sony is really winning ground.
I would definitely welcome a proper Canon mirrorless, but we have been hearing how Canon will wake up for several years now.
Is Eos-M mount FF compatible?
The diameter is slightly latger than E mount so it should be.
I’d like to see an Eos-M FF. Shall be fine competition.
Canon cannot release competitive camera. They already played their cards with 5DSR and it is nothing short of disaster
what’s wrong with 5dsr? it has the best canon sensor to date
Nothing except it does not do the one thing it is supposed to. Otherwise it is gfreat camera – looks like a camera, small like it, weigh like a camera and even autofocuses as one, has the dials and knobs of a camera…but this does not make a camera. Cameras take pictures and shoot movies – this is something 5DSR does not do well enough.
lol
The 5DSr is definitely competive in my book.
Good for you and many don’t think like you
To be honest, I have not used one personally. So, maybe you are right. It was just my impression from all what I have read about it.
It is probably great. However there is this thing with Canon they just fall short of what Nikon and more recently sony offer. My freind bought 5d mk3 recently – it is great thing but it just falls short of the quality of images I take wiht A7ii. A7ii is not as fast, reliable, comfortable, well thought out etc. etc. but it simply does one thing much better and I buy a camera for this one thing – take pictures. This is it.
Now I have to disagree. “taking pictures” or “better pictures” is not the same as “image quality”. For me, image quality is one of the less important factors for good photos. The most important factor is, that you get the shoot at all. That means, you have the camera with you (portability), you catch the right moment (speed, your skills) and the image is focused on your subject (AF accuracy). Not to forget the overall handling/usability. Image quality (sensor, lenses) is important, but still comes after the aforementioned factors.
See, we can things approach differently. So, different cameras for different people. 😉
Agreed! I really am not as good as to have a7ii limit me. I like to shoot static things mostly and a7ii does well with occasional tracking
Can you elaborate why or just because it’s Canon.
Have you used one? Of course not…
You asked him to elaborate, but you didn’t wait.
I have used Canon cameras. Decent cameras, but nothing that really pushes things. Same as Nikon, they are competitive based on market and mindshare, and the only really competitive cameras are a few ones at the higher end.
Canon has a wide range of native lens as well as a large user community. Current L lens are still made in Japan and are 20% cheaper than Nikon variants.
Agree they are the best in photo and video (probably not all segemnts of video but are definely among the best overal). However to remain best you need innovation. Photo and video is a tech industry and requires innovation. This is what canon is lacking for the last 5 years now.
They literaly obliterated the market with superior camera technology 10 years ago but now they only lie on their laurels from glorious past.
I like Canon I lke the cameras they make. I only see that they cannot innovate for many years now and 5DSR only prooves this after 7D mk2.
Canon can produce competitive cameras and dominates the camera market.
Sony currently makes the best sensors, but in no other way comes close to Canon or Nikon for a professional level system.
Mirrorless cameras are basically a sensor in a simple body…that puts Sony on a more equal footing because the sensor is a much more dominent feature and the rest of the camera is less important.
Make no mistake…Canon can and will make a competitive mirrorless camera.
It appears that they will utilize M mount.
They have recently released a hybrid adapter that allows use of almost all Canon lenses on the M mount system….the system can be upscaled to ff.
Canon is now working with on chip processing….similar to Sony’s stacked sensors.
Do not underestimate Canon…despite what you hear on Sony friendly sides like SAR ….Sony is still the underdog, Canon is still the champion, and Nikon is still solidly in second place.
And dont forget….come from behind companies like Samsung are still around.
As sad it is to say if you read a bit about corporations it is easiest to fall of leading position once you are too long at it….We have seen it in many industries and Canon is just repeating a pattern. Nothing new. They will have de facto leadership for few years to come but it is all going down for them. Sorry this is just how the world works. You can look at any too big of a company that was dominating for a while only to fall into complacency and be taken over. GM, Nokia, IBM, Microsoft and so on …. Ok Chevron, Shell and others that dig oil out of the ground do not quite work like this but where innovaiton is everything kings are bound to fall……because they are kings and become complacent.
Canon has been a sleeping giant, but they are wide awake now.
As long as they were undisputed leaders they were able to ignore Sony.
Canon can no longer ignore Sony….but that is still a long way from beating them.
There will be a major battle ahead and Canon is still way ahead in every catagory except sensor technology.
Canon may be able to improve thier sensor tech enough to compete or they may be able to buy better sensors, maybe even from Sony.
In the meantime Sony really better listen to customer needs.
Currently what is drawing the most negative comments are poor battery life and lack of a dual card slot.
I do not agree that these are major issues, but Sony absolutely needs to address those issues in thier next cameras.
They are playing in the big leagues now and attention to every little detail absolutely counts.
Another issue is the complete lack of suitable E mount long wildlife/sports lens.
Again I suggest
300-600 f4.8, 6 or 5.6, with 150mm barrel extender ….for close ip macro mode, and matched 1.8x drop in teleadapter. Price….mid $3000 range
It is absolutely essential that Sony establish some credibility for wildlife /sports where they currently have Zero presnce and Zero credibility.
Having a good lens of this type with features no one else has is the shortest path to that goal. This is middle of the road beween 150-600 zooms and 600mm primes, and no long lens like this has the close up/macro capability this lens would have.
With animals it is often necessary to switch from long telephoto to close up instantly without changing lens or camera.
Agreed! Sony have limited resource and you can see this across the board – usb2, one sd slot, the video internals seem stretched to the limit, 8bit video, weird menus, crippled wifi API,crippled USB tethering on and on. The thing they get though is look 2 years ahead and do the important things. Sensor tech is interesting but not their best thing – in fact Sony are the worst users of their sensor tech – look at Nikon, Olympus and Fuji all squeezing more from the sensor. However Sony are just hitting the market needs year after year for 5 years now. They simply oscillate with the market resonant frequency and they own the mirror less market 50%+ market share…….this is not the sensor tech and far from it.
Canon are exact opposite. They have done exactly the opposite of what is needed after 7d and 5d mk2. They have not released competitive or even desirable product for more than 5 yeas. You call them giant but they actually are pulling out of photo so I doubt you will see them innovate at all. They are clueless. They know how to sell DSLRs to people that crave dslr as upgrade to bridge cameras and these people now do not need a dslr at all they buy mobile phones.
Canon will change when they need to.
One tjing I have learned in life is NEVER, NEVER, NEVER underestimate yor opponent.
I am not anyones fan, and I will not underestimate anyone.
I totally expect an epic camera battle soon.
I cannot pick a winner…in fact I cannot even define what being the winner will mean.
There needs not be a winner. I would hope there are no big losers. I prefer to have choice.
Computer and software industry tends to be monopolized and I do not like these Facebook and Google dominant companies
Which is a good news. In the past five years overall performance of GPU increased to 300% faster while CPU is way less than that. I suspect A6100 was delayed due to lack of competitors.
Leica is for people with real dosh.
People with more modest incomes will happily slum it with the A7rII.
If you call driving a latest model Mercedes versus a 1962 Ferrari slumming.
If you don’t waste your money on replacing your mirrorless every 15-18 month, you can own a leica very soon.
I’d still rather buy to Sonys or invest in a second system.
Just for the record Sony A7rII is 3 times more expensive than A7 too…..So if Leica do their job well they will be real competitor even price wise
A7 is dead. Obviously admin meant at 3x times the A7RM2.
A7 is still sold as new.
I agree that 8$K price is more likely for Leica. Still the article says A7 and not A7rII or A7s or A7r or even A7ii – Andrea should know these names better than any other article author in the world.
The rumored price is $8k with Summicron, which is 2x A7Rii+55/21.8.
Under many scenarios, price is the last question stands between you and paying for the item. You would notice this when shopping for clothes. Price tags are well hidden especially for very expensive brands.
@admin Sony Tech under the hood? Senor, evf etc…
New mount? Not T-mount?
I hope all people who like overpriced stuff sell their E-mount stuff and move to this Leica xD
If it accepts FE lens, might make a good back up camera.
Typical Leica folks are not those who pay for specifications. I don’t see competition here.
That would be correct. That being said, specs do matter when you’re producing for work. The M9 still remains to be a very capable camera to deliver work to magazines and medium-large print purposed. While there were issues with banding, as in the current M at higher ISOs, the capabilty of today’s tech does not particularly affect the workflow of people that have a long history working with Leica cameras (film) and to whom the feel and workflow of a rangefinder is more important than how under-developed the sensor appears when compared to Sony’s best.
Leica’s customer base, just like any other camera, is largely comprised of enthusiasts and amateurs in photography. They compliment this customer base with collectors, hence the limited editions. The few professionals that work with Leicas, are those who will fill the category I describe above (work habits are more important than tech) The difference between the amateurs and the enthusiasts that save up and pay Leica price to, say, any other customer from other brands, is that they do care for Leica’s brand legacy, which is more glamorous and far more exploited/developed in marketing than any other brand – hence the appeal.
I bet the pictures are 3X better, cause everyone knows if it costs more it makes better pictures. Amirite?
Yeah that is why I bought a platinum ruby covered hotshoe protector, now my first eos rebel makes better pictures than the hasselblad h5d-60
Right. I suffered from the mediocre pictures i took with my NEX-7 for years. Then I bought the Hasselblad Lunar and that changed everything. I won two Pulitzer Prices since then. But shhhh, don’t tell anyone, its just between us two.
Leica is not going to and would not even ever try to “look down” and compite with Sony. It’s like saying “RollRoyce will compete against Audi”. Make no sense at all.
Yes, except Royce has real and non fictious advantages over audi.
But what about 40 minutes of hand polishing… That should improve the camera performance no?
You do know Rolls Royce is owned by BMW and that their present cars are based on a BMW designed F01 platform?
Yes. And when someone says “royce”, one certainly doesnt refer to last couple of years.
That’s right, they have a very long tradition…
Regards
Nope, Phantom has a unique platform (true RR). Ghost on the other hand has 20% parts from 7 series, but all the other stuff make it RR…
Regards
The Phantom platform might be “true RR”, but it’s still manufactured by BMW.
More like Jaguar which has it’s cars manufactured by Ford. These Leicas are made by Panasonic.
Under 10k it will sell like hot cakes, any of those idiots that carry around a D4/1D will happily trade in for Leicas specially in the “PRO” market where they believe that fat bodies impress their clients.
When the Q came out it was pretty obvious the direction Leica was heading. It’s their version of the X100 with a ILC to follow. Also, their customer base is getting old, an AF M camera is a great way to keep them in the fold.
One thing I’m looking forward to seeing is the size of the lenses since so many morons compare smaller Leica lenses to FE lenses, AF means they will be big or small and slow.
The Q has little to nothing to do with this new camera. It’s something on its own like Sony RX1.
The “SL” is not meant to subsitute the M line either.
Body is bigger and lighter, and I’ve heard M lenses won’t work on the new mount.
The Sony RX1 was the direct prototype of the A7, just like the Q is a direct prototype of the SL. Except Sony needed to feel the market, PanaLeica are just copying Sony.
No: the shape of SL is that of a dslr. It has a central EVF. Body is lighter than that of Q. Sensor might be the same, who knows? It could even have the same Maestro II engine as the Q and S.
But as stated by someone who actually saw the camera, it’s something different from the Q, and the Q did not lead to the SL developpement.
Agreed, but you may look at them as a kind of predecessors. These fixed lens cameras clearly tested the waters for the follow-up interchangeable lens systems. Maybe that is what Mike meant.
Honestly I think this SL was planned before the success of the Q. I talk about success because when I bought my first Q (yup, first, check my “review” to know more) after a week from its release, mine was the 5th sold in that Leica Store.
After a month I went there again and there was a guy buying his Q. The waiting list was of one month.
Its success was quite a surprise to Leica itself.
And when Ming Thein knew that I had another Q in no time he was really surprised.
Anyway, what I’m trying to say is that one person who had access to this new model, and talked to some “high level” guy, told me (two days ago) that the Q was/is a project on its own, not a platform to develop a new AF interchangeable lens system.
I think the sensor might be the same (though there was some earlier rumor about a better high ISO performance), the Maestro II engine might be there as well, but handling, building, target is different.
He told me that Leica thinks it won’t eat sales of the M line, as the Q did.
Of course I might be wrong, because I don’t have a crystal ball to look into.
You have a wonderful website. The only issue is, that it is terribly slow. (Sorry, I’m an IT guy)
I couldn’t find the Leica Q review. Can you post a link? I would be very interested.
I’m planning to buy an A7S next. But since I’m a 28/35 mm guy, I intend it to use it with one of these focal lengths exclusively. So, I would have no problem with a fixed lens camera. What do you think about the ISO performance of the Q compared to the A7S and the Ricoh GR (which I use almost daily)?
Here it is: http://www.marcosartoriphoto.com/blog/ I’ll try to fix the issue, but I fear it’s due to the portfolio pictures.
The Q has a slightly better high iso performance than the RicohGR (I own it too). Perhaps it’s simply because the Q sensor is newer. 18MP would have made it a better low light camera in my opinion, but its 24MP sensor allows the 35 and 50mm crops, if needed.
The A7S is a good video camera, but its 12MP are somehow few for stills: I’m not saying you can’t take nice pictures, but I fear sometimes you could wish for more resolution.
Isn’t Ricoh a crop camera, so then having worse high ISO not suprising. I’d bet in terms of tech (noise per unit of area) Ricoh has a better Sony sensor.
It has an APS-C sensor (the same in LeicaT, just to name a frequently bashed camera) , but let’s consider also the 16MP compared to the 24MP of the Q. I would say they are on paar until iso 1600/2000, then the Q looks better when pixel peeping.
If I’m not wrong the cousin Nikon A has a slightly better iso performance.
Overall the GR is really good camera, and I consider the Q its sibling on steroids.
Honestly I’m quite tired of this sensor battle: cameras and photography are made of much more.
OK, I found the Leica Q review. 🙂
I also had some dust issues on the GR. However not as much as your first Q. Did you have dust issues with the replacement Q?
Got dust on my GR as well, but you can try to suck it away with a vacuum cleaner: turn on the camera, remove the battery and sd card, and use the vacuum cleaner on the front element (not too near). The lens will move forward, it’s not a problem, once you put the battery back in it the lens will close. I have always cleaned it in that way, but lately a small speck of dust has decided to stay there..
Yeah, I thought about the vacuum to, but I was a little concerned, because the lens seems to be very fragile (biggest disadvantage of the GR).
The Q is not something on its own. The RX1 was/is, because it was the first of its kind. It has that WOW effect, because Sony had the balls to do the (almost) unthinkable. The Q is a very (i mean VERY) nice camera, but absolutely fails to be competitive because of its price. The M-like price point degrades this wonderful camera to a toy for wealthy guys in white pajamas. Which is kind of sad, if you ask me.
For the regular, “normal” customer, I see only two reasons to pay double or triple the price for a Leica:
1) it’s state of the art, way better technology than anything that exists
2) it’s a Leica M
In all other cases, they have to competitive and to be honest, I don’t see this coming for the rumored SL. But we will see.
I disagree: I bought a Q despite not being rich. Compared to the rx1 (which I don’t own but handled several times) it has a completely different feeling/handling. I won’t start a discussion about the release price of an rx1(r) and optional evf..
I use the Q also for work, I’m happy with it despite a bad surprise (you can read more about it in my “review” in my website).
I don’t know if it has a state of the art tech inside: af is fast (faster than rx1 for sure, if we have to compare again the two cameras), manual focus is great, evf is maybe the best available so far, build quality is that of a camera that came out of Wetzlar, and it’s a joy to use.
For sure it’s not an M, but to my surprise I was told (two days ago, by someone who saw this SL) that the Q ate many M sales, and this SL should not do that, because it’s something different from the M line and the Q product.
Any good camera, and like I said, the Q is VERY good, will be bought by a limited number of enthusiasts who really love that particular camera, regardless if they have to pay a massive premium.
Compared to the RX1, the Q is better in almost any aspect. Believe me, I would love to have one.
It is a dream camera, no question, but not something on its own. That may apply to the RX1 (before the Q came out) or the Leica M, but not the Q. So, I do not think the Q is worth its price. It does not sell like hotcakes for exactly that reason, not because it’s a bad camera. The RX1 was selling very well, far beyond expectations. The Leica M9 also, without having state of the art specs.
It may be true the Q ate some M sales (but I doubt it ate many), but the Q does not fish in the same waters. The Leica M is so unique, so special, that the market has it’s own rules. Not the Q. The Q has to be competitive to succeed (beyond the wealthy and the true lovers).
Thats what I think. I may be wrong.
So its not going to use any parts from the Q? I find that hard to believe. My guess is it’ll use the same sensor, processor, LCD, EVF and so on. In other words, if its going to share the internals, the Q has lots to do with this camera.
And I never said it was going to substitute the M line, it just gives people that want a Leica (especially the camera jewelry crowd) an AF option that’s not the goofy T or the giant S.
The RX1 still shared many of the internals with the A7 – including the sensor that was also in the A99, A7II, D750 and so on. It wouldn’t have seen the light of day without shared parts costs – much like the Q and this new camera.
Cheers
+1
No rangefinder? No thanks. While I love my M, I can’t justify spending this much for a Leica with similar technology as an A7.
That said, I think there’s plenty room for an A7-like camera with M-like body shape and build quality with AF Leica lenses.
There is indeed plenty of room for a A7-like camera, but not with a Leica M-like price point. If they want to compete, they have to be competitive. Otherwise they will sell to a small rich customer base only, like any digital Leica other than the M.
The digital M is a different story.
Sweet. More lenses to adapt to the a7 system =)
If they use the T-mount that would be impossible, they share the same flange distance and the T is wider in diameter, not to mention that the electronic contacts on the T is on the top.
And I find unlikely that they will abandon that mount that is ready and capable of FF.
And I think the opposite is true, Zeiss is probably working to bring their new line-up for Leicas, Loxias and Batis. I wouldn’t be surprised if they started developing both just because of Leica and not A7 series.
I guess not, they will reduce the flange distance.
Or maybe not, if they want people to use M lenses without adapter, they have to keep 28mm !
The only one Leica competes against is Leica. The S (Gen 1 & 2), M (6 digital + 3 analog), T, X (Gen 1 & 2), XV, Q, all the panasonic variants, and now the “SL”. Did I forget any …
That’s quite a list of cameras for a Luxury, Niche, Low Volume camera maker. There is no one else offering that broad range … or at that price point … don’t think Sony has to worry too much.
The one big thing that will make it NOT a Sony competitor is the Leica name. Leica stands in a class of its own
3x Meh.
The Leica name is on a ton of PanaLeica Micro Four Thirds lenses (e.g. 25/1.4, 42.5/1.2, 15/1.7) and those lenses are no better than their Olympus counterparts. It is draped over a ton of Panasonic compact cameras, rebranded as expensive Leicas.
The Leica Q, and now the SL, are Panasonic cameras at their core. Panasonic makes great tech, just like Sony. Panasonic is probably one of the best camera manufacturers in the industry. But the Leica badge doesn’t make those products any less Panasonic.
There’s a difference between a re-badged Panasonic, and a full-scale collaboration which sees the industrial design, menus, mechanicals, optical design and manufacturing come from Leica in Germany and the electronics design come from Panasonic in Japan.
The Q is an example of the latter. And it’s a fantastic, formidable camera. An ILS camera with the same arrangement will likely be impressive.
The Leica M system is a class of its own. Not Leica as a whole. They can monetize their famous brand name, thanks to the Leica M success in particular, with a limited number of wealthy customers, but other than that, they have to be competitive, like any other brand.
Feel free to correct me, but to my knowledge, the only digital Leica (other than the M system) that sells good/ above expectations is the Leica S system. And this is the only truly competitive digital Leica. Again, Leica M system doesn’t count in this regard, total different story.
Three times the price?
No problem, just wait for the version rebranded a Panasonic SL and it’ll probably be cheaper than the Sony…
Sony is already 3x more expensive than Sony, so…. (a7RII vs. a7II)
I find this hard to believe. Panasonic is behind this camera. No way is Panasonic stepping away from such massive potential market share by pricing this product into a niche.
This project is dead in the water if this PanaLeica is priced as high as “the real deal” (Leica M). It competes directly with Zony thus it needs to have Zony prices.
Zony is a match made in heaven. Remember the A7 took off with a blast due to the allure of that Sony Zeiss 55/1.8… A mini Otus… Leica size & performance at an attractive cost. Then came the Loxias and the Batis. More “German quality” at Japanese prices. This formula works. Panasonic and Leica must know this.
Good analysis.
Have you ever tried a Leica Q? I am guessing not because then you would not be using the word “desperately”… The Leica Q easily blows away any fixed lens Sony or Fuji…
Everyone tell that RX1r is a really hard to beat combo, didn’t read anywhere that Leica Q easily win anything. Maybe against APS-C ones.
Exactly my thoughts. Well said.
Perhaps Panasonic/Leica don’t have a choice because they need Sony FF sensors. Sony could have had a condition that they do not directly compete Sony’s own products and they are now going for the Leica niche only.
My guess is Nikon and Pentax will have similar conditions and be only able to make DSLRs (nit mirror-less cameras) with any new sensors they get from Sony.
Leica uses CMOSIS sensor on M240 and the does not seem to be any worse then A7ii
Yes, in good light, no doubt. But in low light, it seems that Sony’s sensors run circles around any other sensor.
Why Panasonic? Leica is big enough of a company to build a camera or two or that seems to be their 4th or 5th impressive camera in the last 3 years that has nothing to do with Panasonic. Well they have been doing it for time more than Panasonic have existed. Also Leica in their proper products use components from manufacturers that are quite far from Panasonic. For example the CMOSIS sensors on M240
IT is same as Zeiss and Sony. Yes Zeiss have been lending a hand and brand to Sony but Zeiss is not Sony. Batis is not Sony – It works on sony but is quite different from my other lenses with blue sticker and sony logo.
I dont think this camera was created to enter into the standard consumer market. Leica can only keep up if they stay as an ultra lux niche brand. This camera was created to slow down the people buying sony cameras to use leica lenses. Granted wide angles generally are worse but their are plenty of people still adapting leicas. I personally use a 50 mm and 16-18-21 on the a7r2. Dont own any leica cameras. This camera will provide an option to those knee deep in leica land to stay there if they want some autofocus as well. I still wouldnt buy it but im sure there will be a significant number if leica fans that will buy this over current and future sony cams.
I find it interesting that the first, and so far the only, manufacturer responding to Sony’s lead in FF mirrorless cameras is Leica. Yes, they’ll be priced beyond reason. Yes, they’ll feature Panasonic internals, so what?; you need a world class electronics partner to make a modern camera.
But, it’s still good to see such a traditional company responding to Sony’s game changer.
Too expensive. Too late.
At that price point this system is only competing with the allready existing Leica…
hahahaha, dont fool yourself. $3200 isn’t just change. A few pennies from $4000, when Sony introduces its next cameras in 2016. Its a $4k – $10k game now. That’s where this game is going. Sony has 2 separate models that can be put in one camera. It will be released.
I don’t think he ever used one. The Q has some inner parts made by Panasonic, the sensor is made by a company owned by Panasonic, can’t recall the name, Leica has asked Panasonic (my thought) to develop the AF lens, but the camera body speak Wetzlar. The “made in Germany” written under it might mean nothing, but one thing is sure: there is no Panasonic version of the Q in stores..
Tower Jazz. Israeli company. Panasonic doesn’t own them, they’re just the majority shareholder.
The Q represents the best of a Leica/Panasonic collaboration [note I said Leica/Panasonic, NOT Panny-Leica] – Leica industrial design, menu simplicity, build quality, and German manufacturer … with state-of-the-art Panasonic electronics inside. Price aside, what’s not to like? They perhaps should have done this sooner.
I don’t see why you sony folks are getting offended by this new leica. This camera will not compete against sony series or any other cameras. This announcement remind me of the Nikon Df which still there is negative comments about it (over priced , bad AF…). This product will not be for a lot of readers here. No offence but people who will buy this camera think very different about photography than readers of SAR ( which includes me too). just don’t care and go out and shoot stuff.
Rolls Royce announced today that in the future they see Fiat as there number one competitor,
Good! Toyota are safe for now 🙂
Does that mean the rumored Rolls Royce Cinquecento for under $10.000 becomes reality?
Yes! Plus a GOLD BOX will be available later 😉
Exactly my point. Canon are fantastic and probably the best choice for many still. D810 is magnificent. Nikon have been pushing fantastic lenses for the past 4 or 5 years – all the 1.8 primes are just stellar (I used them for a while). If I need the best camera today there it is. Right now 5DSR just misses on far too many points even on lenses in some focal lengths.
This new Sony is great. I actually use 7Aii I like it because of size – I know it falls short of 5DSR or D810 or A7rii but for a amateur like me it does more than I need. The lenses are few and far between but they are all of very decent quality (I mostly use the primes) I really don’t need much more. 135/1.8 or 135/2 in native FE mount would be more comfortable then the adapted one … I can live wiht this.
Why would one, who believes that fat bodies impress clients, trade his D4/1D for a Leica? Doesn’t sound logical to me.
Because Leica.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paJqHPHLExo
I can live with that
I am happy that Brand like Leica is getting to be the second in the full frame mirror less. Leica and Zeiss are the companies that have little resource and are visionaries and understand photography best. If they do it this is indicative where market is heading. Sony have some resource and are taking sometimes too much risk.
exactly. just like the Leica Q. It just feels complete and fun to shoot with. unlike any sony camera.
It’s not so much the price of the body, but the price of those Leica lenses… yikes.
Leica, as well as Royal Royce, doesn’t aim to let everyone get one of their product.
Since when?
Since they started marketing them. Do your research, go back and review their campaigns and adds
I guess sarcasm is only as strong as its weakest reader.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Panasonic joins forces with them on the mount. Then Sony will have competition! By the way, I feel pretty sure it will be based off their fairly new Leica T mount which is wider than the E Mount.
It seems pretty obvious that this will be based off the Leica T Mount.
I’m really digging this A7II. No…no…I keep telling myself. Gotta calm yourself down lad- now don’t go jumping to conclusions just yet. But dang- I like it quite a bit. Nope…nope…gotta reign it in…ain’t going to get me this time Sony.
I really really hope it looks something like the S or old Rs, not this fugly SL. I like to see good products appear even if I can’t afford them, and I don’t like to see stupid products appear, like Pentax K-01 and Pentax Q, even if I’ll never buy them anyway.
I don’t think Leica can keep up with the fast evolution of modern electronics! Will they come out with an updated SL in two years time that has faster AF, higher resolution better ISO etc. Will Leica fans buy that again then for 6-8 K$? Leica needs longer product cycles.
I’ll stay with reasonably priced Sony and so will the majority I think?
Let me see…$12,000 body alone, another $15,000 for an avid kit total $27,000. pre order it. 6 months later 70% off! Just joking, well not, that’s what happened to me in Thailand.
different style of shooting. Its isnt about numbers and high specs. Fuji has that color character, Canon has those lenses with character, and the Leica mechanics force one to simply fotograph differently. an entirely different canvas.
We’ll see, if Panasonic release its own version at a price closer to what Sony ask for the A7ii it would be a very good thing for competition.
A Red Dot of course!
Its the Leica look and style of the pics from the fotogs that know how to use the system Such as that Fuji look. The pics are just different from those two systems. Fuji knows its colors are different. the true range finder Leicas produced exceptional creativity from those that mastered its style. more to them than specs
Sony will eventually combine the A7sII with the A7r2…….They won’t have a choice. Its game on. That price point has to be well above $4k, clear separation between the levels. Or the consumer will know that they’ve been punked. We know that they held back on the ISO in order to keep the A7sII. Yes, many photogs purchased both cameras. We know this. Its the ISO stupid.