Hacker News Reader

Comment by dale_glass | Hacker News Reader

I remember the K-01, I didn't care for it. For me, a camera is a tool, not a fashion accessory. I couldn't care less that some famous guy designed it. Reviews said it was uncomfortable and for me that was that.

The Q didn't interest me because of its small sensor.

View on HN

Agree 100%. All I'm saying is that they've dabbled with these things before, albeit without any real success.

It is of course possible to make a fashion accessory that is also a tool, but then you have a Leica and I can't afford one!

Leica is pretty much done as a professional camera company, it's a luxury brand along the lines of Rolex. Professionals overwhelmingly use Nikon, Canon, Sony and Fuji in that order, Leica has dropped to sub 1% of the pro market. And compared to say Hasselblad they don't have any USPs that would make someone choose their brand other than the brand itself.

Interestingly: amateurs use Leica 2x as much as professionals do, because the myth of the expensive camera making better pictures is still alive and well.

I remember back when Leica made their own monochrome digital camera (this idea isn't new, Leica did this in 2012).

Half their ad was showing off how they make the bag for the thing.

With prominently displayed branding, because after all, you don't want any thieves to think that they might have a $7K device that can easily be carted off sitting around.

Oh, wait...

You're meant to put a piece of black tape over it so you can LARP as a 1960s combat photojournalist.

Minor: The Leica M11 Monochrome does not have a red Leica logo.

Besides the branding not being that obvious, it should be quite difficult to sell a stolen Leica. At least for anything more than a pittance. It doesn't matter what it costs, what matters for a thief is what they can sell it for.

Why would it be difficult to sell a stolen Leica? Do they have some sort of cloud backed locating thing installed?

Leica cameras are very specialized equipment. The market is small. It is not that a random person would pick up a Leica camera. They are likely to be serviced at some point in time, as the range finder might need adjustment. A stolen serial number would be detected instantly.

I don't think that's as likely as you think. There are hundreds if not thousands for sale on eBay right now, and dozens on each of the NY, LA, and SF craigslists.

Exactly: thieves don't care what you paid for it they care what they can sell it for and they can sell stolen Leica's for enough money that this is a real problem when buying stuff second hand. More so because whoever you buy it from may not know that once upon a time it was stolen. This applies to all goods that are resold but for cameras, laptops and smartphones it is a big issue because those are stolen with great regularity (and it is why manufacturers build in protection against theft in some of their devices and will not replace certain parts unless you can prove you are the owner of the device).

There is a whole industry in unbricking stolen laptops, for instance.

Laptops are common equipment, Leica cameras are not. Especially M series cameras are only used by enthusiasts. They know about stuff and won't pick up a shady one. The next service would put them into trouble anyway.

Your random thief is just going to grab the bag based on the brand and run off, they won't know or care if it is an 'M' series or not, just like your average Rolex thief isn't going to care beyond the basics of 'expensive brand'. That's all.

Except Leica also makes an entire model option (a few in fact) that also minimize or eliminate any branding.

> this idea isn't new, Leica did this in 2012

They also released the M10 monochrom in 2020 and the M11 just this year. As long as there's people willing to pay 7k for a (B&W) camera, leica is going to make them

And as the Pentax is the only competition, a lot of people are willing to pay for the Monochrom.

That last comment is a bit unfair, no? Yes, there are plenty of "fools" that throw money on Leica gear and wearing it as a fashion statement. However, Leicas are also darn fun to shoot, even if they make zero sense for a professional that most likely want reliability and are optimising for nailing each shot.

I, however, very much enjoy the "flawed" process of using a rangefinder. It makes me obsess less about each shot for some reason. Likewise, it is great to be able to share lenses between my non-Leica film camera and digital Leica. Plus, having access to lenses going all the way back to the 30s is also fun, despite them having serious flaws at times.

So, yes, I agree that Leica is "done", but has that not in many ways been the case since the professionals got proper SLRs into their hands in the 60/70s? I for one appreciate the "fools" that throw money at Leica so that I can pick up a second hand digital one ever half a decade or so to keep my fun going.

All of the above applied pretty much equally to Fujifilm at this point, though.

I’ve heard it said that Fujifilm is the Leica of the 1970s, today. I think I agree with that.

I love my X-Pro3. It’s 100% a choice I made for the joy of photography, not practicality. I considered Leica. I could afford it, but they just didn’t offer anything Fujifilm didn’t outside the brand itself.

I usually hear that something like a Leica Q (Q, Q2, Q3) would be a step up in lens and sensor quality. They have full frame sensors, the newer models have a higher resolution and a matching lens. It's also a step up in price... Used Leica Q models are not out of reach price wise. M cameras often are.

I bought a Q2 just be for the Covid pandemic and I kind of expected to be disappointed, given the ratio of capabilities and price. But I wasn't. I actually like the output of the camera.

I mostly agree and love what Fujifilm is bringing to the table (the viewfinder in particular). Sadly their sensor size breaks backwards compatibility though with relation to old lenses. Other than that, I wholeheartedly agree and readily recommend Fujifilm cameras to others looking to get into photography and are not looking to use old lenses and swap lenses between film and digital gear.

Do any of the fuji digital rangefinders have true mechanical focus rings, rather than "focus by wire"? I had an original X100 and thought it was a terrific camera. But I couldn't shoot with it the way I prefer because the manual focus mechanism was too slow and lacked the tactile+visual feedback of mechanical focus.

I looked a couple of years ago at the then-current fuji offerings and thought they seemed great, again, but still weren't the right thing for me because none of them had physically coupled focus rings.

Yes, they do. I have Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 that allows you to switch to manual focus mode on lens and have depth of field for apertures and distance markers, so you can pre-focus in advance.

Thanks. (And that sounds like a fun lens!)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com