Got a spare £3100?

love it, do you get the lens with it? hell yeah id get one if i found 3k down the back of the sofa :D
 
Great news for a rich film camera user but I'd rather use my T70 bought for £8. ;)
 
I didn't know what to make of this when I saw it. It's basically an MP without a meter. I looked at it and first thought it was just an M2 with an M3 counter.

I do see it as a good thing that Leica are putting film cameras out into the market still. Certainly has got people talking.
I kinda got the appeal with the MP more as you had the feel of the M3/M2 (some argue that this was Leica at there best) along with a better viewfinder and not forgetting the meter.

The price however... eeeek!

Leica also announced a new digital rangefinder today without a screen.
 
at the lieca day I went to they said the film cameras sell surprisingly well :-O :)
 
I like it. The ridiculous comment below the article makes me want to like it even more, too. Given the price of their lenses and digital cameras, I actually don't think £3k is that bad, not that I'll be buying one!
 
It might be expensive, but only in comparison with other current cameras. Allowing for inflation, it's less than a Nikon F was sold for new in the 1960s, and only about 50% more than the sort of 35mm SLR most serious amateurs used then. Basically, a mid range DSLR now costs about what a Zenith sold for.

Given the scale of production and the (I presume) amount of hand assembly involved, it's a reasonable price. Just compare it with the cost of a hand built modern large format camera.

Personally, I wouldn't buy one because I don't use 35mm any more.
 
Last edited:
Remember that this will probably be working perfectly once we have left this world (assuming u can still get film)
 
I was intrigued by the digital camera they also launched which doesn't have a rear screen. A much more elegant solution than turning off the image preview, saves all that tiresome clicking through menus.
 
Leica these days is basically Lomography for the super-rich, isn't it? Panasonic compacts with a red dot premium, digital cameras with no screen, new film cameras that cost three times what seems reasonable . . .
 
Strappy said:
I was intrigued by the digital camera they also launched which doesn't have a rear screen. A much more elegant solution than turning off the image preview, saves all that tiresome clicking through menus.
Click to expand...

That's the one with the extra zero on the end of the price tag, to compensate for leaving off the screen?

Actually, we ought really to be in favour of the idea (if it weren't for the price), since it's basically an old manual camera with new parts and some digeri bits instead of film!
 
The way I see it is that Leica have always been expensive - even when other manufacturers were making film cameras. Now they just seem MORE expensive because not many companies still make them, so inevitably people are going to chime in with how they can get a film camera for a fiver.

It's a bit like everyone suddenly stopping making cars, except Morgan. If Morgan carry on making what they produce now, they'd look quite overpriced and antiquated to those who are looking towards them from a previously consumer car saturated market.
 
ped said:
The way I see it is that Leica have always been expensive - even when other manufacturers were making film cameras. Now they just seem MORE expensive because not many companies still make them, so inevitably people are going to chime in with how they can get a film camera for a fiver.

It's a bit like everyone suddenly stopping making cars, except Morgan. If Morgan carry on making what they produce now, they'd look quite overpriced and antiquated to those who are looking towards them from a previously consumer car saturated market.
Click to expand...

H'mm methinks you are missing the point and is:- will it take better pictures than a camera for a fiver with a VG old lens and could you see the different in a 10" X 12" print......Maybe all those adverts about D.Bailey using a Olympus trip are just for the adverts and he never actually used one :D
 
excalibur2 said:
H'mm methinks you are missing the point and is:- will it take better pictures than a camera for a fiver with a VG old lens and could you see the different in a 10" X 12" print......Maybe all those adverts about D.Bailey using a Olympus trip are just for the adverts and he never actually used one :D
Click to expand...

Nope it won't. Cameras don't take pictures, people do. Most of us don't use film because it's 'better' (even though it is lol)
 
naw leicas are special, so there is that to them, and most of their lenses have a certain look to them... So you can't quite emulate the same shot
 
Last edited:
pingu666 said:
naw leicas are special, so there is that to them, and most of their lenses have a certain look to them... So you can't quite emulate the same shot
Click to expand...


Well you can buy a Contax 139 for peanuts and a nice set of Contax lenses and it would be a lot cheaper........ and have the Zeiss look ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top