New film Leica: Leica M-A

[georg16nik]

Canon and Nikon each have sold a larger number of cameras every year since 1960.

You mean.. quantity over quality.., and they both exited the RF scene long long time ago. No service support from these guys for their old cams.
Leica provide service support for your M3, M2 etc. even to this day and it looks like 10 years from now they are still gonna do it.

....

The new camera provides a choice for these others.

But if you use IXMOO no.

...

If I'm not mistaken.., IXMOO was phased out decades ago, nobody expect Leica to produce film bodies to work with IXMOO.

 

[Xmas]

If I'm not mistaken.., IXMOO was phased out decades ago, nobody expect Leica to produce film bodies to work with IXMOO.

If Leica expect me to stop using IXMOO or FILCA they are wrong.

59 - 61 Canon P out sold Leica M2 cause of better

design
quality
cost

Prior to that Canon had not really been able to compete on design. The customer is always correct.

 

[Bill Burk]

I'm a happy owner of an M6 and planning on getting a second body sometime down the road. When that time comes I'll buy a new MP or M-A. I am really happy to see new film cameras still being produced and/or introduced and want to support that.

Actually it sounds like Leica listened to us when they specified the M-A, it looks a lot like an M2 which is well-regarded, has already stood the test of time. Now you could buy a few M2's for the price, with enough money left to send them to Youxin Ye for CLA. Or buy one M-A and be ready to shoot now and for the foreseeable future.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

But have you really looked at the specs on this? It's more than a spiritual throwback to 1959, it's a mechanical throwback as well... 1/1000th top shutter speed, flash sync at 1/45th or 1/50th or some such? (which isn't specified on their website... it's actually a bit thin on tech specs, which proves this isn't intended to be used, just shelved, fondled, and occasionally worn around the shoulder at Ascot or Henley to garner appropriate compliments from fellow toffs).

 

[Bill Burk]

I find myself reaching for the mechanical cameras more these days, they're the ones which can sit around for several years and work when you pick them up.

Listen to me. You're right.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

On the other hand, you have fake photographers who tell themselves that true art is a beat up Leica and some film and since they are using just that they must be good at it even though they couldn't frame to save their lives.

That's me.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Only $4.750.00. You ought to buy both the silver and black versions, E.

Nah. I'll have them paint one fluorescent green and cover it with gecko hide. It's only money...
But to be conservative, I'll get just the body. I have a nice J-8 that will fit with an adapter.

 

[BradleyK]

While nice to see an apparent "commitment" to film from our friends at Leica, I do wonder how many of these will be purchased to reside in display cases? If I had the cash to throw around, I would pick one up; but I already have equipment enough. For my part, my M6s are doing just fine, and will more likely be with me until I reach my best before date (after which, My niece gets an M6 body with the 28 and 50 and 90 Crons, and nephew number one gets the second M6 with 35 and 50 luxes).

 

[NJH]

It hasn't been said yet if the a la carte program will allow it to be purchased with alternate viewfinder magnifications. This is something missing in the old cameras, the recently popular 0.58x viewfinder in particular for glasses wearers. I could definitely see a few well heeled older photographers buying one of those.

Its a small point in some regards but this body is light for a modern Leica at 580g or so, it was one of the disappointments I had with the M7 0.85x, weighed it back to back against my M6 as it felt noticeably heavier, the scales said it was more than 80g heavier. I thought electronics were supposed to be lighter but there you go. Proof of just how much fashion there is in the Leica world, look at the recent secondhand prices on M7s a camera still made and sold new for similar money to this new thing, they have gone south rapidly I lost £300 on mine they are down around £1100 to £1300 now but a nice MP is still £2K. Makes no sense practically other than a market trend towards purely mechanical cameras based on a fear of electronics as a result IMHO of digital rot. Leica rather astutely are cashing on on this trend. Expect it to be their biggest film seller due to 'purity'. I will sit on the sidelines and keep a lookout for the inevitable much cheaper now 'impure' secondhand MPs.

 

[benjiboy]

I don't understand these irrational fears about " fear of electronics as a result of digital rot", I've been using electronic cameras for about thirty years, and still am and I've never had one failure.

 

[NB23]

But have you really looked at the specs on this? It's more than a spiritual throwback to 1959, it's a mechanical throwback as well... 1/1000th top shutter speed, flash sync at 1/45th or 1/50th or some such? (which isn't specified on their website... it's actually a bit thin on tech specs, which proves this isn't intended to be used, just shelved, fondled, and occasionally worn around the shoulder at Ascot or Henley to garner appropriate compliments from fellow toffs).

Your logic is funny. Or you're unfamiar with Leicas.

 

[NB23]

I don't understand these irrational fears about " fear of electronics as a result of digital rot", I've been using electronic cameras for about thirty years, and still am and I've never had one failure.

Come back in 250 years

 

[John Koehrer]

It's nobody's business what someone else spends is it?
The world population grows, there are new millionaires made every day. Let them have their toys too.
Not everyone wants a Koenigsegg.

 

[cliveh]

They never made many spares...

The last real finder they made was the M3s

The M2 finder and later clones - junk... they lost the market dominance to Canon and Nikon circa 59-60.

Bit like Kodak.

I beg to differ and far prefer the frame lines of the M2.

 

[analoguey]

I'm a happy owner of an M6 and planning on getting a second body sometime down the road. When that time comes I'll buy a new MP or M-A. I am really happy to see new film cameras still being produced and/or introduced and want to support that.

Thats good of you! And while I may not be able to afford a new Leica, I might tilt at the Lomo(the instant camera) or Nikon(f6) way (in the not too distant future).




Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[film_man]

I don't understand these irrational fears about " fear of electronics as a result of digital rot", I've been using electronic cameras for about thirty years, and still am and I've never had one failure.

I haven't had an electronic camera fail on me ever. I guess if someone is shooting in the rain then it may become a factor but if it is raining that hard and I know I will be shooting...well I've got a Nikonos. I can see the repair issue though, probably not an issue with Leicas as they still support their cameras but I wouldn't spend serious money on an unsupported electronic system, one of the reasons I didn't buy a Contax 645, for example. On the other hand I have no problems buying 35mm electronic cameras, with the exception of the Nikon F6 they are all worth nearly nothing nowadays.

 

[film_man]

Come back in 250 years

That's ambitious...to say the least!

 

[NJH]

I don't understand these irrational fears about " fear of electronics as a result of digital rot", I've been using electronic cameras for about thirty years, and still am and I've never had one failure.

I bought an Olympus OMD EM-5 that died about an hour after receiving it, just wouldn't power on. Its the only problem I have had though with any electronic camera, I guess the internet is somewhat to blame because we hear about the problems other guys have and this gets taken way out of context compared to the volumes sold.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Your logic is funny. Or you're unfamiar with Leicas.

Elucidate your thought, please. I'm not unfamiliar with Leicas. I know that many people don't use flash with them (it took the second-generation of M6 to get even rudimentary TTL flash with it). But I know that it would be nice to be able to use fill-flash in daylight, something I can do with ease with my Rolleiflex, my Canon EOS system, my Contax RTS III and my Contax G2. Even my G1 has a 1/125th flash sync.

I get it, they're aiming for an all-mechanical camera. They got it. But the cloth horizontal-travel focal plane shutter is traditional to the point of primitiveness. It may be an elegant design, but it's not elegant engineering. So if you want to argue I don't "get" Leicas, you're right. But don't say I don't get the appeal of "traditional" cameras - I shoot 90%+ of my work with a Rolleiflex, and the majority of the rest is shot on view cameras with sometimes century-old lenses. If I'm going to give up square inches of film, I'd better get something else back in the way of features/functionality. I don't see this as giving me anything back other than slightly smaller size/weight over my Rollei. My Rollei cost me $600, complete with a legendary lens, the Zeiss f2.8 Planar. That Leica would cost nearly $6000, without a lens. Not a good deal.

 

[cliveh]

The idea of having a purely mechanical camera is a sound marketing and design initiative. Introducing electronics complicates the issue and takes it further away from the simplicity of function and seeing. Given the opportunity I wouldn’t mind having a go with the Leica M-A.

 

[Pioneer]

What I have seen of it reminds me of a modern M3, with updated viewfinder. I think that is a good thing. It is unfortunate that it has to be so pricey but nothing Leica makes can be mistaken for something inexpensive.

I do love Leica but Flying Camera is right to a large extent. The Rolleiflex 2.8F is wayyy more bang for the buck, though I think prices are a bit above $600. The Planar lens is stunning and that big chunk of 6cm x 6cm film (give or take a millimeter or two) has a lot more going for it than a puny little piece of film that is only 35mm x 24mm.

Fortunately though you do not have to pay $5,000 for a Leica. Once can often find an M2 or M3 in good user shape for a tad over $1,000, or even under if you are patient. Both the Rollei and the Leica should at least be checked out by a repairman if for no other reason than their age.

But...if you do have the scratch, I consider this a worthwhile camera for anyone.

 

[NB23]

That's ambitious...to say the least!

I was obviously joking but then I realized that in 250 years my leicas would still be working with a slight oil massage here and there, not the digital cameras.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

What I have seen of it reminds me of a modern M3, with updated viewfinder. I think that is a good thing. It is unfortunate that it has to be so pricey but nothing Leica makes can be mistaken for something inexpensive.

I do love Leica but Flying Camera is right to a large extent. The Rolleiflex 2.8F is wayyy more bang for the buck, though I think prices are a bit above $600. The Planar lens is stunning and that big chunk of 6cm x 6cm film (give or take a millimeter or two) has a lot more going for it than a puny little piece of film that is only 35mm x 24mm.

Fortunately though you do not have to pay $5,000 for a Leica. Once can often find an M2 or M3 in good user shape for a tad over $1,000, or even under if you are patient. Both the Rollei and the Leica should at least be checked out by a repairman if for no other reason than their age.

But...if you do have the scratch, I consider this a worthwhile camera for anyone.

My Rollei is a 2.8E. I got it already CLA'd for $600. The second one I have is also a 2.8E which needed a bit of TLC, but I paid $500 for it. An F will run you closer to $1K.

 

[ericdan]

M3's are 50 years old and still work. Maybe they need a tune up but they still work like a charm even now. I don't see why 5000 dollars for a 50+ year investment is expensive. I'm in my 30s now, if I were to buy an M-A now it would probably outlast me.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

...