Leica M-D
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
They actually did it the absolute madmen.
>The Leica M-D offers the ultimate in digital rangefinder photography. No LCD screen leads to more freedom for creative photography.
"Who's going to buy a $6000 digital Leica with no screen?"
"We'll let marketing worry about that."
level: no chimp
i think it's a cool idea. but the price does not match said idea
The only reason I'd use this is if I was a time traveller who wanted to go to the past and take photos while blending in.
>>2831834
>travel in time
>to use a digital camera instead of kodachrome
>>2831808
Why is Wojak crying in this one?
is there anything other than street photography that you can use a Leica for?
>>2831840
It's based on this video, it just happens to be one of my favorite Wojak crying pics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmI-hGthrwA
>>2831845
See for yourself: https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=&cm=leica%2Fm
>>2831845
Gearfaggotry and *looks*
>>2831839
>bring back photos
>can't get then developed properly
>can't publish them anywhere
>>2831856
Just get them developed right there.
Leica should go further.
They should add a lever for the shutter like the Epson R-D1.
And also only allow special SD cards that can only hold 36 photos.
Maybe take it to the next level and only allow the camera to make jpg's which get processed depending on what film type SD card it is.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh Photographer Picasa 3.0 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 870 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 78 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2010:11:30 02:27:31 Exposure Time 0.4 sec F-Number f/22.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Focal Length 52.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 620 Image Height 336 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Digital Zoom Ratio 1.5 Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation High Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Unknown Unique Image ID 0565af0ab37f4e0577a89f2923022e9a
>>2831863
Why did Epson put a fucking lever on a digital body, that seems insane to me.
>And also only allow special SD cards that can only hold 36 photos.
>Maybe take it to the next level and only allow the camera to make jpg's which get processed depending on what film type SD card it is.
That's ballsplitting, I really want to see this happen. Even if it was just a software feature, like when you put the SD card in, you chose a film type. After 36 shots, it refuses to work with that SD ever again.
>>2831867
>Why did Epson put a fucking lever on a digital body, that seems insane to me.
Cock the shutter, perfectly reasonable.
>>2831873
Did the tech to do that automatically not exist in 2004?
>>2831874
Maybe, but the tech to replace that shutter cocking feeling will never exist.
That said, yeah it's a bit wacky, but this is a hell of a camera for its time.
>first digital rangefinder
>first interchangeable lens mirrorless
>APSC
>dials and shit on digital while todays Fuji fags were still in third grade
Epson is the original, and the best, digital cool guy.
>>2831863
>6MP
>apsc
ABSOLUTE MADMAN
>>2831905
>still used and sought after today, costing a fortune a working piece.
>>2831846
When did they start calling it wojak?
I kinda like this idea, I would probably buy this Leica over any other digital Leica. Looks like it could be fun.
>>2831912
Years ago
>>2831912
That was his original name, once pepe got involved everyone went back to the original name for some reason.
>>2831847
well then
https://www.flickr.com/photos/redsun81/26831714155/
>>2831925
Another anon here, this is the first time I saw this and I've been her since 2005.
Oddly though, this "digital purity" Leica thread seems like the best place to discuss memes.
>>2831892
Why don't they make another full frame version? I wouldn't even mind if it was a shitty 5 year old 16 megapixel sensor if they could keep the cost under a grand I'd buy 2
>>2831932
Epson is dead, mate. At least the photo department.
>>2831867
>>2831873
>>2831874
>>2831892
>>2831907
Taking photos with the RD-1was therapeutic as fuck, every physical and mechanical aspect of the camera is perfect. Even the fact that the sensor was so tragically awful felt liberating in a sense--once I realized that the images would always have a shit early digital look no matter what I just stopped worrying about trying to optimize image quality
It's 100% about the experience, and in that sense it's the like the epitome of the commercial post-film camera, a fact which was only recently realized with the wave of retro styled mirrorless cameras or even the screenless leica above
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SEIKO EPSON CORP. Camera Model R-D1 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2011:10:28 09:52:20 Exposure Time 1/55 sec Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 800 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Function Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1024 Image Height 681 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control Low Gain Up
>>2831937
I think can see what you're getting at.
That shot actually looks good. Is that just a diamond in the rough kind of shot?
>>2831940
That's the kind of shot that would look good on any camera. The rd1 sensor just doesn't have subtlety, which is typical of early digital but limits the kind of scenes u must seek out if you don't want it to have that gross digital look (pic related)
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SEIKO EPSON CORP. Camera Model R-D1 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2013:01:13 20:57:03 Exposure Time 1/120 sec Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 400 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Function Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1024 Image Height 681 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None
>>2831809
They already tried a $19,000 camera with no screen so this is a huge leap forward :^)
http://www.wired.com/2014/09/leica-m-edition-60/
>>2831937
Good to see you still posting here. I miss your photos.
>>2831807
>implying the buyers of this camera will use it as anything but cabinet ornament.
>>2831892
>2004 was 12 years ago.
damn i feel old.
>>2831976
I haven't posted here for what feels like years. I'm moving to clapistan for school this summer though so I've had to start organizing my shit. When I was cleaning all my photography stuff out of my school's current workspace I was reminded of this place
>tfw turning on the 2006 era mac pro in the digital lab that no one uses anymore except as a platform for obsolete scanning sofware and seeing all my folders with hundreds of 100MB+ 6x7 scans all over the desktop
>all those hours scanning and i hadn't even bothered to do my own external backup
i'm pretty lucky no one deleted them desu
>>2831937
Agree with this guy. I had one of these for about two years before I had to sell it. It was a pure joy to use and will be buying another one when I have the money. It still goes for about $1000.
There were three of them, The R-D1, R-D1s, and the R-D1x. The two earlier models were almost the same aside from the screen, the second model (the R-D1s) had a flippy screen, which I always kept flipped inside. I always got a lot of attention from other street photographers for it. The limitation of only being able to use 2 gb sd cards made it interesting as well. Joke about holding only a "few" images if you want, all you have to do is carry extra cards. No big deal.
The third model, the R-D1x, finally lifted the card size limitation. Obviously this is one of the harder models to find.
Epson had absolute shit for marketing so the camera never did very well. I miss that camera so much and have never regretting selling any of my other cameras. I have an X-pro1 and it's a fine camera but it's not a joy to use like the R-D1s I had.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SEIKO EPSON CORP. Camera Model R-D1s Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:01:19 02:18:16 Exposure Time 1/2000 sec Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 400 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Function Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None
>>2831990
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SEIKO EPSON CORP. Camera Model R-D1s Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:10:01 16:05:15 Exposure Time 1/720 sec Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 400 Exposure Bias 0.3 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Function Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None
>>2831992
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SEIKO EPSON CORP. Camera Model R-D1s Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:04:04 10:40:18 Exposure Time 1/500 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 400 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Function Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None
>>2831990
dat ISO/ASA dial on the back
>>2831994
It actually wasn't an ISO/ASA dial. It was a little diagram that showed what your lens equivalence was since it was an APS-C sensor. It looked close enough to an ISO dial if you just glanced at it though, which is why if I didn't feel like showing somebody my camera while I was street shooting, they wouldn't question it.
The best part were the needles on the top plate display to tell you how many photos you have left, battery life, and all that other info.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Panasonic Camera Model DMC-GF1 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.7 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 41 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:07:07 14:06:28 Exposure Time 1/100 sec F-Number f/2.2 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/2.2 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 20.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2831863
That these still sell for $1000 is amazing to me.
>>2832000
Look at the photos posted, same photos made with todays entry level DSLR would reveal much more detail and give a much bigger print but wouldn't have the same look.
I don't know what Epson did with the processing but the photos look something else and I just can't put my finger on it. No wonder why it holds such a price today.
>>2831936
RIP In Peace
>>2832014
If there's anything other than a placebo effect, then it's nothing more than a tone curve.
And higher dynamic range, more resolution and detail, and new sensors make images more and more sterile, and have more and more information, which means you have to do more and more to make it look natural, and aesthetically pleasing.
People love photos from the 5D classic at high ISO because it looks a lot like 35mm in terms of detail and "noise/grain" straight out of the camera.
I'm not saying it's not a neat piece of equipment, but that neatness is what makes it desirable, and really nothing else.
>>2832033
Well, a big part of the allure of the R-D1's photos is the fact that it uses a CCD sensor instead of a CMOS sensor. Technical bullshit aside, the photos just look very different. A CCD sensor's digital noise also looks a lot like film grain. The quality (or maybe, lack of quality by today's standards) of the photos themselves is also very film-like. That's the real joy of this camera, I think. The fact that you look at the photos and don't feel a compulsive urge to take them into Lightroom or whatever editor to really change them. It's similar to what Fuji is doing with its JPEG film presets. I would argue the R-D1 is better at it than Fuji, despite being ancient equipment.
>>2832076
I don't like the way ccd sensor images look and especially on the rd-1. Coupled with the short flange distance on RF lenses--hence the extreme angle of incidence of the light at the edges of the frame--they produce very contrasty images and unless you make sure to expose just right (the meter is not that good on the RD1, besides it cant account for the problems some lenses have like vignetting etc) the image will also have "dark" colours. Idk how to best describe what i mean by deep colours, maybe "deep" or "intense" is the right word, the point being that they are colour areas where the luminance value is far less than the greatest individual (RGB) colour measurement, or in other words where there is a large disparity between the largest and smallest value recorded by a single channel IN THE SAME AREA/SPOT--whether it's because the sensor doesn't get as much signal or information for each channel because of physics or if its because of some processing issue i have no idea, i just know that i hate the how unforgiving ccd sensors are for exposure and how their files look as a result.
I had a really shitty lens though so some of what i described could possibly be attributable to that, and indeed more so than other cameras i think that the rd1 needs to have a really good lens to take technically satisfying pictures
>>2831807
>No LCD
>still fat as the other digital M's
come on
>>2831863
That's a Bessa with a digital sensor crammed in.
The Bessa is just Cosina's Nikon FM10 body with a rangefinder.
Keep the sensor, put the prism and flipping mirror back, and you have a small, retro-looking digital Nikon F-mount camera.
>>2832076
>A CCD sensor's digital noise also looks a lot like film grain
Idiot.
>>2832109
>No LCD
>still fat as the other digital M's
this so much
>>2831932
Probably because no one wants to buy a $1000 camera from a printer company, not that that's a good reason, that's just what the bean counters at Epson would say.
I think this thing is amazing and Fuji needs to nut up and just do it.
>>2831892
Oh and I forgot,
>articulating screen in 2004
What a masterpiece.
>>2832117
Ricoh managed to sell and even improve the Pentax line, I don't see the problem with Epson selling an upgraded R-D1 with a newer sensor.
They could probably bite out a substantial amount of the Leica market.
>>2832121
>They could probably bite out a substantial amount of the Leica market.
This desu.
Leica are getting away with their pricing by being the only digital rangefinder game in town. They used to be known for their brand and craftmanship but even that's been diminished over the years.
I was hoping for Zenit to make a comeback but I'd like to see Epson or Kodak try it too.
>>2832109
Right. It's a Bessa body.
>>2832110
Thanks for your contribution.
>>2832117
>>2832121
It's not that simple. Look at Pentax. They clearly make excellent cameras and provide great value. Nobody is buying them. They don't have any market penetration at all. I want a Pentax myself but can't bring myself to jump ship (Canon) because I'm already so invested in the ecosystem.
>>2832076
I've owned many CCD cameras. The noise isn't any more "film like" than CMOS. Maybe you have a shitty CMOS sensor setup with pattern noise but that happens in CCD too.
the future is no nice things
>>2832134
>so invested in the ecosystem
I never understand this. If you like a system that's fine. No need to change it. But sticking with a system because you are "invested" in it? What does that even mean? Does that mean your gear is worthless?
>>2831807
I would definitely buy one over a model with a screen, if I would actually pay less instead of more. Maybe even if they costed the same amount. On the other hand I wouldn't buy a Leica in the first place, because they haven't heard of "value for money".
>>2832206
Yep, this is why I went with Pentax. This and the fact I only wanted cheap astrophotography and got the rest of the photography thing as an added extra.
>>2832206
>he thinks price correlates with value
>>2831807
>200 base iso
We fuji now.
>>2832212
You know what I meant.
>>2832215
>You know what I meant.
o-overthrow the oppressors and seize the means of production?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 100 dpi Vertical Resolution 100 dpi Image Created 2013:04:21 02:31:16 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1100 Image Height 1700
>>2832213
200 is literally the perfect ISO. Why would you need more? Can't you hold a camera still for a small fraction of a second?
>>2832217
I meant that I don't want to pay for the name alone. I want features.
>>2831863
>>2831874
It did, but putting it in the R-D1 would have meant replacing the entire shutter mechanism with something different, and making it even more expensive than it already was. The R-D1 was just a mechanical RF with a sensor grafted into it, and the rest of the camera is pretty much as it always was.
I'd love a modern version with a FF sensor in it, but that'll probably never happen, and if it does it'll probably be insanely expensive, so I'll just stick to pretending my Fuji is a real RF.
>>2831847
>https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=&cm=leica%2Fm
All that tells me is that Leica users are shitty unimaginative photographers
>>2831867
Calm down satan
>>2831807
>yfw leica m-d = iphone 7
no lcd screen and no audio jack
>>2831937
looks like slide film, crushed blacks and all. i like it.
>>2831807
Why even the Leica fanboys crying over this one?
The Leica M edition 60 doesn't have a screen as well and fanboys love it.
>>2832134
Sell used buy Pentax.
Never better time than now.
>>2832134
What lenses do you use?
I wish people would stop comparing the X-Pro 1 to traditional rangefinders and realise it's actually a digital Contax G.
>>2832389
this, anyone who genuinely thinks it's a rangefinder camera is frustrated that they couldn't actually afford a leica.
>>2832389
>it's actually a digital Contax G
But that makes me want one even more
>>2832033
I would disagree. This is a 1:1 crop from a photo I just took with my 5dino at 1600, and I'd say it looks unmistakably digital.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 5D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.8 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:06 12:49:20 Exposure Time 1/500 sec F-Number f/1.8 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/1.8 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1911 Image Height 1274 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
I like Leica's microscopes a lot but their photo shit is just getting out of hand.
>>2831830
Pretty much this. Neato idea but it should in theory cost less than the other Leicas because of it.
Fucking Pure Photography marketing hype.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2014:09:16 22:34:13 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 480 Image Height 320
>no ASA 100
Absolutely haram.
>>2832221
I don't need more. I need less.
>>2832389
>>2832393
I'll continue to compare them to both, and maybe it's worth explaining why.
Here's the thing about Leica and other traditional RFs: yes, we think of the rangefinder as the defining feature of the camera, but it wasn't really the reason to own one.
Look back at the period from, say, 1960 to 1985 or so, the era when the Nikon F was king but there were still pros shooting Leica. Were those pros really shooting RFs because they preferred focusing through a hazy little patch and fucking around with framelines and accessory finders to shooting with a big, bright, full-frame TTL finder? Of course not. They shot Leica because the system was small and light compared to a Nikon F setup, because it was quiet and discreet thanks to the lack of a mirror, and because of Leica's excellent glass. Using a rangefinder made all of those things possible. Of course, there was also the build quality, which may not have actually been any more durable or reliable than a Nikon, but it sure as hell felt nicer in the hands.
I think the Fuji system fills the exact same niche. It puts great glass and sensors into a system that's a fraction of the size and weight of a DSLR setup, it's quiet and discreet, and to a certain kind of shooter it feels more more enjoyable to hold and use than a modern DSLR. Sure, it lacks the RF system, but it replaces it with a much better modern option. I think that if Leica had focused on the things that made their cameras appealing to serious shooters and had kept up with technology instead of clinging to tradition and catering to collectors, they would have ended up with something very similar to the X cameras.
>>2832421
Yes, those smd ICs are definitely digital
>>2832739
Pentax D-FA 70-200/2.8 or Tamron/Sigma 70-200/2.8 or Pentax DA* 60-250/4 if crop body is okay
UWA is mostly crop line for now, HD DA 16-85 or DA* 16-50/2.8 not really UWA but FF is the D-FA 24-70/2.8 (same as Tamron)
Sigma 50/1.4 Art can be converted but on crop the DA* 55/1.4 is king, for FF the FA 50/1.4 or f/1.7, maybe D-FA 50/2.8 macro if you can live with the aperture.
There's many options really and some good quality budget options too in the Pentax lens lineup
The rest is here: http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/
http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/
>>2832721
It's not marketing hype. Consider this camera as a niche filling product, manufactured in smaller quantities than other branch of M cameras, on separate assembly line. You are not paying more for less, but for effort Leica took to actually manufacture camera without screen. So,
>it should in theory cost less than the other Leicas because of it
is true only if we mind sole price of components, without costs of technology to manufacture this camera.
>>2833094
Manufacture, Market, Ship, Stock, Provide support for, Train salesmen about, buy raw materials to create, etc. Every expense goes up as the projected sales run goes down.
>>2831856
one hour photo BITCH
>>2831863
>And also only allow special SD cards that can only hold 36 photos.
>Maybe take it to the next level and only allow the camera to make jpg's which get processed depending on what film type SD card it is.
i actually like this idea
>>2836070
And you have to set the iso for each memory card beforehand
>>2831807
Does the ISO dial on the back even do anything or is it just a spinny dial like any other film camera?
>>2836123
And you can only use them once, and then you have to throw it away and buy another one.
And maybe each card is locked with some mega complex encryption, so you have to mail it off to someone to get them to get the photos off of it, and it takes about a week...
>>2836453
It does what it says i.e. sets ISO and the dial on film cameras is just as important.
>>2836454
That might be taking it too far. I think the perfect level of assholery would be:
>proprietary cards with room for less than 50 images
>each one is a certain film simulation with fixed iso and even different megapixel usage, you have to buy the right film and can only change it by using a different card
>no one sells the card you want any more so you have to pay loads over the Internet
>cards have an arbitrary lifespan, after which, weird artifacts start appearing in the photos
>cards will ruin your photos deliberately if you expose them to light
>you can't delete images
>the camera still records a raw photo where you can push exposure etc (with the film simulation added) but you can only do this in complete darkness
>>2836454
>locked with some mega complex encryption, so you have to mail it off to someone to get them to get the photos off of it, and it takes about a week
That sounds like an emulation card for maybe Kodachrome and other dead formats, but not regular C-41 or E-6. Or at least it's not like that where I live.
>>2831839
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZpaNJqF4po
>>2832414
agreed.
