Leica has made a brilliant comeback with nice but expensive rangefinders.

buy a fuji

>>3006155
>no rangefinder
>APSc
>current year
no thanks

>>3006166
x pro 2

>>3006166
>x100 series, X-pro series
> just announced medium format
>2017

>>3006152
I can understand the appeal of a Leica, but not so much a digital body.. I have a M2 that will last forever.. but digital body's are outdated a year after you buy them. and if you're lucky they will last you a good 4 years. I can't justify blowing over 6K on a digital body just to say I own a leica..

>>3006181
it's like buying a rolex to tell you the time when my iPhone does the same job only more accurately.

>>3006182

No, it's like buying a digital Rolex.

>>3006167
>no rangefinder

>>3006194
have you ever tried a x100 or xpro? the OVF is amazing. yeah digital rangefinder whatever.. can you justify spending over $6000 when fuji's are doing the exact same thing? in a lot of ways better..

I mean with a fuji you have the option of the OVF or EVF.. the IQ is the closest thing to film on anything digital. If it ever shits out it's literally 1.300 to replace the body.

I'm a day one adopter of the x pro 1 and it still runs like it's brand new.. that's a camera that came out in early 2012. i'm on to the X-pro 2.. i'm a film shooter.. I own a leica M2 body.. I can tell you from years of shooting film.. the fuji system is the closest thing that replicates it.. leica has become a over priced fashion piece.. there always two steps behind. yet people still blow there money on them. you can buy a M8 right now for probably 1000$ or less.. so if you're a M8 owner you just took a 5000$ hit on you're investment.

>>3006198
still no rangefinder coupling for range finder lenses

rangefinder does not mean `little window on the corner of the camera'

>>3006198
No mate, no rangefinder means its not a rangefinder. So stop trying to sell some fuji shit.

>>3006205
>>3006240

I mean, they definitely do have a rangefinder because of phase detection at the sensor level..

so.... .. .. . .

>>3006167
No rangefinder
Aps-c
No software support

>>3006198
Xpro evf is the worst on the market
No rangefinder - ovf is useless
Lenses worse than ones that cost less than a quarter on competing systems
Iq is bad because no full frame, no raw processing software, no good lenses

>>3006241
Ah right, you literally have no idea what a rangefinder is and you've only ever owned fuji digital cameras - your opinion is trash.

>>3006260
>No rangefinder - ovf is useless
why do so many gearfags completely not understand what the hybrid viewfinder allows?

>>3006266
A careful blend of disposable camera viewfinder and circa 2006 handicam evf.

>>3006273
Sounds like you've only ever seen it in videos where it looks different than your eye perceives it.

>>3006260
It's easy to tell you've never picked up a Fuji, let alone shot with one. So until you do your opinion is discarded.

>>3006290
I own a fooji fren

>>3006297
Mmmhmmm... And by your logic you must be dumb for own owning one

>>3006323
Nah, it has its uses, if me or my partner are using my main body, and the other wants to shoot, they use the foojee, or the pentax k5, or the nikon d70, or the nex c3, if they're not wanting to use film.

Gf likes it for social events as it goes well with some of her outfits.

>>3006325
I guess then different horses for different courses

>>3006167
>APS-C
OP wants FF

>>3006172
>MF
No rangefinder


What part of "Epson/Cosina", "Full Frame" and "Rangefinder" did you not understand?

>>3006329
Have you not met the fuji fanbase before, most of them are under the impression they have equal or better low light performance than ff Sony sensor cameras and that their lenses aren't some of the worst performing of all time.

>>3006336
>their lenses aren't some of the worst performing of all time

Lay off the drugs, man.

>>3006336
Unless you have compared each lens thoroughly, you don't have a single shred of proof, and your opinion is irrelevant

File: yu-gi-tmax.png (60KB, 324x490px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 324x490px

>>3006152
>Why won't Cosina and Epson make a second generation of the RD1 with a FF sensor?
Because R&D on that is expensive, especially for a company that doesn't make any other digital cameras, and the payoff is questionable.

>people wouldn't be able to buy these fast enough
No. Since rangefinder focusing has lost pretty much all practical advantages by now, the market is extremely limited and dominated by "muh unique shooting experience" magical thinking that Leica has a firm grip on.
Remember that when R-D1 came out, it was not just the only digital RF on the market, but the only non-SLR digital camera with interchangeable lenses. It could be sold both to rangefinder fans who wanted to go digital and to regular photographers who wanted something more discreet than a DSLR - and it STILL sold poorly.
Nowadays, you'd have a hard time convincing rangefinder fans that your product is better than a used Leica, and anyone looking for a small ILC already has some sonylympus with performance Cosina/Epson cannot hope to match.

>>3006260
>Ah right, you literally have no idea what a rangefinder is and you've only ever owned fuji digital cameras - your opinion is trash

I do know what a rangefinder is. Pretty sure you don't, though.

>>3006359
No fuji lens outresolves any of the bargain bin sigma dn range. You can buy the sigma trio for the same as fujis cheapest prime.

Look to photozone for the test results.

If a £800 lens is being outresolved by a £100 lens, somethings deeply wrong.

>>3006359
I haven't, photozone have.

>>3006367
Used in golf aren't they?

>>3006369

Used in golf, and also used in the x100s and 100t for the split image manual focus.

>>3006375
Pip focus mag isn't a rangefinder dufus.
Go use an actual rf, understand how it works, then come back.

>>3006152
>people wouldn't be able to buy these fast enough
All 30 people who would want to pay for a manual focus camera from a company that is unfamiliar for most people at a price that would rival most FF cameras anyways.

Lots of Fuji hate in here. I've been reading through. I'm not brand loyal but I would take a X-pro 2 over a M9 any day.. but for practical sake if i was going to buy another Fuji body it would be the XT2 . I love the rangefinder style of the xp line up but the evf on the XT2 is the best on the market..

The argument leica vs Fuji that always seems to come up is a bit retarded. You really can't compare the two.. when I got my first Fuji xp1 my initial thoughts had been that it was supposed to be a leica clone.. but I find Fuji cameras stand on there own as there own thing.. just like leica a they only appeal to a small crowd.

That being said Fuji out performs any digital leica.. there more practical, affordable, offer AF, a lens line up That's approachable..

File: fujifilm_x100s_digital_split_image_sample.jpg (22KB, 630x165px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 630x165px

>>3006379
Fuji actually has an electronic imitation of a rangefinder patch, except with a split image rather than an overlaid image.

>>3006428
I will add to this. I'm a street photographer. I have friends that own leicas. But they all bring there fujis out on the street. Why? Because who wants to walk around with a 6k camera on there shoulder all day in shady neighborhoods.. nothing about buying a leica is practical.

>>3006241
this has to be bait

>>3006430
Once again, that is not a rangefinder. Its like calling a mirrorless a dslr because it resembles one. No mirror means no slr, no rf means no rangefinder.

>>3006437
Xpro and x100 series are digital rangefinders with a ovf. XT series is a take on a film slr with no ovf only evf.

>>3006437
It's a digital rangefinder my man

>>3006437
they contain digital rangefinders. thats what phase detection is. an autofocus digital rangefinder. normally this is a technicality, "all cameras are rangefinders", but in this case, the way you USE the camera is the same as well, so the difference is purely autistic "muh mirrors"

We don't need mirrors anymore, dickwad. They havent used mirrors in surveying rangefinders in years.

Leica enthusiasts what's the cheapest way to buy into leica? Used M8?

>>3006432
>Because who wants to walk around with a 6k camera on there shoulder all day in shady neighborhoods.
> in shady neighborhoods.
so sick of people thinking they shoot street while taking photographs of buskers. Or a high contrast B&W of a wrinkled old guy. why don't you try shooting something new?

go shoot show wives in yoga pants on the strip or something

>>3006449
in order
Richo GXR
sony with adapter
epson RD1
M8

>>3006437
It's not an optical rangefinder of a specific construction that is commonly meant when people say "rangefinder camera". But it is a kind of rangefinder, and it works in the same way an optical rangefinder does - rotate focus ring, combine images.

>>3006453
That's if he meant "buying into Leica mount".

The cheapest way of buying into Leica cameras is a screwmount film Leica II or III, but those are an ergonomic nightmare by modern standards.

A rangefinder works by triangulation based off of two points of measurement. In a classic optical rangefinder (with mirrors), one of these is the OVF, the other is the rangefinder window.

In a Fuji, because it has a live sensor feed, one of them is on the sensor, and the other is in the OVF. You're still triangulating. If you actually understand how a rangefinder works, not just "it has mirrors", then you know that a phase detection system is the same principle.

Using a Fuji with rangefinder lenses is exactly the same as what the Konost Rangefinder plans to do. Leica still makes theirs optically, but that doesn't mean a digital rangefinder isn't one.

File: Good things come in 3s.jpg (206KB, 1101x683px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 1101x683px

>>3006456
leica IIIf is quite a pleasure to use
I often shoot mine over my M3 of F3

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH
Camera Model	GXR S10
Camera Software	GXR Firmware
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:20 12:09:54
White Point Chromaticity	0.3
Exposure Time	1/40 sec
F-Number	f/3.7
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/3.7
Brightness	1.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	11.50 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1280
Image Height	960
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal

>>3006460
>In a Fuji, because it has a live sensor feed, one of them is on the sensor, and the other is in the OVF

No, Fuji's OVF is passive. The split image system works using directionally sensitive pixels on the sensor, same as on-sensor PDAF (note that split image is available on X-T series too)

> If you actually understand how a rangefinder works
Seems like you don't.

>>3006456
Yes I meant leica body/ cheap 35mm lens. I've seen M2's for cheap. I already own a entire Fuji system if I wanted to go with the adaptor option I would just buy a m mount for my XP2.

>>3006460
Konost is vaporware.

>>3006465
then leica m2 or CL

>>3006463
Describing a technological difference does not mandate a functional one.
Diesel engines, faggot.

>>3006480
>Describing a technological difference does not mandate a functional one.
What does that even mean lol

File: M5.jpg (58KB, 679x390px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 679x390px

>>3006465

>>3006181
Disagree, because they're so light on random shit I feel like the only thing that can really make leicas obsolete is their image quality, that's why you can still find lots of people still shooting the m8 because it produces beautiful images and the only real reason to upgrade to newer leicas is just for full frame and better ISO performance

>>3006462
what advantages does it have over leica m's?

>>3006619
fuck the M5 was an ugly camera

>>3006942
*is* an ugly camera.
Digicucks really have lowered the bar as far as the aesthetic quality of the "average" camera goes.
But when you have the simplicity of form of a Leica, a failure in proportions becomes more glaring.

why do you faggots talk about how a camera looks? has to match your Louis Vuitton bag? fucking homos

as a photographer you have an appreciation for aesthetics and style, that doesn't just include the photographs themselves but the equipment also as well as a wide range of arts and lifestyles.

>>3007182
for
>>3007174

>>3006369
>If a £800 lens is being outresolved by a £100 lens, somethings deeply wrong.
I have large format lenses that I've picked up for under £100 that outresolve all your small format lenses.

Something's deeply wrong.

>>3006863
they are a little smaller and lighter without compromising ergonomics. Cameras like the CL/CLE are smaller but I find they are clunky in the hand. plus screw mount lenses are cheap.

>>3006462
I love how short non-M cameras are. I feel like digital cameras have gotten a little too tall

>>3006449
Leica CL. Yeah I know that it's really a Minolta, and it won't get you into the Leica swinger parties, but at least the name is there and that's the only reason you'd buy a Leica.

File: AF-C1-2.jpg (94KB, 653x463px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 653x463px

>>3006449

probably this guy

>>3006430
The imitation has to be a bad one because it relies on the camera's AF ability to detect what is in or out of focus.

>>3006430
I wish Sony had split prism simulation. Focus peaking is cool and all, but I find a split prism to be faster.

>>3006152
>epson
busy making printers trying not to go bankrupt like other nip companies.

>>3009865
don't they have auto punch focus when you turn the focus ring?

>>3009863
It doesn't involve AF in any way.

Just like any other optical rangefinder mechanism, it uses 2 separate light paths, in this case separation is done using directionally sensitive pixels on the sensor.

>>3009814
Thats also a rebranded minolta friend

>>3010308

Yes, we know. He said cheapest way to buy in and it's got the dot, friendo. Take it up with Leica.