Sony NEX-5 vs Leica M8

StingerNikon

StingerNikon

nice shot!
Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,188
Name
Konstantin
Edit My Images
Yes
With the new FD-mount to NEX adapter from Voigtländer it is possible to use Leica lenses on NEX-3, NEX-5 bodies.

voigt_e-vm-top3.jpg


http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/leica-minolta-and-canon-m-mount-lenses-tested-on-the-sony-nex/

I don't think NEX-5 sensor is worse than M8's sensor so why do people still pay huge money for M8?:thinking:
 
A Ford Mondeo will cruise on a motorway just as well as a BMW 5-Series, some people like to buy into the brand image (in this case Leica). If you have the money you can choose, nothing wrong in that really. Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
StingerNikon said:
I don't think NEX-5 sensor is worse than M8's sensor so why do people still pay huge money for M8?:thinking:
Click to expand...

Because there are people with more money than sense who believe a camera with Red Dot with a Leica logo makes them better photographers.

You've got to admire the brass neck of a company who has thrived on providing expensive trinkets to the naive and gullible :D
 
I can understand about differencies in these brands but what about technical aspects of these bodies?

I'm looking for something portable as a second camera and Leica M9 is too expensive for me.
Perharps its better to wait for a Nikon EVIL but when I found these new adapters for NEX I started to think if it is good alternative to use NEX-5 with a good prime lens.

I have been useing my friend's NEX-5 for a week with 16mm 2.8 lens but I wasn't impressed with results I got with the lens. So perharps the new adaptor and a good lens will solve the problem?

What do you think?
 
I was tempted by the Sony but the reviews say that the IQ is good but it is frustrating as hell to use. Such a shame as the Sony Alpha controls are, I think, are pretty good.
 
My nex-5 twin lens kit arrived this morning i love it and cannot wait to get out and about with it.

You can by different adaptors for it i.e sony/canon/nikon etc so open to any lenses if you want too.

J
 
I don't like the idea of putting a Zeiss 24-70mm on such a dinky body, I think the new 35mm f1.8, 85mm f2.8 and the 50mm f1.8 might just work though and it means that I don't have to buy separate lenses.
 
puddleduck said:
Because there are people with more money than sense who believe a camera with Red Dot with a Leica logo makes them better photographers.

You've got to admire the brass neck of a company who has thrived on providing expensive trinkets to the naive and gullible :D
Click to expand...

Leica lenses basically the best though :bonk:

(yes, that statement was way too glib)
 
Voyager said:
Are Leica still making the M8? :eek:
Click to expand...

No. Horrible thing. It was one of the biggest mistakes Leica has ever made. And they've made a few.
 
Messed with my brothers Nex-5 the other day. I liked it!!
Hd mode looked damned good and when compared to a like for like shot with his 18-55 and my 5dmk11 with 24-70 it didn't do a bad job, bit of fringing and not quite as sharp but if I were to print I doubt if anyone could tell the difference. Menu system was slower than dslr but I soon got used to it.
 
zooxanthellae said:
Messed with my brothers Nex-5 the other day. I liked it!!
Hd mode looked damned good and when compared to a like for like shot with his 18-55 and my 5dmk11 with 24-70 it didn't do a bad job, bit of fringing and not quite as sharp but if I were to print I doubt if anyone could tell the difference. Menu system was slower than dslr but I soon got used to it.
Click to expand...

I think that's why I'm waiting to see what the NEX-7 will be like because I don't like the idea of everything being revolved around that wheel, I would love to have a second shutter wheel (or whatever they are called to adjust the shutter/aperture)
 
puddleduck said:
Because there are people with more money than sense who believe a camera with Red Dot with a Leica logo makes them better photographers.
Click to expand...

Equally, there are people for whom the entire Leica legacy with regard to photojournalism and the Magnum heyday is important.

I'm not sure it's necessary to make such a perjorative, sweeping generalisation as you have here.

And no, I don't have a Leica. But I have no problem with those that make that choice.
 
waspjunior said:
A Ford Mondeo will cruise on a motorway just as well as a BMW 5-Series, some people like to buy into the brand image (in this case Leica). If you have the money you can choose, nothing wrong in that really. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...


yeah right ! :lol: ford mondeo !

as for leica, they are expensive for a reason. and many togs use them for a reason.
of course in the end of the day - it's all what you can afford.
 
Radiohead said:
Equally, there are people for whom the entire Leica legacy with regard to photojournalism and the Magnum heyday is important.

I'm not sure it's necessary to make such a perjorative, sweeping generalisation as you have here.

And no, I don't have a Leica. But I have no problem with those that make that choice.
Click to expand...

And that is what is special about Leica, the heritage, and it's a great legacy for sure. But that is long gone - decades ago.

Personally, I think the current range is a bit of an embarrassment - nothing special in terms of quality, low spec, and ludicrously over-priced. Aligator skin and gold plate? Cartier-Bresson must be spinning. The best Leicas these days are made by Panasonic, and the new all-Leica S2 is a farce.
 
HoppyUK said:
And that is what is special about Leica, the heritage, and it's a great legacy for sure. But that is long gone - decades ago.

Personally, I think the current range is a bit of an embarrassment - nothing special in terms of quality, low spec, and ludicrously over-priced. Aligator skin and gold plate? Cartier-Bresson must be spinning. The best Leicas these days are made by Panasonic, and the new all-Leica S2 is a farce.
Click to expand...

They make stuff for collectors no doubt (and good luck to them, that happens in every area of consumer product), but there are an awful lot of very serious photographers using their kit, and that includes the M9.

To dismiss them all as idiots as done earlier in this thread is pretty wide of the mark.
 
Radiohead said:
They make stuff for collectors no doubt (and good luck to them, that happens in every area of consumer product), but there are an awful lot of very serious photographers using their kit, and that includes the M9.

To dismiss them all as idiots as done earlier in this thread is pretty wide of the mark.
Click to expand...

Agreed, a lot of pro street photography used to and still do use leica's because they combine IQ and handling (oh and a FF sensor;)) in such a small body that's excellent for street photography for when you try to keep inconspicuous.
 
Radiohead said:
They make stuff for collectors no doubt (and good luck to them, that happens in every area of consumer product), but there are an awful lot of very serious photographers using their kit, and that includes the M9.

To dismiss them all as idiots as done earlier in this thread is pretty wide of the mark.
Click to expand...

mastertrinity said:
Agreed, a lot of pro street photography used to and still do use leica's because they combine IQ and handling (oh and a FF sensor;)) in such a small body that's excellent for street photography for when you try to keep inconspicuous.
Click to expand...

Maybe not idiots, let's just say wealthy individuals with esoteric tastes. Take the red dot off and nobody would buy their cameras today.

Where are the "lots" of serious photographers shooting with Leica these days? I've never seen them; not seen a Leica in use for years apart from the little D-Lux Pano clone. If there was more than handful of them, Leica would not be in terminal trouble.
 
HoppyUK said:
Maybe not idiots, let's just say wealthy individuals with esoteric tastes. Take the red dot off and nobody would buy their cameras today.

Where are the "lots" of serious photographers shooting with Leica these days? I've never seen them; not seen a Leica in use for years apart from the little D-Lux Pano clone. If there was more than handful of them, Leica would not be in terminal trouble.
Click to expand...

actually without the red dot i would still purchase it because it would probably be £10k cheaper:lol::lol::lol:
 
HoppyUK said:
And that is what is special about Leica, the heritage, and it's a great legacy for sure. But that is long gone - decades ago.

Personally, I think the current range is a bit of an embarrassment - nothing special in terms of quality, low spec, and ludicrously over-priced. Aligator skin and gold plate? Cartier-Bresson must be spinning. The best Leicas these days are made by Panasonic, and the new all-Leica S2 is a farce.
Click to expand...

Leica can't even meet demand for the M9 as it is so popular. It makes some of the best hand made optics in the world and the S2 is up against the Hasselblad/Phase One crowd so not exactly mass market.
 
HoppyUK said:
Maybe not idiots, let's just say wealthy individuals with esoteric tastes. Take the red dot off and nobody would buy their cameras today.

Where are the "lots" of serious photographers shooting with Leica these days? I've never seen them; not seen a Leica in use for years apart from the little D-Lux Pano clone. If there was more than handful of them, Leica would not be in terminal trouble.
Click to expand...


of course not enough buyers for leica. I've only seen togs with leicas on tv, oh ! but what togs !

leica isn't actually that expensive . for example m9 costs 4,5k a nikon d3x what ? 5,5 ?
 
very funny ! I bet if you had 50 togs on your tale 24h a day, they would have funny pics of you as well :p . not to mention that leica is a rangefinder so it's easy to not see that the cap is on through the viewfinder .
 
In the thread: people who have never used a rangefinder and therefore cannot possibly understand the allure of a Leica. :p
 
FruitFlakes said:
In the thread: people who have never used a rangefinder and therefore cannot possibly understand the allure of a Leica. :p
Click to expand...

And those that have used a Leica, cannot possibly understand the allure of them either!

Only one of Leica's cameras is a rangefinder, and if that was fundamental to its appeal, then why don't Epson even bother to import their excellent rangefinder cameras to the UK? Because actually, it's a way outdated design and modern cameras do the same thing much better.

I think that if Cartier-Bresson was around today, he'd be delighted with a Pansonic GF-1.

Time was when rangefinder cameras were small, quiet and discrete - at least compared to the clunky SLRs of the time. People bought them and used them because they were objectively better at many things compared to alternatives. And relatively speaking, they weren't that much more expensive because all cameras of that era were expensively hand made and all-mechanical.

The world has moved on, Leica has not, and I think it's damn shame because they had so much but consistently stuck their collective heads in the sand until it was all too late. For example, Leica has never made a decent SLR than could compete with anything from Japan.

Now they are left with expensive novelty products verging on jewelry, over-branding Panasonics, and a crazy medium format DSLR that fills a non existant niche market. It's all very sad :(
 
HoppyUK said:
And those that have used a Leica, cannot possibly understand the allure of them either!
Click to expand...

Understandable, I have nothing against people who have tried rangefinders but find it doesn't suit the way they shoot.

Only one of Leica's cameras is a rangefinder, and if that was fundamental to its appeal, then why don't Epson even bother to import their excellent rangefinder cameras to the UK? Because actually, it's a way outdated design and modern cameras do the same thing much better.
Click to expand...

The Epson RD-1 is what, 5-6 years old now?

I think that if Cartier-Bresson was around today, he'd be delighted with a Pansonic GF-1.
Click to expand...

Agreed, the GF1 is a brilliant little camera.

Time was when rangefinder cameras were small, quiet and discrete - at least compared to the clunky SLRs of the time. People bought them and used them because they were objectively better at many things compared to alternatives. And relatively speaking, they weren't that much more expensive because all cameras of that era were expensively hand made and all-mechanical.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that the rangefinder as a compositional and focusing tool is outdated as such, as they still offer many advantages over SLR based systems, it's simply that those advantages aren't really appreciated by the general public today - they want convenience, they want video, they want flashy gimmicks. They don't want to work just that little bit harder for the results they're getting. Objectively speaking, their advantages over SLRs still stand (easier manual focusing, no mirror blackout, smaller size), mainly due to the fact that both designs remain virtually unchanged. The higher price is to be expected though, who else makes handmade cameras out of solid brass nowadays?

The world has moved on, Leica has not, and I think it's damn shame because they had so much but consistently stuck their collective heads in the sand until it was all too late. For example, Leica has never made a decent SLR than could compete with anything from Japan.
Click to expand...

I think it's quite admirable for Leica to stick to making rangefinders, they're catering to a market who want a timeless design and a no nonsense approach to their photography. Yes, they're cashing in on their reputation by rebranding Panasonics, but for me Leica has always been about their rangefinders, and it'd be a damn shame if they stopped making them.

Now they are left with expensive novelty products verging on jewelry, over-branding Panasonics, and a crazy medium format DSLR that fills a non existant niche market. It's all very sad :(
Click to expand...

The over-branding of Panasonics and rediculous special editions make sense from a business point of view, and it comes with the territory of being seen as a high end brand - you'll always have posers who'll take mediocre photos of cats and old people reading books with their 7k Leica setups, much like how you'll always find posers sitting in 911s and Ferraris, so why not let these idiots fall hook, line and sinker to get an almost guaranteed source of income? If it means that Leica will be able to develop the rangefinder even further for proper photographers (i.e people with a passion for it) then so be it.

Also, yes the S2 is a very specialised tool, but then again digital MF as a whole is very specialised anyway.

However, a brilliant as Leica Ms are, I feel that they will face very stiff competition from EVIL cameras, especially once Canikon get their feet in that market. But then again, buying a Leica involves the heart as much as it does the head. :)
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
And those that have used a Leica, cannot possibly understand the allure of them either!

Only one of Leica's cameras is a rangefinder, and if that was fundamental to its appeal, then why don't Epson even bother to import their excellent rangefinder cameras to the UK? Because actually, it's a way outdated design and modern cameras do the same thing much better.

I think that if Cartier-Bresson was around today, he'd be delighted with a Pansonic GF-1.

Time was when rangefinder cameras were small, quiet and discrete - at least compared to the clunky SLRs of the time. People bought them and used them because they were objectively better at many things compared to alternatives. And relatively speaking, they weren't that much more expensive because all cameras of that era were expensively hand made and all-mechanical.

The world has moved on, Leica has not, and I think it's damn shame because they had so much but consistently stuck their collective heads in the sand until it was all too late. For example, Leica has never made a decent SLR than could compete with anything from Japan.

Now they are left with expensive novelty products verging on jewelry, over-branding Panasonics, and a crazy medium format DSLR that fills a non existant niche market. It's all very sad :(
Click to expand...


how is M9 outdated ? or 50mm f0.95 ? yes the lens costs like a house, but it's a masterpiece.

you can live without the beauty of the leicas, but you can't deny it.
 
You can't really compare the NEX 5 sensor to the sensor out of a Lieca M9 (the M8 has been discontinued and the M9 is the current camera). It would be like comparing the sensor out of a 550D to the 5D Mark 2. They are essentially the same sensor, but why does one cost so much more?

Also the Sony NEX cameras are not really usable IMHO. If you want to look cool then maybe, but if you actually want to take pictures, then a EP1 or FT1 are better choices.

And as for optics, if you have never used a range finder or Lieca M lenses, it is very hard to explain why they are so special, but needless to say that many could wipe the floor with even the best Canon or Nikon primes.
 
FranchiseJuan said:
You can't really compare the NEX 5 sensor to the sensor out of a Lieca M9 (the M8 has been discontinued and the M9 is the current camera). It would be like comparing the sensor out of a 550D to the 5D Mark 2. They are essentially the same sensor, but why does one cost so much more?

Also the Sony NEX cameras are not really usable IMHO. If you want to look cool then maybe, but if you actually want to take pictures, then a EP1 or FT1 are better choices.

And as for optics, if you have never used a range finder or Lieca M lenses, it is very hard to explain why they are so special, but needless to say that many could wipe the floor with even the best Canon or Nikon primes.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is extremely hard to explain why Leica lenses are so special, because actually they are not. No more than the fabled Zeiss optics for that matter, some of which are distinctly unspecial.

Leitz lenses used to be exceptional because, long before the invention of computer lens design or even electronic calculators, Leitz employed squadrons of mathematicians who worked endlessly performing the hundreds of thousands of complex formulae necessary to perfect even quite simple lenses. Plus they has genius chemists who would mix unique and exotic optical glass, some of which was worth its weight in gold by the time it was finished. This is literally true. And finally, they put everything together in finely engineered heavy brass and steel barrels.

Today, all you need to design a great lens is a clever optical physicist with a laptop, access to the Hoya glass catalogue, and a quality engineering facility. None of which is that difficult. TBH, if you asked Leica to produce a top quality high end zoom, with AF and IS, I actually don't think they could do it, and they certainly couldn't do it at a remotely affordable price. Heck, they couldn't even make the Leica D-Lux 4 which Panasonic produces for them!

On the other hand, as manufacturers of rose tinted spectacles, they are peerless.
 
HoppyUK said:
Yes, it is extremely hard to explain why Leica lenses are so special, because actually they are not. No more than the fabled Zeiss optics for that matter, some of which are distinctly unspecial.

Leitz lenses used to be exceptional because, long before the invention of computer lens design or even electronic calculators, Leitz employed squadrons of mathematicians who worked endlessly performing the hundreds of thousands of complex formulae necessary to perfect even quite simple lenses. Plus they has genius chemists who would mix unique and exotic optical glass, some of which was worth its weight in gold by the time it was finished. This is literally true. And finally, they put everything together in finely engineered heavy brass and steel barrels.

Today, all you need to design a great lens is a clever optical physicist with a laptop, access to the Hoya glass catalogue, and a quality engineering facility. None of which is that difficult. TBH, if you asked Leica to produce a top quality high end zoom, with AF and IS, I actually don't think they could do it, and they certainly couldn't do it at a remotely affordable price. Heck, they couldn't even make the Leica D-Lux 4 which Panasonic produces for them!

On the other hand, as manufacturers of rose tinted spectacles, they are peerless.
Click to expand...

What Canon or Nikon zoom has IQ as good as a Leica prime? Leica doesn't really need IS as the mirror isn't slapping about in an M9. If Leica equipment wasn't absolutely top notch quality there would be no market for them.
 
ShawWellPete said:
The cheapest place I can find the twin lens kit is Simply Electronics. Is that a shop others have used?

it looks pretty kosher but I am wary of fake shops...
Click to expand...

Just googled them and seem OK. One of the few places that have them in stock
code SAVE10NOW gave me £10 off. Not bad as that was an out of date coupon code from some site that happened to come up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top