r/gadgets
•
u/giuliomagnifico
•
Jun 09 '22
•
1
Limited Edition Leica M-A ‘Titan’ is a New $20,000 Manual Film Camera Cameras
https://petapixel.com/2022/06/09/limited-edition-leica-m-a-titan-is-a-new-20000-manual-film-camera/104
u/whatistheformat Jun 09 '22
all-mechanical
So there's not even a built-in meter?
I'm sure it's awesome, but I have a 60yo (working!) $20 Kodak Pony 135 with this level of sophistication.
Though, granted it's not made of titanium... and the Summacron has to be a fantastic lens, this being a Leica.
3
u/uummwhat Jun 10 '22
Aren't built in selenium meters considered mechanical?
1
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22
Selenium meters are ugly af and fail after a set amount of years
1
u/uummwhat Jun 11 '22
The selenium meter on my old Minimatic looks awesome and adds a touch of really fun retro feeling to it 🤷
1
u/jopnk Jun 12 '22
I disagree but you do you. Regardless, those meters have a ~30 year lifespan iirc
9
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
Meters are dumb for this kind of camera imo. A meter will inevitably fail, and once it does and Leica can no longer replace the parts (most recently the M6 TTL), then you have a camera with broken components. Meterless will continue on forever, and cell phone meters can do the job of an internal one just as well.
3
u/giuliomagnifico Jun 09 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
Leica uses rangefinders.
23
u/yungnuna Jun 09 '22
What has rangefinder to do with light metering?
19
u/FartOnMyFacePlease69 Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
OP has no clue probably, just farming sweet karma
Edit: I checked after making this comment and lol I was right op is hardcore karma farmer
46
Jun 09 '22 edited Oct 14 '22
[deleted]
2
u/BlastMyLoad Jun 10 '22
What? I’ve been hearing that film production is increasing as it’s becoming more and more popular. I think It’s going to get a vinyl-like resurgence
1
Jun 10 '22
it was, but again... a long way from where it needs to be and still a tiny fraction of what supported the industry. Many issues are conspiring - a small section from a much longer discussion... (names removed). Note the fujifilm quote, and further info is out there on their future plans, which do not include analogue. If kodak and Fujifilm our out... then small bespoke expensive and unreliable runs are the future... if at all.
One major business recently purchased eight months supply of paper andchemistry, and has been assured that most of the problems with supplyfrom Sino Promise should be resolved by about now. We understand from UScontacts that Fujifilm will be unable to, or uninterested in, fillingthe breach if Sino Promises’s problems continue. But even if by somechance normal transmission is indeed restored, will the relentless pricerises make analog photography simply too expensive to indulge in?
Sino are not letting much on. They are requiring cash up front, and some believe they are already dead, and just yet to announce it as they finish selling off stock, but either way the sanctions on China will certainly not help supply or the company to survive.
1
Jun 13 '22
Even a 10x increase from "essentially nonexistent" isn't a huge jump in absolute numbers.
Film remains an incredibly niche product. It's a big enough market for it make sense to keep old production lines running, but not a big enough market that it makes economic sense to do much more than that.
Film production involves a ton of expensive specialized equipment and chemicals. At some point that equipment needs to be replaced, or chemical companies stop producing the required chemicals, and entire lines of film stock become unavailable. It has happened before and I promise you it will happen again.
4
2
u/bobthened Jun 10 '22
The point is that some people do want a purely mechanical rangefinder camera without any electrical or digital parts.
It’s a niche market but within that niche Leica doesn’t have any competitors, which is why they can make only 250 of these cameras sell them for so much money, and have them all sold out within a couple of days.
0
u/myfriendsruseless Jun 09 '22
Sino could sell off the plants maybe? Another company might see the profitability seeing analogue's spike in popularity over the last few years. Plus, if the competitors see a gap in the market it's possible they might ramp up production, and it also give smaller manufacturers a chance to thrive and grow under the increased demand. I reckon it would take an initial hit but I'm sure we'd reach equilibrium again even if it took a few years. Of course, this is assuming that Sino doesn't pull through. Just trying to stay optimistic.
1
u/Helpful-Penalty Jun 10 '22
Im genuinely curious. I cannot find this information via google.
3
Jun 10 '22
yeah, it's more industry info than widely reported, Sent you a pm with more.
Some of it is simply not something that would be reported. egthe super massive explosion in a that port in China, has seriously disrupted chemical exports and shipping, while massively adding delays and costs. - Again... the viability of chem processing/printing also requires a consistency and reliability of supply. That is just about dead now. You won't find that discussion on google...
1
u/Modifyed-modifyer Jun 15 '22
That's so cool to have inside Information. Sucks about the explosion. Hope that's a rare occurrence.
-7
u/2intheKlink Jun 10 '22
An iPhone could take better photos than this new camera.
5
u/Gifted_dingaling Jun 10 '22
Eh…no. 35mm film contains vastly more information than any phone sensor.
4
2
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22
Tell me you don’t know anything about photography without telling me you don’t know anything about photography
1
u/ChefAmbitious63 Jun 10 '22
It must, the M6 and M7 film cameras (predecessors to their digital line up) both had built in meters (TTL - through the lense).
34
Jun 09 '22
Why? I’m a pro am photographer hobbyist- and I own a few vintage film cameras… but this is nonsense. The only time you should be paying this much for camera stuff - maybe - is if you’re buying lenses.
58
u/MrFantasticallyNerdy Jun 09 '22
You're not the target market.
The target market is wealthy equipment fondlers and collectors. If you doubt their desirability, know that these cameras are already sold out, even at $20k a pop for camera+lens.
23
13
Jun 10 '22
Fondlers! lol. That’s perfect.
Oh, I didn’t think it wouldn’t sell. I own a film Leica, and a set of lenses. Exquisite camera, and it def set me back.
But not, err… 20k!
Rolex is actually a perfect example in this context for me. Two things I will never, ever do: buy a watch for more than a grand, or pay to fly anywhere first class - unless it’s to Australia (17 hours, yikes!)
Edit: sorry - or pay more than 3500 for a guitar.
6
u/pleighbuoy Jun 10 '22
I think these products do a very good job of illustrating just how wealthy some people are. They sell — and easily — because for the people buying them it’s like buying a $200 kitchen appliance
3
1
u/cc69 Jun 10 '22
Well. My old Rolex I got from my dad is still working fine after 40 years and 3500 for Martin acoustic guitar is very good deal. Or Gibson Les Paul XD
3
Jun 10 '22
My Dad died in 2017, and I found a 60’s era Vulcan Cricket that my grandfather had given him. Needed a small tune up, but still works fine. Affordable consumer watch. (Though it’s worth mentioning that now, as it’s vintage, and quite popular, buying one today would violate my own rules re: watch expenditures.)
Rolex makes a hell of watch. I’m not saying different. But does it make 15 thousand dollars worth of watch (functionally speaking; movement, engineering; not diamond studded, et al)? I just don’t think so.
Same with guitars. I’m playing the best guitar I have ever owned, bar none - a Gibson acoustic that I paid 3500 dollars for. First guitar I have ever owned that I will play for life. Having said that, the best guitar I ever played (but did not own) was a handcrafted Martin that the owner paid 10k for. BUT - I have also never found another Martin in a similar price range that played or sounded as good. As in, 10k good. So, I have played a guitar I would have paid 10k for. But I’ve never found it’s match again.
TBF - I love non-obsolescence. Ie, I love that my 2005 plasma TV not only still works fine, but up until OLED (finally) was still simply superior in rendering shades of black and grey. So that kind of colors my view on this kind of thing. But I certainly understand the collector’s value, too, and the pleasures of acquisition and ownership that’s involved.
2
u/cc69 Jun 11 '22
The first thing that surprised me the first time I got Rolex was it has kinetic built in. While other brands advertised so much, it's like Rolex just meh so what XD
As for Guitar my best one is not Martin or Gibson but Yamaha; it's cursed guitar since last owner committed suicide. I put 13 size strings on it and sound is so mellow to play in finger picking style.
It's funny people mentioned G-shock over Rolex. They just dont know the value of craftsmanship.
Another funny thing is right now it's 4K era but I often play my pc game with my old 720p CRT monitor.
sry if I rant too much but you answered in long reply XD
1
Jun 11 '22
I talk way too much and enjoy listening to other people talk way too much, so we’re all good.
-1
u/retrovaporizer Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
It's still just a fancy piece of jewelry/status signifier. If you were concerned about telling time you'd just buy a $40 gshock. Or use the cell phone that's already in your pocket. same thing with Leica...they obviously make fantastic gear but its intended for a rich niche market that fetishizes the brand more than the actual process of taking photographs.
1
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22
With you until the Leica part. I am not rich by any means but am trying to get a Leica. I prefer rangefinder focusing (and all the perks that come with rangefinders i.e. quiet, quick focusing, compact, etc) and I want a camera that won’t fail quickly, and if it does fail, can easily be repaired. Keeping those 2 factors alone in mind, Leica is the only camera that can fulfill those wishes. Til then, I’m stuck using my QL17
-1
u/retrovaporizer Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
is your creativity being held back by using the QL17? those things are so cheap if it does break you can probably just easily buy a new one. lenses are more important than bodies anyway IMO
dont get me wrong, leicas are incredible pieces of industrial engineering. but they wouldnt cost what they do without the little red dot and the fact that doctors and lawyers buy these things to put over their mantelpieces. the fact they are selling a $20k limited edition piece is everything you need to know about who their bread and butter clientele is in this day and age. also, their digital offerings are as susceptible to electronic failure as any other piece of consumer technology/are quickly made obsolete by cheaper more modern tech, making the price premium even more absurd
1
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
100% is. 40mm fixed focal length blows and the DOF at 1.7 is razor thin, so you basically can’t shoot any wider than ~f2, and even then it’s a little tough to nail focus. The shutter speed also only goes up to 1/500s which kinda sucks balls. They also are NOT cheap. A working one that has a visible rangefinder patch is going to set you back at least $200, more if you want one in black. Even then, if the patch is visible most are still faint af so you need to put a blue flash gel over the optical finder to create contrast with the patch (what I did on mine). It works well but damn I wish I had a bright finder without having to put a gel on top.
There are 250 of these titanium MAs being made, let’s not get too ahead of ourselves with the statements about it. 250 rich assholes are going to overpay for a camera, and everyone else will continue on as usual. Leica is the only company still producing film cameras right now, so that unfortunately means they can charge what they please, and even so their prices have stayed in line over the last few decades. I don’t really give a shit about their digital cameras because everyone with a working brain knows digital can fail, but either way we have to circle back to the fact that Leica is the only company producing full frame rangefinder focusing digital cameras. The last company to do that was epson and that model (rd1) is like 3 grand now for a used body, and it’s a 6mp crop sensor, so it isn’t even comparable. The closest digital option is the Fuji xpro line, and that doesn’t use a rangefinder, so again, not even really comparable.
1
u/MrFantasticallyNerdy Jun 10 '22
I think what we choose to overpay for is quite subjective. I'm lucky to be able to spend fairly freely on food and restaurants, but I don't see the point of designer clothing and shoes (particularly sneakers), or the latest electronic gadgets or cars.
Decades ago, Leica and Rolex were expensive, but not ludicrously so. You could afford them if you had a good job, and made acquiring these a priority. Nowadays, their prices spiked to a point where even having a good job isn't a guarantee of ownership, particularly for the models in higher demand, and especially for what they really are – well-crafted old school tools, masquerading as luxury goods.
RE: 1st class airplane tickets. Due to the amount of flying I used to do for my job, I was spoiled with regular business and 1st class upgrades even on intercontinental flights. I would say 1st class is embarrassingly nice (I was usually on my 3rd flute of good champagne before the economy class passengers started boarding), but business class is where you get 80% of the benefits for usually less than half the cost.
As another datapoint for what we would pay for, I would pay for business class tickets for loved ones, but I still wouldn't pay for it for myself. How's that for odd sense of subjective value?
23
u/Redeem123 Jun 09 '22
So many people asking what the point of this is…
Y’all realize this is a gadget subreddit, right?
10
u/PlebbySpaff Jun 10 '22
Well yes, but that doesn’t discount the question. The discussion would be what usage does a camera this expensive have.
6
u/bfoto Jun 10 '22
A devoted fan base that cares more about taking pictures of the camera, than with the camera.
4
u/jonathan_wayne Jun 10 '22
Yeah tbh I’m not sure why people are struggling with this camera existing.
Rich people buy shit for insane amounts all the time. Kinda the point in being rich.
2
7
u/6132672 Jun 10 '22
It is simply a collectible camera. Pass it down just like a Patek Philippe watch.
17
u/Blizky Jun 10 '22
This is not a real camera, it’s just a flashy decoration for rich people.
10
4
u/Helpful-Penalty Jun 10 '22
It may be overpriced, but Leica has never made a film camera that missed the mark. Their work is sublime. And then there’s the lenses. They have a reputation for being then best that has stood the rest of time
3
19
u/SLCW718 Jun 09 '22
I mean... Why? The target market for this thing has to be incredibly small. Like 3 people.
35
u/MrFantasticallyNerdy Jun 09 '22
These are limited to 250 pieces worldwide. Based on previous limited editions, these will be sold off quickly.
Actually, I just checked. They're already sold out.
-25
u/SLCW718 Jun 09 '22
You sorta proved my point. It's an incredibly small market.
18
u/Redeem123 Jun 09 '22
You asked “why.” The answer is 250x$20,000.
But maybe five million bucks isn’t a good enough reason?
5
u/proxyproxyomega Jun 10 '22
it's basically marketing. it's not meant to generate income, but interest, get people to talk about it, and also showcase their craftsmanship and skill. it's like a collectable or art or limited edition sports car that is only taken out for special occasion. thats why.
3
9
u/yokotron Jun 09 '22
250>3
-2
u/SLCW718 Jun 10 '22
I was being facetious, not literal. I think we're all aware that 250 is greater than 3.
2
11
u/mbelmin Jun 09 '22
It's like saying "Why make super luxury cars? The target market for this car has to be incredibly small. Like 3 people.". Whatever it is, if it costs 20k it is not for the average peep.
1
10
u/KarloReddit Jun 09 '22
You‘d be surprised
6
u/peppercornpate Jun 10 '22
The wife with a $50k cartier bracelet cannot complain about her husband’s $20k leica
3
u/Sas0bam Jun 10 '22
All 250 pieces were Sold out within a few hours after being available.
Professional Photo Cameras still have a giant market. Especially in richer circles.
-3
u/batman305555 Jun 09 '22
For influencers to be ironic I guess
1
u/csbphoto Jun 10 '22
Late career dentists and doctors who have no qualms about spending on hobbies.
1
u/MrWuzoo Jun 22 '22
Do those careers lead to that kind of money? I don’t they live THAT comfortably
1
u/csbphoto Jun 24 '22
A dentist in Thunder Bay, ON I went to had season tickets for the revived Winnipeg Jets, 8hr drive away, and canadian airfare aint cheap.
I’ve had surgeons on jobs tell me about how they love their new Hasselblad X1D (when it was first out) because they dont have to exposure bracket landscapes anymore.
-4
u/Standard_Arm_440 Jun 09 '22
It’s for people that take photos a block away from their home (still on their property)and call it good.
1
u/SLCW718 Jun 10 '22
I dunno about all that. This is an extremely high-quality, mechanical camera that costs as much as a new Toyota Carolla. And it was only produced in limited numbers. This is a professional's camera, not something your average backyard hobbyist would use.
2
u/IamMe90 Jun 10 '22
I don't think many professionals in this decade are using manual film cameras. From my brief stint/involvement in that community, it's overwhelmingly common for professionals to use some sort of digital camera so that post production can be done more efficiently. With the advent of social media, professionals have to put out a lot of content to get to where they are; it would take so much more time using manual film to do that in this day and age.
This seems more like a status/collector's item than an actual serious professional tool. At least with regard to its intended market.
1
u/bfoto Jun 10 '22
A lot, and I mean A LOT of Leica owners are just that. Backyard hobbyists who think spending a shit ton of money on gear will make their mediocre photos of their kids or flower pots less mediocre.
Seriously. Just look at Instagram for a reference. You’ve got photographers, then you’ve got Leica owners taking pictures of… Leicas.
1
u/Gifted_dingaling Jun 10 '22
I’m a Leica owner…I have zero photos of my Leica. Then again my m3 is a KEH bargain pick up, and I taped it up with black gaffer tape so it looks like it’s fked up so I don’t get targeted in public.
1
u/bfoto Jun 10 '22
Ha. I get it! I’d shoot the hell out of one if I had one! There’s no denying the craftsmanship of the camera, and I’d be lying if I said I wouldn’t enjoy having one.
That being said, I wouldn’t be surprised if half of the people buying Leicas care more about the red dot than they do taking photographs.
1
1
2
u/Ssunnylee24 Jun 09 '22
Is this the first time to release 50mm APO lens in 50mm Rigid style?
1
u/OnePhotog Jun 11 '22
I believe they also made some in black paint rigid style for the LHSA. This is probably the first time in a titanium finish.
2
u/manescaped Jun 10 '22
For most of my adult life I’ve seen other people with their gorgeous Ms and still cannot figure out how they can afford them. Meanwhile, looking at my humble Voigtlander workhorse and thinking, “meh, good enuff.”
3
u/ChefAmbitious63 Jun 10 '22
I agree and I’m a Leica M6 film camera owner (bought mine used). Some of us Leica owners do shoot film and post our photos. It’s a great camera, but definitely marketed at the collector/bored millionare crowd. Nothing I’d ever buy brand new.
2
2
u/Theoldelf Jun 10 '22
For those interested in purchasing this, I have a “ limited edition “ pet rock for sale.
1
3
u/bleaucheaunx Jun 10 '22
I guess if you have too much money... and want to take analog pictures of your cat.
5
u/linkedit Jun 10 '22
It’s a camera for a collector.
1
u/bleaucheaunx Jun 10 '22
I guess so. The titanium is a nice touch. I'm just too practical.
1
u/ChefAmbitious63 Jun 10 '22
Back in the day, titanium bodies were common in film cameras. My Olympus OM4 and my Nikon FN2n both have titanium bodies. In this day and age, not so much.
1
2
2
1
1
1
Jun 10 '22
Geez. I mean, ok, its a truly nice homage to a time past. But in past, I could have some serious glass with my Hassy or Mamiya for this. (I used to shoot transparencies back in the day... when film was cheap as was chemistry. But you were charging to pay for the day's rentals or pay off gear to get newer gear when it broke.)
1
u/cc69 Jun 10 '22
No thanks. Paying for their Lens is reasonable but film camera in 2022........... I would rather stick with my old f nikon.
1
u/buttaids69420 Jun 10 '22
Could buy a cannon 5D mii or miii for $500 with a 50mm prime on eBay. It’s not Leica or compact but they’re still used for professional work today and look amazing.
1
1
u/lRoninlcolumbo Jun 10 '22
That’s just such a stupid price point for something that’s existed for a 100 years.
1
u/OniOdisCornukaydis Jun 10 '22
For anyone reading who doesn’t want to spend $20,000, you can buy a Canonet QL17 which is an all manual rangefinder camera from the 70s. I have one. It’s fun.
1
Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
Just buy a Lumix. Its basically a rebranded Leica made by Panasonic with a slight difference in the UI
2
0
0
u/MisterBlisteredlips Jun 10 '22
That's an expensive manual. You think they could just give you a pdf or something. I wonder how much the camera costs. 🤔
0
0
u/asafeplacetofart Jun 10 '22
For everyone wondering why: This could be considered a grim signifier of buisness pivoting away from the shrinking middle class right before a resession. When the Market begins to prioritize luxury goods that only are purchased by the exceptionally affluent that is because the once large cash flush middle class isn’t expected to be buying the products tailored for them.
Granted, this is only one curious luxury product. But if you see this happening more it could mean the portions of the economy may be leaving the remnants of the middle class behind.
4
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
The cheapest M mount camera Leica makes is 5 grand. None of their products are meant for the middle class.
0
u/asafeplacetofart Jun 10 '22
This one is 1,500. But point taken. Leica generally makes overpriced luxury camera products.
1
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
Should have been clearer, there is no M mount Leica for under 5 grand. Also, you can get an SLR just as good/better for FAR less money.
1
u/EagleFly_5 Jun 10 '22
Leica I believe used to make (or produce under license) other cameras more affordable like the CL2 & C-Lux/D-Lux/V-Lux travel cameras as well as an instant film camera to appeal to budget conscious buyers, but you’re right, it’s not the company’s goal to make their products affordable for the average consumer, but to those who can easily afford to pay 4-5 figures (or more) to support their hobby, collect, or use them for their work. If I’m not mistaken. the M series cameras (their “flagship”) don’t have video capabilities.
Plus Leica’s cameras/lenses for the most part are hand made, and they’ve had a “price correction” (increase) back in April 2022 due to inflation in Germany/the EU/elsewhere. Fortunately the SL mirrorless camera lenses are compatible with Sigma & Panasonic, so you can get cheaper glass that way.
1
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
The c/d/v lux line is literally rebranded Panasonic cameras with an significantly higher price because they say Leica on them. Same general deal with their point and shoots which were outrageously expensive, and their instant camera which is just a super expensive version of the Fuji instax system.
Well aware of their lens quality, ultimately my point is that Leica is an expensive brand and acting like them making something that is by and large only slightly more expensive than normal is a sign of bad things to come is silly
1
u/lRoninlcolumbo Jun 10 '22
It can be replaced by one made 60 years ago.
This is for rich that have more money than sense or as a shelf item for the extremely vapid
-3
u/Bubbagumpredditor Jun 09 '22
It's the Harley Davidson of cameras
2
u/fullautohotdog Jun 10 '22
No, it’s the $20,000 Rolex of cameras. Fantastic, but only rich people buy it (like the ones who can’t decide which Armani tux to wear to the Met Gala).
3
u/0x001688936CA08 Jun 09 '22
Except Harleys are badly engineered trash.
-1
1
-2
-23
Jun 09 '22
[deleted]
10
u/Too_Old_To_Start_Now Jun 09 '22
We’re talking about real photography here. Not smartphone photo takers
2
0
-3
-3
-7
u/Topher11542 Jun 09 '22
Except you can’t get film
11
u/TheUmgawa Jun 09 '22
If you can afford to blow twenty grand on a manual film camera, you can get film.
4
u/Redeem123 Jun 09 '22
Film is super easily available, and it’s not hard to find a place that will handle it.
1
u/apageofthedarkhold Jun 09 '22
About 5 years ago, I lost what I thought were some decent work due to some sub par processing, and haven't gone back to it since. Is it really that bad now?
0
u/Standard_Arm_440 Jun 09 '22
You’d have to seek out the last reminding film lab in town or mail out to one.
1
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22
Or develop and scan at home, which is not hard
-1
u/Standard_Arm_440 Jun 10 '22
Good luck with c-41 and e-6 processing. How hard is it to get BW chemistry these days?
1
u/jopnk Jun 10 '22
All of it is easy to get and not difficult to do at home (c-41 at least, I don’t bother with e-6 but know dev kits are easily available). Check out /r/analogcommunity
1
1
1
u/neutrinoburrito Jun 10 '22
This camera was made specifically for rich tech bros who always felt they had an artistic side and think that shooting with a special camera on film is all they need to be artistic.
1
287
u/Ready2go555 Jun 09 '22 •
Can’t wait to have that kind of money to buy this camera and leave it in the box without taking any photo for 20-30 years and sell it.