text:
Complaint Review: Natural Cures
- Natural Cures
Po Box 342
Elk Grove Village, Illinois
- Phone: 800-655-2757
- Web:
- Category: Corrupt Companies
Natural Cures this company rips me off every month for $9.95 Elk Grove Village Illinois
their web site is naturalcures.com and the latest billing for $9.95 comes from what is listed on my online banking with wachovia is 'weight loss cr'
which i do not know what that means
lakeland, Florida
According to the majority of victims interviewed by Rip-off Report, those who immediately called their banks to dispute the charges did not get very far. Many victims got the following responses from their banks: we could not do anything for you or you waited too long; it has been more than 60 days.
If the bank is says that you have waited too long, explain to them how you called their 800 number as soon as the charges were found, and were told by the bank that nothing could be done. Remind the bank that they failed to assist you properly at the 800 #, and instead, provided you with an inadequate explanation of your right to dispute. Tell the bank that it's their fault time has expired, and since they gave you the wrong info to begin with, they will just have to deal with it, take the loss and reverse the charges.
Tell them the truth; this was unauthorized and your account was NOT to be charged! Keep emphasizing how you never authorized anything! Direct them to the hundreds of victims reports that were filed on Rip-off Report.com. And if you're at the bank, walk them over to their computer and make them go to this site! If you are on the phone with them, tell them you will wait while they access this site! Either way, be persistent!
Let them know nicely, that you were advised to Report them (the Bank) and this situation to the Banking Commission in your state. Since each state has a different name for the agency/controller over banks, find that name before you call or get to the bank so you can throw it in their face. The more knowledgeable you appear to be, the further you will get.
And just continue to demand the Federal Regulation E form! The bank CAN, MUST and WILL reverse the charge! But, you must be persistent; ask to speak to the supervisor or the area manager for all the branches in the state.
Let the bank personnel know you are meeting with the media later in the day, that you would much rather they do the right thing (as most other banks have) by looking at the complaints and immediately reversing the chargetruth.
If you have to, be loud (but nice) in front of other customers. If you are just calling by phone, the above tactics s) to your account; no matter how long ago it was. Be sure to call the Media if necessary so you are telling the EDitor's Suggestions on how to get your money back!
demand tion E.
Go to your bank within 60 days of the charge, or as soon as you know about the charge, don't delay, and tell them that there has been fraudulent activity within your account. Explain that you wish to file a dispute, and orm.
Does your business have a bad reputation?Corporate Advocacy Program™Fix it the right way.
Set the record straight:Arbitration Program
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 12/26/2007 06:02 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/natural-cures/elk-grove-village-illinois-60009/natural-cures-this-company-rips-me-off-every-month-for-995-elk-grove-village-illinois-294401. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
ZipBooks Accounting Software
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.


text:
This website is currently being redesigned to comply with both Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you see anything on this site that does not comply with either Act please notify us immediately so we can correct the problem.
We are excited about school starting and getting the students back in the classrooms! We are on the 2nd year of our earlier start waiver from the Michigan Department of Education. The first day of school is August 23rd, 2017. The summer has been a productive one and some projects are being completed including replacing the flooring and furniture in needed classrooms and some improvements on the baseball field. Several new laws are in place for this school year including the 3rd grade reading legislation. This year's 1st graders are the first group who will have to test under this law once they reach the 3rd grade. Students who are identified as not being at grade level in reading grades k-3 will have an Individualized Reading Plan starting this school year. This is new and parents will be contacted if this applies to their child. Other changes that have occurred over the summer is that we have contracted all of our technology services through the Wexford Missaukee Intermediate School District. Our former technology director left for another position. Having the ISD perform these services does create a savings to the district and allows for a seamless transition for that department. We have lots of new faces in our district this year. We have hired new teachers in all of our buildings, as well as new support staff.
Again, just an update on hours. The doors will open at all buildings at 8:20 AM. At 8:30 AM, the doors will be locked and anyone wishing to enter will be buzzed into the office. School ends at 3:10. We ask that parents try to not pick up their students early, unless it is an emergency, due to the congestion it will cause in the offices. The last half hour of school is an extremely busy time for the office.
I would like to welcome all parents/guardians to our open house on August 21st from 6:00 – 7:00 PM. I hope everyone has a safe and enjoyable end to summer!
Leonard Morrow, Superintendent
Manton Consolidated Schools
231-824-6411 Option #5
Whatever it Takes...Manton Students are Worth It!
Manton Consolidated Schools, as a part of the community, is dedicated to providing opportunities for the development of each student's full potential. We believe each student has abilities and talents that can be developed. We value the individuality of each child and are committed to nurturing every student's abilities. As professional educators we will utilize research and apply a variety of strategies to promote quality and motivate students in our school.
The last meeting on Jan 29, 2016 discussed the amendments made to the policy and having it approved by the BOE.
Next meeting date to be announced. Please look for updates in the near future. Everyone is welcome to attend.
Wellness Policy
Terms Of Use |
Privacy Statement |
Copyright 2017 – SchoolDesk

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Daily protection against 90% of skin aging
30ml $55.00
Ultra-lightweight SPF 50 sunscreen for body
150ml $58.00
Ultra-lightweight SPF 50 sunscreen for face
100ml $55.00
Instant perfection meets lasting correction; Clinically proven to correct skin tone irregularities with Vitamin C.
40ml $52.00
100% Mineral-based sunscreen, safe enough for sensitive and acne prone skin.
50ml $72.00
Join Friends of Kiehl's to enjoy exclusive offers, early access to seasonal promotions, and so much more!
*Valid for 12 months from date it first purchase.
**Valid for one month from the date of the online redemption.


text:
Follow @11points
Coke Once Made a Clear Cola That Was Intentionally Terrible to Take Down Crystal Pepsi
written by Sam Greenspan
Crystal Pepsi is coming back next month. On August 8th, a limited run of Crystal Pepsi will hit stores, and it will probably sell very well. Nostalgia is huge right now, whether it's
Nintendo Vans
, the Saved by the Bell restaurant in Chicago, the Pokemon resurgence, or calling exploding, non-hovering scooters "hoverboards" because we're so
desperate for
Back to the Future Part II
's reality
. Crystal Pepsi was, while not a commercial success or a taste success, a marketing success of the early 1990s. That qualifies it for nostalgia, even though we didn't collectively enjoy it.
Crystal Pepsi was an effort by Pepsi to reslice the soda market's pie chart. You had regular colas, diet colas, root beer and fruit-flavored sodas. How about a clear cola? It was a hell of a gimmick, one that both worked with the early '90s aesthetic
helped define it, and Pepsi poured $40 million into marketing it. (Which was a lot at the time. Now that's the advertising budget for a mediocre cell phone game.) It was positioned as a "new age cola" and got an explosive introduction via a high-profile Super Bowl commercial. Crystal Pepsi was part of the early '90s zeitgeist.
Its failure is quite well documented. Check out any of the infinite "most spectacular product fails" lists on the Internet; Crystal Pepsi will make it 100 percent of the time. Crystal Pepsi was introduced in April 1992 and off the market in 1994. The main reason it failed was simple, too: It didn't taste like Pepsi (or any cola). I remember it just tasted... different. And not in a good way.
But two decades of distance has unearthed another reason why Crystal Pepsi -- and the entire "clear cola" concept -- arrived, withered and perished so quickly. It's because Coca-Cola's counter strategy to Crystal Pepsi was... a high-stakes corporate kamikaze mission.
About half a year after Crystal Pepsi debuted (and when Pepsi was still holding out hope that it would become a permanent market segment), Coke rolled out "Tab Clear." They took their least-popular soda brand, Tab, and made a clear edition. The one and only purpose of Tab Clear was to create market confusion around clear colas, which would accelerate their demise.
Here was the thought process:
Make "clear" colas seem lesser.
They picked Tab Clear, not Coca-Cola Clear, because as a Coke executive
New York Times
, Coca-Cola was too iconic of a brand to adapt like that. (Short memory on Coke II, I guess.) "Clear Coke is an oxymoron," he said. The not-so-subtle implication, of course, is that Pepsi was NOT an iconic brand that
be messed with wantonly and haphazardly.
Tab was a diet soda only.
While Crystal Pepsi came in regular and diet versions, Tab Clear only came in Tab's artificially sweetened formula. The
was to confuse people into thinking Crystal Pepsi was also a diet-only drink, which would turn off potential customers. (Diet sodas were far less popular in the early '90s, primarily because sucking down insane amounts of sugar and corn syrup that tasted good was preferred to sucking down insane amounts of artificial sweetners and chemicals that tasted worse.)
Tab was considered a "woman's" brand.
It was like the Virginia Slims of sodas. So Coke was trying to equate clear colas with women, in an attempt to discourage men from drinking them. Sexism was still really hot in the '90s.
Tab Clear was gross.
Coca-Cola paid lip service to the idea that Tab Clear was "full-flavored," but the early reviews described it was "cinnamony," "peppery" and "not like Tab." It was supposed to taste different, bad, and not like a cola; mission accomplished.
Tab Clear only lasted about five months, into the spring of 1993. It was dismissed a failure -- but it wasn't. It was a flop that didn't hurt any perceptions of Coca-Cola -- who cares about Tab? -- but did hurt Pepsi. Although there's no way to ascertain how much Tab Clear's intentional failure contributed to Crystal Pepsi's demise, both disappeared off the shelves around the same time. (Crystal Pepsi was reformatted to have a citrus flavor and made a brief comeback, but was completely gone by 1994.)
Have there been other corporate kamikaze missions? Not confirmed, but probably. Things like
, Playstation Move, last year's
Fantastic Four
, every network's version of
The View
, FOX News and McDonald's using kale can't be coincidences.
This post was originally published on Thursday, July 21, 2016 at 11:00:00 AM under the category
Food & Drink
11 Best Discontinued Fast Food Items
11 Pairs of Damn Near Identical Movies That Were Released at the Same Time
11 Photos of Poorly Phrased Advertisements
11 Most Popular Brands of Beer and Liquor in the World
11 Unusual (and Way Over-the-Top) Thanksgiving Desserts Around the U.S.
Archive of all Food & Drink posts
Who Has Held More Jobs: Super Mario or Homer Simpson?
Published Thursday, September 7, 2017 at 11:00:00 AM under the category
The 11 Funniest Words in the World, According to Science
Published Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 11:00:00 AM under the category
11 Textbook Writers Who Temporarily Lost Their Minds
Published Wednesday, July 26, 2017 at 10:00:00 AM under the category
A Ban on Everclear Grain Alcohol Is Bad News... For the Violin Industry?
Published Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 11:00:00 AM under the category
Food & Drink
11 Pairs of Classic Movies That Were Surprisingly Released on the Same Day ('90-'94)
Published Thursday, June 22, 2017 at 11:00:00 AM under the category
11 One-Hit Wonders Whose One Hit Was a Cover
Published Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:00:00 AM under the category
Full Archive
Mailing list
Food & Drink
Web & Tech
Dating & Sex
News & Politics
Full archive
11 Points
Mailing list
Copyright 2008 - 2016
Privacy policy


text:
Expand Messages
- Jul 1, 2007Dearly Beloved,
"Thank [God] in everything [no matter what the circumstances may be, be
thankful and give thanks], for this is the will of God for you [who are] in
Christ Jesus [the Revealer and Mediator of that will]" (1 Thessalonians
The story was told of three men that went to thank their Creator. The first
one had just a piece of cloth to cover his body. He would have to be naked
for the period he washed and dried the piece of cloth when it was dirty. The
second had just underpants. The third one did not have anything. The first
one that first expressed his heart of gratitude thanked God for the piece of
cloth that he had and also thanked God that he was better than the other two
men. The second one also thanked God for his situation though he had only
underpants. He was grateful to God because he was not like the third man
that did not have anything. One would wonder what the third man that did not
have anything would thank God for, but he also expressed his heart of
gratitude to God because, to him, he was better than the dead. He believed
that there was still hope for him that it shall be well with him soon.
This is an old story that teaches us that we should be thankful in any
situation we find ourselves. When there is life, there is still hope. No
matter the situation, if we ponder very well, we will have causes to thank
God. That hymn writer (Johnson Oatman, Jr.) said:
When upon life's billows you are tempest tossed,
When you are discouraged, thinking all is lost,
Count your many blessings, name them one by one,
And it will surprise you what the Lord hath done.
Lord, I thank you for who I am and all what you have done, is doing, and
will still do for me. Thank you Jesus!
In His service,
Bayo Afolaranmi (Pastor).
As we begin the second half of this year, let me express my heart of
gratitude firstly to our God Almighty who enables me to continue this online
ministry in spite of all odds, then secondly to you for what you have
allowed God to do through you in my life and this unique online ministry.
Your occasional reactions and even criticisms help me a lot. Let me share
this with you as we enter the second half of the year: the Lord will cause
all things to work together for your good. He shall perfect your concerns
and show Himself strong on your behalf. He will never fail you nor forsake
you. You will surely see the goodness of the Lord in Jesus' name. Amen!
Bayo Afolaranmi (Pastor).
+234 805 515 9591
"I eagerly expect and hope that I will in no way be ashamed, but will have
sufficient courage so that now as always Christ will be exalted in my body,
whether by life or by death. FOR TO ME, TO LIVE IS CHRIST AND TO DIE IS
GAIN" (Philippians 1:20-21, NIV).
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


text:
[TRANS] 140922 JYJ "Standing tall as solo artists… Proud of that presence" – Kim Jaejoong Excerpt
Park Yuchun said, "In case of Jaejoong's concert, I was presently surprised by that wild element of rock because it is totally new genre that I never encountered before. Junsu was the same. I am so proud that we can stand tall as solo artists. It is also amazing how we harmonize this well after all that solo activities."
Upon the mention of rock genre Kim Jaejoong confessed, "Dancing is becoming difficult. My last album was rock so I didn't have to think about dancing so much. There are many rules to follow for dance numbers making them hard. But the difficulties disappeared after the first concert!"
Press photos on related articles:
Photo Caption: Kim Jaejoong, his toned arm muscles bulge out of his shirt
Photo caption: Kim Jaejoong in sexy outfit with slit at Shanghai Concert: "Kim Jaejoong, who introduced solo rock album, exuded wild masculine charms with his straight singing style"
Photo caption: Kim Jaejoong, immersed in a sweet ballad
Photo caption: Kim Jaejoong sends out powerful stare as he sings 'Butterfly'; Charisma of rocker; his mesmerizing stares steal your heart
Credit: various news articles + media daum
Translated by: @crystalmoon64
Shared by: PrinceJJ
2 Comments
fineday500September 22, 2014
JJ, your bulging biceps are so damn sexy!! Thanks princeJJ for all the great pics and the translation ♥♥
fineday500September 22, 2014
Why he keeps on saying he's not good at dancing. I saw those fancams of him dancing at Return of the King concerts, he's damn good !


text:
KILLINGS: Educate readers about domestic violence
Re: "Spanaway man pleads not guilty in deaths" (TNT, 8-31).
The tragedy of the Holmes' murders is made worse by the coverage as The News Tribune misses another opportunity to inform. This was not, as reported, a "dispute" or "slaying." It was an act of domestic violence, plain and simple.
The TNT should use these all- too-common tragedies to educate the public. By consistently using the label "domestic violence" to describe these acts, readers will come to understand that this is a pervasive problem that has a devastating impact on our community.
Imagine the lives that could be saved …


text:
Being a fairly recent East-Ender (moved from the College W. area a few months ago), I'm still fairly lost when it comes to having any knowledge of the restaurants in the East End. I've been to EL for brunch (fantastic) and of course had some take out from the Goof but other than that I've been pretty domesticated and doing the whole 'cooking at home thing'.
This Friday I'm taking one of my best GF's out for dinner and rather than head back to my old hood which I spent 10 years eating my way through, I'd like to support a local restaurant in my new hood.
What I'm hoping for is somewhere with consistently good food and fairly reasonable prices. A prix fixe menu would be great but not a must. Ambiance in the way of a nice patio or just an overall good vibe would be welcome as it is a birthday celebration. As for location, looking for restos East of the Viaduct, West of Kingston Rd. and South of Danforth. Hopefully that isn't too limiting! :)
Thanks in advance for any and all suggestions!


text:
I really don't know if there's a section like this one in any other blog. But this is going to be my new section called Bookalization.
What is it going to be?
Another thing I enjoy doing is listening to music and singing along.
Sometimes when I listen to music I picture some character in some specific situation on the book that I can imagine would be feeling what the song says or that would sing that song to someone else.
I thought I could be sharing this with you.
I will be posting the lyrics along with the scene I picture it and maybe explaining why.
I will hang a link with the song and if the song is in spanish I'll do my best to translate the essence of it rather than what would sound good to the melody.
Would be REALLY important to mention that if you haven't read the book, it might and will contain spoilers.
So I'm starting.
This one is about Vampire Academy's second part: Frostbite.
The scene is on the resort they went for christmas vacations.
After Rose found out that Tasha is interested in Dimitri and that she must forget about him (TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE) and she finds Mason to be a good prospect for her.
I can picture Rose singing this song about her troubled feelings about Mason.
Since the moment he storms out of the room, till the moment she is found hugging Mason after Spokane.
Rose has always been aware that Mason likes her and that we would do anything for her. But she is in love with Dimitri, thats why she convinces herself to be with Mason.
"Its a pain to know that our relation can end just because I've never known how to act.
And I know that you live for me, die for me and you have never left me behind, even when you know that sometimes I'm all fear.
But you live with me, live in me, inside me on this confused heart, thats why I'm asking you now...
Teach me to love you a little more. To feel with you the love you always give to me, fade the cold away.
I want to see you now.
Teach me to love you a little more, how to live with you."
This would start when she finds out that Eddie, Mia and Mason have gone to Spokane.
"I can't stand the anxiety of knowing you mine. I want to go, wherever you go.
Far from thinking I am doing myself wrong. I have to admit, this all has turned out wrong for me.
This would be after she killed the Strigoi. When she can't stand being apart from Mason's Body.
Thats why, I'll learn to live.
I'm going to hug you more and more. And I can't, I shouldn't stop looking at you. "
This is from a Mexican group from the 90's-00's called RBD. The original is in Spanish and it's called: Enseñame. (I did my best to translate and keep its essence.)
And here is the link to the song, if you would like to hear it.


text:
Fundraise at school
Fundraising at your own school can make a huge difference to the lives of young people in rural Africa. Whether it's an on-going link with a school in Africa or a one-off donation, your support could help children access the quality education they deserve.
Why do we need your help?
Children and teachers face many problems at schools in rural communities, making everyday learning a challenge:
Overcrowded classes
Inadequate and unhygienic toilets
Unsafe classrooms
Too few resources
How will your school benefit?
Our School Fundraising Program, developed in consultation with teachers, provides lesson plans, school presentations, games and resources to help your students:
- Learn about the cause they are supporting
- Gain a better understanding of global issues
- Establish links between their lives and the lives of those that they are helping
- Understand the work of non-profits
- Develop participation skills and their role in active global citizenship
- Work as a team to understand how individual and collective actions can benefit others
Your school will also gain an unforgettable insight into life and learning in a school in sub-Saharan Africa.
What could your school achieve?
- $455 could buy 75 textbooks for children desperate to learn
- $1,200 could pay for 4 teachers to receive training on up to date teaching methods
- $3,350 could buy 50 desks so that children no longer sit on the floor
- $9,000 could pay for a 10,000 liter water storage tank and guttering, giving them enough water to last through times of drought
- $22,775 could pay to build an entire classroom
For more information about fundraising at school please contact [email protected]


text:
Traveling Luck for Satsuma Chapel, Texas, United States
Where is Satsuma Chapel?What's around Satsuma Chapel?
Wikipedia near Satsuma Chapel
Where to stay near Satsuma Chapel
The timezone in Satsuma Chapel is America/Rankin_Inlet
Sunrise at 06:52 and Sunset at 17:23. It's light
Latitude. 29.8803°, Longitude. -95.5881°
Weather near Satsuma Chapel; Report from Houston, Hooks Memorial Airport, TX 28.8km away
Weather :
Temperature: 14°C / 57°F
Wind: 10.4km/h North gusting to 17.3km/h
Cloud: Few at 6000ft
Weather :
Temperature: 14°C / 57°F
Wind: 10.4km/h North gusting to 17.3km/h
Cloud: Few at 6000ft
Satellite map around Satsuma Chapel
Loading map of Satsuma Chapel and it's surroudings
Geographic features & Photographs around Satsuma Chapel, in Texas, United States
- school;
- building(s) where instruction in one or more branches of knowledge takes place.
- Hairgrove Elementary School (2.7km)
- Emmott Elementary School (3.6km)
- Bang Elementary School (3.8km)
- Jersey Village High School (3.9km)
- Post Elementary School (4.5km)
- Owens Elementary School (4.6km)
- Post School (4.7km)
- Cook Junior High School (4.7km)
- Horne Elementary School (5.4km)
- Truitt Junior High School (5.9km)
- Cypress Falls High School (6.5km)
- Carverdale School (6.7km)
- Willbern Elementary School (7.2km)
- Labay Junior High School (7.4km)
- Fiest Elementary School (7.9km)
- Reed Elementary School (7.9km)
- Lowery Elementary School (8km)
- Windfern High School (8.2km)
- Bear Creek Elementary School (8.2km)
- Francone Elementary School (8.2km)
- Campbell Junior High School (8.2km)
- church;
- a building for public Christian worship.
- New Life Pentecostal Church (3.6km)
- Rio de Poder Iglesia Pentecostes Church (3.6km)
- New Life Pentecostal Church (4.4km)
- Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton Church (5.8km)
- Greater Macedonia Baptist Church (6.2km)
- Baylor Methodist Church (6.5km)
- Saint Jude United Methodist Church (6.6km)
- Carverdale Missionary Baptist Church (6.7km)
- Northwest Fellowship Church (6.7km)
- Westside Community Church (7.5km)
- Riverdale Baptist Church (7.5km)
- Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church (7.6km)
- Saint James Baptist Missionary Church (7.8km)
- Westway Baptist Church (8.1km)
- Peace Community Church (8.1km)
- Radiant Life Fellowship Church (8.1km)
- park;
- an area, often of forested land, maintained as a place of beauty, or for recreation.
- Henry Park (4.9km)
- Central Park (5.9km)
- Cy-Fair Park (6km)
- Independence Park (6.5km)
- Carverdale Park (7.8km)
- Cypress Falls High School Football Field (8.2km)
- Cypress Falls High School Softball Field (8.2km)
- Local Feature;
- A Nearby feature worthy of being marked on a map..
- Satsuma Chapel (0km)
- Long Meadows Country Club (2.7km)
- Church of Christ - Jersey Village (2.7km)
- Cy-Fair Church of the Nazarene (5.9km)
- Carverdale Church of Christ (7.1km)
- Houston First Church of God (7.7km)
- airport;
- a place where aircraft regularly land and take off, with runways, navigational aids, and major facilities for the commercial handling of passengers and cargo.
- Hearthstone Heliport (5.4km)
- Steeplechase Heliport (6.7km)
- NW Police Station Number 5 Heliport (7.2km)
Accommodation around Satsuma Chapel
- populated place;
- a city, town, village, or other agglomeration of buildings where people live and work.
- Melendy (2.2km)
- Jersey Village (3.4km)
- Satsuma (3.9km)
- stream;
- a body of running water moving to a lower level in a channel on land.
- Horsepen Creek (6.2km)
- Rolling Fork (6.9km)
- lake;
- a large inland body of standing water.
- Jersey Lake (4.3km)
- tower;
- a high conspicuous structure, typically much higher than its diameter.
- KNUZ-AM (Houston) (4.8km)
- hospital;
- a building in which sick or injured, especially those confined to bed, are medically treated.
- Cypress Fairbanks Medical Center (6.7km)
Wikipedia entries close to
Satsuma Chapel
- Jersey Village, Texas city city o
- Addicks Reservoir landmark landmark
- Spring Valley, Texas city city o
- Hedwig Village, Texas city city o
- Bunker Hill Village, Texas city city o
- Hilshire Village, Texas city city o
- Cypress, Texas
- Piney Point Village, Texas city city o
- Hunters Creek Village, Texas city city o
- Klein, Texas city city o
- Memorial Park, Houston, Texas city city o
- Houston Galleria
- David Wayne Hooks Memorial Airport airport airport
- Aldine, Houston, Texas city city o
- Mission Bend, Texas city city o
- ArtCar Museum museum
Airports close to Satsuma Chapel
George bush intcntl houston(IAH), Houston, Usa (35km)
William p hobby(HOU), Houston, Usa (52.6km)
Ellington fld(EFD), Houston, Usa (68.2km)
Montgomery co(CXO), Conroe, Usa (72.6km)
Scholes international at galveston(GLS), Galveston, Usa (130.4km)


text:
Leica has built up a significant reputation since it created its first 35mm film camera 100 years ago. That reputation means different things to different people, and hangs over every new model its name is applied to. The Leica X (Typ 113) is the company's latest fixed-lens APS-C camera. Designed, developed and built by the German company, it commands a substantial price tag. So what's it like to shoot with and what do you get for your money? We handed the camera to two photographers to see what they thought.
The Professional's perspective:
By David Wentworth
|David Wentworth is a commercial and editorial photographer, and owner of FLUTTER Studios in Seattle
When asked if I would test out the new Leica, I jumped at the opportunity. I haven't ever owned a Leica, nor used anything from their digital line, but I have shot with an M3 and it was a beautiful experience. Regrettably, the accountant in me has not yet allowed this photographer to purchase one of these hallowed pieces of engineering for day-to-day use. So, when asked if I would try out their more affordable, fixed-lens model for the day, I was really looking forward to it.
Like everyone, I have expectations about what a 'Leica' should be like. To me, the name still implies the highest quality of craftsmanship, intuitive technology and style.
The Leica X is a stylish looking camera, of course: it has that unmistakable look from across the room. Its magnesium and aluminum body is extremely light-weight, which will be a big plus for travelers and over-the-shoulder shooters (as well as b-list celebrities). But it also made the camera seem a little delicate, and fragile. My tendency is to be somewhat hard on my cameras, and those with similar habits might be wise changing them before they hit the streets with the X and leave the back-breaker at home.
I primarily shoot commercial fashion and editorial images, and my work tends include a lot of movement, and often unpredictable lighting scenarios. This type of shooting requires an extremely responsive camera for when the perfect moment comes and that's not exactly what the Leica X is designed for. The AF system seemed faster than other cameras I've used of this type but, as expected, fairly sluggish compared to the (bulk/ugly) DSLRs I'd usually use. I felt like I was fighting with the camera somewhat to keep moving subjects in focus.
Another slight annoyance came from the behavior of the lens: a 35 mm equivalent f/1.7. The camera would not allow me shoot at f/1.7 when within a certain distance to a subject. Instead, the aperture would automatically "correct" to f/2.2 or f/2.8, even when in full manual mode. I understand Leica's position of wanting its camera to always produce the best images, but I'd prefer it if they let me make that decision, rather than limiting the camera's behavior on my behalf.
My biggest concern, though, was the image quality. While I wouldn't expect the X to match my DSLRs for autofocus, I do expect decent images and found the camera's DNG files to be inadequate. I often like to shoot subjects when back-lit or in high contrast lighting situations and have come to expect Raw files with enough latitude to work with, even in difficult lighting.
With the X, I had trouble with some too easily blown highlights in high-contrast scenarios, especially in the red channel, and found deep shadows turned a bit grainy at ISO 400 when pushed more than a stop or two in post. The Auto-white balance was overly magenta for my taste, and needed a good amount of post adjustments as well to get tones close to where I wanted them.
It wasn't all bad, though. I did like the low-profile appearance of the camera, the near silent shutter, and found the menu system intuitive and easy to navigate. Having to compose through the LCD screen could be somewhat awkward (Call me old-fashion, but I still prefer a viewfinder) but there were times it was a benefit, too: it was nice to use the LCD screen to compose from above eye level and low to the ground without the usual side-effect of getting my clothes dirty.
Overall, the Leica X clearly wants to seem attractive to the serious amateur or pro on the street, as well as those who just want something a bit more stylish to sling over their jacket. And sure enough, you can pull it out at the café and have people come up and admire it. However, I'm not sure whether the X's images always live up to its looks, or the Leica name. This doesn't mean I'm not looking forward to the day my inner accountant says it's ok to buy an M series, though.
The enthusiast's perspective
By Samuel Spencer
|Sam Spencer is studio photographer and writer at DPReview.com as well as being a keen enthusiast photographer
The Leica X gets a lot of things right. So, for a moment, let's forget its price and take a look at the things that other manufacturers need to take note of.
When compared to other focus-by-wire systems, this camera does things well. The focus ring has hard stops at minimum focus and infinity within less than one 360-degree revolution (something Olympus has also got right on a handful of its Micro Four Thirds lenses). This solves two major problems with focus-by-wire systems. First, it means minimum and infinity are always where you left them. There aren't any sort of algorithms calculating how fast the focus mechanism should move based on how quickly the ring was turned, and it means that infinity isn't going to be anywhere from 1 to 16 turns away: it will always be within one turn of the wrist. Plus, this system enables Leica to paint on a pretty distance scale instead of forcing you to stare at a screen to estimate focus distance. Combine this easy to use manual focusing with focus peaking and finally there is a compact camera with fast, simple manual focusing.
|The Leica X is capable of taking some really nice images, even in JPEG mode, as demonstrated here.
F8, 1/400th
The lens has more virtues than just a short focus throw and a fancy distance scale. This is, as expected, a high quality bit of optics. Especially in close distances, sharpness is exceptional. This shows through despite the absolute sharpness of the sensor being hindered slightly by the presence of an anti-aliasing filter. Combine the optical quality with the exceptional build quality and classic looks that the Leica name leads you to expect, and this camera should be a winner. However, even before we reintroduce the price tag, the 'X' does come with a set of faults.
One of the big selling points of this camera is its fastest-in-class Summilux 23mm f/1.7 lens. Yes, it does open up to f/1.7, but in the interest of sharpness, the camera decides for you whether f/1.7 is appropriate, without any option to override. At closest focus the lens is limited to f/2.8, and gradually opens up until f/1.7 is hit at roughly five feet (1.5m). What we have here is the world's first 23mm f/1.7-2.8 lens. In Leica's defense, it's making a device that must produce the highest quality images possible no matter who is using it. However, it does seem a bit blasphemous to put the revered 'Summilux' name on a lens that isn't an f/1.4, and sometimes is closer to the brightness of an Elmarit than anything else. Fewer pitchforks would have been raised if Leica used one of their other classic, but slightly more appropriate names, such as Summarit, or Elmar.
|The camera will automatically stop the aperture down at close focus distances but the does ensure very good levels of sharpness.
F2.8, 1/40th
Speaking of blasphemy, it is difficult to feel right about shooting a Leica while holding it at arm's length looking through a fixed rear LCD display. Leica built its entire legacy on the simplicity of a rangefinder, and straining to see the image while struggling to capture it in focus just kills the entire meaning of the Red Dot on the front of this camera. A Leica needs to have a rangefinder to be considered a Leica, in my opinion, and using one without one does not feel like using a genuine product. Adding the 'Visioflex' electronic finder to the hot shoe doesn't help much either. Our test camera came in the gorgeous silver body with brown leather. The ugly black viewfinder completely clashed with the color pallet and killed the looks: one of the X's most endearing features. Plus, it isn't any higher of resolution than the screen and it sometimes feels like the color is off.
ISO performance, as well, is average. The camera can shoot up to ISO 12,800, but continues its bossy ways and will only use that highest setting if it is absolutely necessary. While shooting our test scene we tried everything we could to trick the camera in to letting us shoot at 12,800. We turned the lights down all the way and closed the aperture to f/16, but the camera would override that decision and shoot at f/9 at ISO 6400, to ensure we could not use its lowest-quality ISO setting. Leica was the king of analog, so having a camera that makes decisions instead of the photographer is the antithesis of what I expect shooting a Leica should feel like.
What hurts the Leica X the most, though, is its price. It costs $2,300, with an additional $500 required for the Visioflex viewfinder if one cannot stand taking a picture without bringing something up to the eye. It many respects it keeps with the name, offering high levels of build and optical quality at a high price point. Lens performance is definitely near the top of its class, but for half the price its competitors offer twice the usability. The funny thing is, the Fujifilm X100T with its fancy new 'digital rangefinder' puts forth more of an effort to imitate the rangefinder shooting experience than Leica does. The Leica X typ 113 would be a great camera if it carried a different name (Panasonic, perhaps?) and different price tag, but is undone by its own heritage.
Cick here to see how the Leica X (Type 113) compares in our studio scene comparison widget
I own it
I want it
I had it
I had a Leica X Type 113, and sold it because I did not like the fact that it had an external viewfinder. It ruined the camera for me. I must however let you know that the quality of the jpegs in terms of colours being real and true to life is unmatched in this price range, as far as I know anyway. If you think otherwise please let me know. If Leica stuck a cheap rangefinder viewfinder in the top left hand corner, it would have been a classic.
Interesting thread. JakeB is right. HowaboutRAW OWNS this thread. Not a single comment containing the slightest criticism towards Leica has gone without him/her passionate defense of the brand, bordering on irrationality. I lost count on his 100th answer. The fact is, none of us could probably distinguish what brand of lens took a good photograph, above a certain benchmark of common quality. And I know Leica noes not win on all accounts, on every lens. Far from it. There are MANY Canikon, Fuji, Olympus, Zeiss and other lenses that are optically equal or better than Leica. Too bad the sole intervention of the dazzled HowabaoutRAW has distorted the interesting direction that this thread was sometimes heading. And JakeB is right on another account. HowaboutRAW is a bore.
Unfortunately, even before the demise of film, Leica commandants decided they business niche was neck jewelry more than photographic tools.
As a happy owner of one of the latter MP's (a whim prompted by a transitory full wallet) I cannot but recognize it is probably the best camera I've ever owned and I put it to good and heavy use. However, I still cannot find much over my beloved M2 or M6. IMHO Leica left their soul at Wetzlar when they moved to Solms.
I'm now certain that I will never own a digital M —mainly due to economic considerations but also as well because of their lack of comparative performance– although I am and have been a big fan of their compact line of rebranded Panasonics
Goes without saying I've never bought one of their D-Luxes in light of the 50% price increase for the red dot. I've always went with the pedestrian Lumix LX's and never regretted the choice.
What a great review. Give a subtle, sophiscated camera to two people totally unfamiliar with it for a day—or a week—and then print two negative reviews.
Such balderdash.
The X is not a perfect camera, but it is a fine camera nonetheless. I wouldn't try to shoot with it like I shoot with a Leica M9, or an Olympus E-M1, or a Nikon D4s: I would be disappointed. In my hands, it is a far far nicer camera to use than any Fuji I've tried (basically all of them). And no one has questioned for one moment the quality of the 11x17 and larger prints I've shown made with it.
It takes time to learn and use a camera. You don't just transfer skills from a completely different camera in an instant. I'd say it took me a couple of weeks and a couple thousand careful shots to grok the X. And I couldn't be happier for doing so. It was worth every penny of what I paid for it, much more so than several other popular cameras I've tried.
I am also a member of the X113 happy owner's club. My Fuji X100 and XE1 are ready for ebay. (But my X1 stays). I saw a video on youTUBE of some guys reviewing the M240 and one of them was complaining because "it lacks autofocus" (?)
Seemed like a very fair review by a well qualified reviewer. I don't see how more experience with the camera would really make a difference regarding most of his negative comments. Besides, most reviewers don't get to live with a camera for extended periods of time. A day or a week is reasonable. I'm curious, how long did you keep "basically all" of the Fuji cameras before you determined they weren't good enough for you?
>> how long did you keep "basically all" of the Fuji
>> cameras before you determined they weren't
>> good enough for you?
Long enough (both time and number of shots) to know they would not do it for me. I found little compelling about them.
I found their reviews to be full of expectations that were not appropriate to the cameras, as if they figured with the price tag they were buying a top end DSLR.
Well, I don't miss my 5DII at all. I'm very happy with Xt1, and found the majority of reviews consistent and accurate in terms of the camera's pros and cons. Enjoy!
They look so good but get let down by IQ. There are so many that do better. Panasonic do better so why the dickens don't they talk to their pals with the enormous electronics company and do what Leica do best - lenses (and way too cool design).
Raw conversion - reportage must shoot jpeg (must not be altered by editing) so any such camera must produce good jpeg. So playing with a raw file is for fixing one that assumed rotund pearosity.
Leica is Leica and the teutonic mindset is not likely to change to meet customer complaints or requirements. The quirks and the pricing help set the parameters on an ever decreasing customer set, although the latest balance sheets might suggest the strategy is working. But in the long run it's just a tool and applied to the right problem, it is usually an elegant solution.
The Fuji X100T looks and handles more like Leica then this camera. The image qauilty will same. I have on idea what Leica engineers are thinking about when design these cameras. I have a feeling the got one group that designs the way it will look, the other the camera itself. The guys that say what about the looks have all the say and you get a great looking poor operating camera as this one is.
If Leica would design a FF 18-24MP, with out mechanical RF and put in an EVF with MF aids and have new AF. Have an aptor for M lens AND NOT MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A CELL PHONE, for under $4k. That may put them back on the map.
For now look to Fuji for a mondern Leica camera.
Perhaps because a range-finder is not used like a normal camera. It harks back to film and reportage when AF did not exist and the camera had to be pre-set to allow quick thinking for shooting.
It is not like Leica don't make a DSLR because they do and they do make interchangeable lens full frame mirrorless cameras (M series)
But please, stick an EVF on them.
Actually i've seen plenty Pros using Leica, just that Canokon is cheaper and has good Pro support as well as in some cases more convenient operating lenses. To each their own
In any case the Sony a7s has allowed me to compare several manufacturer's lenses on the same sensor and I gotta tell you that there are occasional Zeiss' that can match a -cron centrally... occasional is the important word. And perhaps a Big OTUS is up for the task too since that one remains untested by me. However, by and large the -crons will make the Canokons and Zeiss' look soft central and downright broken at the edges.
You may or may not like the M. It is quirky, but that's part of then fun. It does take beautiful pictures however and part of that equation is the glass. A large part in fact. Add to the IQ, the size, weight and build quality make these lenses a bargain. Yes.... a bargain since if you want/need a smallish lens for a given FL and speed they are typically in a class by themselves.
Yeah, they decided to advertise for Leica by finding some people who said the cameras were only so-so.
Weird strategy no?
For no one. Its not advertising unless you believe another company arranged this post as a way to make Leica look bad. Nor is it advertising for Leica unless you think a good strategy to promote your product is to find people who don't like it.
Even with those "flaws" I bet this camera can take beautiful pictures. And it is one sexy piece of photography gear. I would trade it for my X1 in a beat.
Ming Thein's blog has some very nice examples of what this camera can do.
Except for higher ISOs and a slower lens, sometimes, the X1 is an excellent camera, why trade? More pixels?
I would say 3 reasons to upgrade, in not specific order:
I think (based on pictures) that it is a more hefty body, maybe less point and shoot feeling (?) The stop faster, which it delivers shallower DoF... and last but not least, the Silver/chocolate combo looks beautiful! But I agree the X1 is excellent! -I like it more than my X100 LE-
I'd post a comment stating my opinion, but HowaboutRAW will just shout me down like he's done EVERY SINGLE FREAKIN' COMMENT that dares to raise even the spectre of criticism of the god-like Leica Corporation, so I'll just go take some photos instead.
Life's too short for internet bores.
You are mistaken, I've never spent much time defending the "Leica Corporation", whatever that is.
I've pointed out that Leica makes lenses that are hard to equal for optical performance, therefore that's a reason people sometimes seek out Leica lens/body combinations.
In other words, you've completely confused my point in order to misdirect from the basic substance of it. Saying much more about your motivation than mine.
Aye. But lenses and bodies are two very different things. They sure have some nice lenses (still often overpriced, in my opinion), but the bodies are WAY overpriced. But hey, i understand that you pay for the brand (not only ofc, not saying the cameras are bad). But to me, that's very odd, at least when it comes to Leica prices.
Leica is more than one company, and yet again: You've confused yourself thinking I've defended the Leica camera/camera lens company. That's not nitpicking.
You keep trying to make an argument that isn't mine into something I said. This is less than strong logic on your part.
Some problems with the Leica camera/lens/binocular company:
They dismissed digital for too long. The newish 90mm and 75mm M lenses aren't as optically good as they should be, nor is the 23mm T lens.
The M 8 was way too loud.
The M 9 should likely have used a CMOS sensor.
There are too many variations of the M in for sale in the year 2014.
For the price, Leica binoculars should be better than Zeiss and Meopta but they're not. And for that price buy Swarovski.
Oh, and these X cameras need some kind of built-in VF or EVF, same with the T.
All that said, a well executed Leica camera lens is optically hard to match. Zeiss, Samsung and Olympus (and one Sigma) being the only real challengers.
@howaboutraw: may be, that Leika makes the best lenses, maybe not, but that is not the point here at least for me, using a Leica. the main point is performance. Nowadays almost every serious camera has an image-quality that is more than sufficial for everything. This was very different when the Leica was invented 100 years ago. In those days most newspaperphotographers used largeformatcameras because lenses and films where so bad! I use my M9 for its performance which is very different from my Canon SLR. The small body and lenses and the rangefinder make the Leica attractive. I tried some Fuji X1 but the electronic viewfinder does not work for me, because of its delay. My canon 5dII has great lenses as well, but they are so bulky and heavy, that i rather shoot the Leica M, the rangefinder is slower than AF, but that makes me consider my shots instead of shooting without thinking. (part 1of 2)
Yes, the Leica has great lenses, but I use mine also with old lenses from Canon or Yashica (M39) which are great lenses as well. At least some of them. Speaking of image qualtity: The (part 2 of 2)the Leica X is a point and shoot camera. It may have the best image-quality of all P&S, I don't know, but whats the point here? most people who use these kind of camera will seldom if anytime, make prints bigger then A4. I made great A3 (30x42cm) prints from a canon 20D in 2006 shot with an old Zeiss Planar for Rolleiflex. they where pinsharp, from 8(!) Megapixels.
Camera overrides the photographer on ISO and aperture settings, even in manual??? No thanks.
Plenty of other MILC systems out there to invest in.
I don't know why some people HATE Leica..... If you don't like, don't buy.....
@HowaboutRAW............"My biggest concern, though, was the image quality. While I wouldn't expect the X to match my DSLRs for autofocus, I do expect decent images and found the camera's DNG files to be inadequate. I often like to shoot subjects when back-lit or in high contrast lighting situations and have come to expect Raw files with enough latitude to work with, even in difficult lighting."
.who cares how good the lens is.
".who cares how good the lens is." Huh?
I exposed some of my samples not well (for a background) and recovering faces wasn't hard. It's not something I'd do if I owned the camera, and had it set up the way I'd want.
What DNGs have you extracted?
Of course the lens matters. But Leica isn't' the only top quality lens. Nikkor, Canon, Zeiss also make excellent lenses. I would suspect that if the identical photo was taken using the above array of lenses---most viewers would be hard pressed to identify the lens of manufacturer.
With that said, if people want to spend their money on any brand of body or lens--regardless of price--that's their business. But in choosing one top notch system versus another--it's mostly about the hardware.
If readers want to justify their purchases by thinking their camera and lens take the worlds best pictures---well, so what. It's their money.
No. Marty:
Canon and Nikon lens do not equal the optical performance of half decent Leica lenses. Not even close.
Indeed Zeiss does make amazing lenses, good ones though costing less than Leicas, are not cheap.
And the Zeiss lenses for the Fuji X system lack.
Leaving some big heavy Samsung NX lenses, or big heavish expensive Olympus lenses as almost Leica. And yes some Sigmas are starting to show promise. But Sigma APSC cameras use a different kind of sensor.
When I was 20, I would have killed for a Leica, but now that I'll be turning 65 in a week, I find, oddly, I have absolutely zero interest in owning a Leica. I don't need a beautiful, well built, reasonably competent, digital camera that is obsolete within 2 months of its release.
I feel I can get by with an uglier, less well built, but still reasonably competent camera that is obsolete within 2 months of its release.
Besides, most of my friends who would likely be impressed with my owning a Leica are either dead or confused by my inability to give up the passions of my adolescence. A couple are just confused.
My new E-M10 will likely last until I'm dead. And after that, it won't matter much, will it?
You could bury with Leica with you :)
Really expensive watches have not functioned better than cheap watches since the 1970s, whereas good examples of Leica lenses, of which there are many, are optically better than most other lenses in the year 2014 and will be for at least another 10 years.
Glen Barrington:
I think you're confused about the word "obsolete", unless you chase higher and higher ISOs.
@HowaboutRaw - Not confused, just making a broad generalization for the sake of humor. I'm sorry the humor escaped you.
Okay, but the problem is "Leica is obsolete" is an oft repeated error. (Albeit the rest of your post does read as humor.)
@HowaboutRaw - please educate me - which of the old Leica lenses matches for example the 35mm Sigma Art lens in resolving power ?
And please don't give me any of that "magical characteristic feel" a picture will suddenly get as soon as you realize it was shot with an overpriced Zeiss/Leica glass.
Try the 75mm f/1.4 M. (I got mine used in 2002.)
Also drop resolving power as the only way of judging a lens, it makes you look ignorant.
Sigma has upped its game, but only after the acquisition of Foveon.
@Len_Gee , I'll have to check my schedule and get back to you. Even if I died, I might not have time to lie down.
SkiHound: "if you buy a Leica you're paying a heck of a lot for that red dot."
If you buy the Leica M-P, you pay even more to not have the red dot!
There used to be only 2 parts of cameramaking which both required great craftsmenship: manufacturing of the housing and - separately - the optics.
Today, the largest (and third) part of a camera are electronics - which change so fast, by the time you are finished developing them, they are already outdated.
Leica has since the digital age clearly focused on the perfection of the housing, which they do beautifully like no other. But the BEST cameras are built by others. The problem is, who wants to spend this much money on a camera which is already outdated when new, not to mention a few years down the road?
Maybe Leica could lead the way and design a camera with partially interchangeable electronic hardware, like the sensor/display/interface parts of the camera (the stuff which gets old fast) while keeping the housing and lens.
Because someone should start to do something about the terrible planned obsolescense in the camera industry, and Leica would be a great company to start.
Since the "digital age" really got going, Leica has spent a lot on new lenses.
You've completely missed a reason to buy this camera.
If you want interchangeable Leica hardware get an M or S2. (Same idea applies to a Canon 5D or Nikon D3, Olympus EM1, etc.)
I entirely agree and have said the same thing many times. Leica's dual film/digital R was a work of under-appreciated genius.
I also think one day sensors will be available on a roll like film - a new clean sensor for every shot..!
some good points, but note that most people keep a camera for 2-4 years which when the cost is split per year less second hand value, can fit in with many people's income
its up to the individual
swiss automatic watches are dreadful time keepers compared to £10 casios but people still pay for them in droves
I think Leica does have fantastic IQ but outside the M its not really market leading so its up to you if you want that housing!
I am "old school", being 71.
I owned many cameras (Exakta Varex to a Nikon F4S) and took thousands of photographs.
Photography has changed enormously over the last fifteen years. I bought a Leica Digilux 2 (part exchanging the Nikon 4 S + lenses. Wow! Five Megapixels!
It took remarkable photos despite the mongers who claimed that digital would never beat film quality...
The nub, is that with a slow camera and an even slower person handling it, one can still take great photos. Today, speed appears to be of the essence. Photos taken at arm´s length over a crowd....catching movement.... etc.
What´s the hurry? Cartier-Bresson´s photos are masterpieces of timing but in the artistic sense. Granted we are not geniuses like he was, but so what?
If you want to just take photos, use your mobile. If you want to record photos for posterity, buy a decent camera. If you want to savour the pleasure of taking photographs, buy a Leica. I envy all that can afford one but relish in their enjoyment.
Well put, Sir.
What is about a Leica article that brings out the usual comments focused on the price?
And why doesn't this happen with other consumer goods - such as cars?
An Audi shares much of its components with a VW, yet people proudly spend the extra money for, essentially, the same product..
How many people complaining about Leica are at the same time making the opposite judgment about the car they drive?
It is not ironic that someone with an Audi A3 may complain about the price of a Leica? Surely, wouldn't they be smarter if they just bought a Golf?
Leica - Audi - whats the difference?
In my city every time I see a 5 to 8 year old VW, it seems to have some paint/rust problem. Whereas I see many Audis of the same age, and the paint/steel has not been compromised by rust. And these Audis aren't being parked in garages but on the streets.
Clearly Audi is using better paint/coatings/steel than VW, even though VW has owned the company since the 1960s. And in the same city one doesn't see this problem with Honda, Toyota, GM, or Ford cars etc.
As for Leica lenses, there isn't some exact substitute. Right a good Zeiss (or even recently Samsung) lens is considered as optically good as a good Leica lens, but the look is different.
The difference is that Audis are genuinely better cars; meanwhile, whis particular Leica camera has nothing to show for its price.
This Leica has the lens, no other camera has this lens. And other cameras lack for that reason.
I think what has happened to Leica is similar to what has happened to Rolex. In both cases, their products were at one time at the technological peak of their respective industries.. Today, both are enormously expensive status symbols, but no longer at the forefront.
In specific regard to the Leica M, you rarely, if at all see them being used by professionals--yet for the cost of one, you can easily buy a top of the line Nikon or Canon pro model. Only well heeled amateurs can afford an M---and I wonder how many of them would dare risk their expensive cameras to the outside weather elements as well as risk of theft?
I suspect most of them end up in the hands of wealthy collectors--and indoors.
You kind of have a point about Leica bodies, but you really don't seem to care about lenses. Leica lenses are still better than almost all other lenses, and it's something that's pretty easy to see.
Few buy Leicas digital cameras for the bodies, though the S2 is a good bit cheaper than a PhaseOne.
Actually, one does see pros using current Leica Ms. Not all pro photographers only shoot sports, which would not be a place to use a Leica M.
@MartyCL: "In specific regard to the Leica M, you rarely, if at all see them being used by professionals"
I use my Leica M9-P professionally. I rarely ever bring out my Nikons unless I'm shooting fast sports with a telephoto. And even then the Leica comes along with me.
Just last month I had a photo of Kid Rock in Rolling Stone, Jay Z in Inc. Magazine, Bombino in Vogue, and BB King on Music Radar. All shot with a Leica M9-P, a camera which many people say is obsolete.
There are pros that use Leica cameras.
** A non-owner and never will be's perspective **
Leica =
- Very nice lenses.
- Technology always lagging current achievements.
- Bought by people with more money than sense/knowledge/ability.
- [And nowadays] Probably just a prettied-up version of a Panasonic hiding inside?
A pretty case and a red dot don't make you a better photographer, just a lot poorer. Leica as a brand was past its sell by date many years ago.
Not a rebadged Panasonic here. Though plenty of those are good cameras and many of the m4/3s PanaLeica lenses are extraordinary.
This is a very popular 16MP Sony sensor, see the current Fuji X APSC bodies.
"- Bought by people with more money than sense/knowledge/ability." this point is contradicted by your point about lenses.
Small, quiet, very good image quality through ISO 2000, and a lens optically significantly better than the competition like the Fuji X100, and equaling the lens in the more expensive, slower to focus, Sony RX1.
Smart people buy a Leica M and used mint condition Leica M lenses. The only system which does not loose value over time as the lenses appreciate in value. This is called common sense. I burned a ton of money with MFT and Fuji (ever tried to sell a Fuji XE-1/2, X-Pro1 or Olympus EP1,2,3, OMD-5? Good luck).
Could take better photos with a throw away camera and the highlights would not be blown out and I can buy a throw away camera for £14.99
And you could take worse photos with a 15 pound camera.
Despite the claims here, the Saab jpeg shadows are easy to fix, without washingout the sky.
I wouldn't go judging this Leica based on these examples.
If this could merge with the best features of the Sony RX1 and Sigma DP2 in a sealed, tank-like body allowing for full control, then it would be really interesting. Not sure why Leica can't do that in their price ranges. If Sony could simplify and make manual better with true weather sealing, if Sigma could make a better ergonomic camera with 3rd party software that works, any of these fixed lenses might pull me away from interchangeable for most needs, especially if under $3000. Unobtanium, I know.
But you really can't use the Sigmas at ISO 1600, while this Leica is easy to shoot at ISO 1600. (As is the RX1.)
This Leica is well built.
The Sigma Quattro is easy to handle, but has huge files. And on Mac a later release of Iridient will likely open Sigma raws.
The RX1 is nice camera, but its AF lacks, and it's nearly $3000.
Buy Ricoh GR...:)
I agree with both comments above, would consider the Ricoh except I have Samsung NX with adapters that work well for Leica R, Rollei QBM and Canon FD due to the flange distances (untold benefit to the Samsung lens design btw.) Samsung is not well set for Leica M but can't afford those lenses anyways. Ricoh GR is interesting but wonder where it will go from here. As for RX1 AF, I don't use AF much so the manual lens feel works for me--without trying them all (where can you do that these days?) it is hard to compare less envision the comparisons other than these reviews and photos. Sigma is really interesting sounding and may be the most affordable experiment, with exception of permission for yet another camera ...
First article, final paragraph: "by" -> "buy".
Last paragraph of second article: "It costs $2,800," has been in error for days now.
Retail price in the USA, $2300, and it's shipping at that price. Also not announced at $2800 and then reduced.
Seems more serious than a skipped "u".
$500 is less than small change to a Leica user! Why, it's hardly in the noise :)
I think you're confused about who buys Leica lenses.
Both errors have been corrected.
At this price you could buy a sony a600 and adapt a leica M lens, or a fancy zeiss ZM lens and be way better off for images and build quality.
The build quality of this Leica is pretty high. (I assume you mean the A6000.)
The Leica M lens for this hypothetical would cost a bit more than this X.
The 24mm SonyZeiss is neither cheap nor small.
The build quality can be high but its useless to have good build quality when the image quality it delivers is as shitty as these images.
People who are going to buy a camera like this aren't going for best bang for their buck. They aren't living paycheck to paycheck. They aren't driving the most economical cars. They have money to spend. The Leica X caters to people who are buying $5000 Gucci handbags and $10000 Piaget watches, and want a nice looking camera to throw in their bag for the next time they fly off to Paris for a getaway.
You really don't know what you're talking about. Anyhow, no one who is really broke is going to buy a Nikon D750 or Canon 6D, or Fuji XT1, either.
Yes, some people will buy for the name, and some will buy for the name and the lens, and others will buy for the lens sensor combination alone.
I can't help what DPR posts, or whom it chooses to engage in this project.
My DNG samples, which I won't share, are more than adequate. And you can look at Ming Thein's blog for very good photos shot with this Leica.
@HowaboutRAW - it's you who doesn't get it. The point I was getting is that there is a world of wealthy consumers out there with much, much higher levels of discretionary income than most people here at dpreview who are pouring over test charts and specs sheets trying to get the best bang for their limited bucks. These are the people who are buying the $10,000 business class airline ticket, versus the people who are on Travelocity trying to snag the $1,000 economy class airline ticket to the same destination. To these people, paying that price differential is not such a big deal, and it's worth it simply for the comfort. A lot of people here wouldn't be able to stomach that price differential, even if they could afford it.
But who pours of test results and specs? That's boring.
When I talk about Leica and Zeiss lenses, I've used, and owned, extraordinary examples of both. And I've never bought a new car or a $10,000 plane ticket.
And when I comment on a new camera here, I've almost always shot at least a few test shots with an example.
to get back to Ron's point a zeiss 25/2.8 is 1200$ plus a XE2 another 800$ and here we are, 2000$ for the package.
But for leica lenses, as Howaboutraw sais, the cheapest option is 28/2.8 elmarit, which is 2250$ so it will go to about 3000$ the package.
The lens (in both cases) would be a bit darker, but they both are exceptional lenses (and from what we heard about the leica X) much better than the lens on this camera.
Anyway, it really depends on who is buying... i would go for the zeiss-fuji combination, but I totally get that a leica-M + a summilux 24/1.4 would be better on many levels (and if i would have the money to spare i would go for it, even if it would be more expensive as my car).
Some observations about DPR. It's a valuable site to gain insight into camera specific capabilities and features, but there's always lots of text juxtaposing and comparing camera A vs. camera B. Never understood that.
Unfortunately, the images posted that are taken with the tested cameras never seem to emphasize what the camera and photographer are capable of producing as far as aesthetically pleasing, well composed killer photographs with the camera. Just repetitive images of things many if not most photographers would ever consider in their decision to spend any serious money. I guess the so-called test or post images attempt to remove the photographer from the analysis and just focus on the technical.
In my mind, I would like to see results that challenge the photographer and camera to produce those great photos and not just technical photos examining esoteric features of the camera and the image. After all, the camera is just a tool.
What's camera B in this example?
And Ming Thein's blog has much better samples of what this Leica X can do.
I wouldn't take real seriously what these "photographers" have to say about this Leica.
Also, NB:
It's pretty easy to use PhotoShop CS5 to recover the shadowed bumper of the Saab jpeg--and blow the sky. (A different feature Paint.Net and GIMP will pretty much do the same thing.)
It's pretty easy to use PhotoShop CS5 (or 6) to recover the shadowed bumper of the Saab jpeg--and not blow the sky.
Wow, this write-up has certainly brought all of the Leica haters out of the woodwork. I'm still scratching my head wondering why DPR would loan this camera to professional dSLR shooters. I'm betting, if they had put the camera into the hands of a professional photographer who is used to shooting a rangefinder, or familiar with Leica products, the results would have been quite different. Seems anyone can be called a professional these days. I've seen amateurs produce better results than some of the so-called professionals.
Ming Thein got very good results.
And I didn't have any real trouble with the 5 or 6 sample DNGs I shot.
There's a bit more to the point about rangefinders and other Leicas here:
"I'm betting, if they had put the camera into the hands of a professional photographer who is used to shooting a rangefinder, or familiar with Leica products,"
No of course this X is not a rangefinder.
The fact remains that there are big problems with all of the samples here except the tree greenery, and it looks like the testers simply weren't paying attention.
Wolfgang - Perhaps, you are not familiar with shooting a rangefinder, I am. Pay attention and read carefully, I did not say the X Typ 113 was a rangefinder, what I did elude to was that someone who shoots a rangefinder tends to take their time and think through the process and art of shooting. You can't always rely on Program mode. It' looks like they did not bother to understand that you can control the tone curve by moving away from the camera defaults and if you're going to use center-weight average metering you may very well blow the highlights. Any camera has only a finite dynamic range. I don't think that Leica ever intended that their cameras replace a dSLR. It is made for a certain type of user. If it doesn't fit your style, just move on. There are no shortages of camera manufacturers.
nboyer - maybe I am not as familar with shooting rangefinder cameras as you are or better as you think you are. I am a professional photojournalist for more than 25 Years and bought my first M6 as a photography student in 1987, used to have 2 of them + M3 + CL and non-Leica rangefinders too (Mamiya and Polaroid). I do not know on what your stupid arrogance is based on and beside your typical forum blabla ("someone who shoots a rangefinder tends to take their time and think through the process and art of shooting") you made my day but you did not answer my question, what has a camera you have to hold 50cm for your face to do with a rangefinder???
One thing must be handed to Leica.
When they turned digital, they gave an all new meaning to the phrase:
"There's a sucker born every minute".
Not sure why you seem to have it in for Leica users. You know most Leica users also use DSLRS, but just for different stuff than their Leicas. It's ironic that I can't ever recall reading a Leica post where the Leica user is denigrating a DSLR or its user especially from the big brands. Unfortunately, the opposite is not true.
If Canon and Nikon could ship lenses that are optically close to good Leicas, you sort of could have a point, but you don't. Since you have to use Zeiss manual focus lenses (or one Sigma) on your Canon and Nikon DSLRs to come close to Leica--albeit Zeiss has different look. (The regular, non-shift, Schneider mf lenses seem to have disappeared and the one I tried wasn't up to Zeiss or Leica.)
Olympus and Panasonic make really good lenses for the m4/3s system. And Fuji, not as good as Leica and Zeiss, still betters Canikon by a good bit for optical performance.
I guarantee that, without looking at EXIF info and the like, you cannot identify the brand of lens or camera that took any given picture.
Vincent O'Sullivan:
Wrong, it's pretty easy to spot the use of better lenses and that means Leica and Zeiss.
Now it is a little hard to see the difference between something shot with the best Olympuses and Leica, but Olympus lacks something. (Leaving only the better Samsungs.) Fuji is easy.
Now this won't work with any and every lens.
BTW, the first two images are the worst images I've seen taken with the X113 since its release. These are really bad images and I'm surprised that this working pro can't get a properly exposed image when most others could and did. Really shocking.
The second photographer's images are in keeping with dpreview's penchant for testing cameras by taking photos of ridiculous inanimate objects that an iPhone could render well. What's up with that?
If you want to test a Leica like this, shoot people and/or do some street photography. That's a stress test worth talking about. It will also be a good test to see if these photographers are up to the task. That's hard photography which challenges the camera and the photographer.
In the many years of reading reviews of Leica products on this website, I have never seen a positive review of any Leica products even though many, many serious photographers use their products and these users are not "bling" photographers. One might be led to think that there's a bias here.
Maybe that's because "serious" actually has a specific meaning, one that suits DPR better than most Leica users?
After all, Leica users DID buy Leica M-monochrme in spite of not being able to anything that can't be done is PS.
...I would so LOVE to do a blind test (pun intended) over that one...
Not sure what motivates your assessment that "serious" photographer are on dpreview and then the bit about Leica photographers? Odd statement.
Frankly, many of the posts I read on the forum are very gear oriented and not results oriented. Not to say there isn't some good photography here, but there are a lot of gear-centric exchanges.
I wouldn't buy a MM, but have seen some amazing B+W results. Check out Peter Turnley's work.
Leica survives by selling a lot of rebranded Asia made camera gear. This seems easy. But look how miserably Hasselblad fared with their re- branded Sony kits. In between, Leica designs some exceptional stuff. Not necessarily manufactures it. Remember the original Leica lenses made by Minolta?
Strange discussions here. Leicas are overpriced, we knew that. However, I strongly recommend all X113 bashers to visit Ming Thein`s blog and read his review. Unfortunately, Sean Reid has a subscriber only site, but his review confirms the findings of many other competent testers. The IQ (i.e. including file quality) the X113 produces are excellent. If there was no Sony RX1(r), the X113 would set the IQ gold standard among fixed prime lens compact cameras (the Sigma DP2 Merrill and Quattro who wipe the floor with anything Bayer under certain conditions do not come with a 35mm equivalent lens). Enough said.
We like Leicas, we just don't have enough money...:)
Those Ming Thein samples are something to look at.
There are better cameras on the market and a lot cheaper too
I hate these rip of companies. and Leica is the biggest rip of going
rebadging cameras then double the price plus.
some people need to be educated!!!!!!!
No rebadging here.
This lens is not available on another camera.
Fuji XT1 + 23mm Fuji lens is in the same price neighborhood, and optically, we can be pretty sure, the Leica's lens is better.
Okay the X100T, but the lens isn't as good, and is f/2.0, though f/2.0 at all focusing ranges. Right the Fuji has a good VF built in.
Never seen more flat images in my life.
I agree, I would love a Leica M9, but not a Leica X judging by the image quality.
It seems to me Leica are not getting the best of the deal with Panasonic if they can't source a descent EVF, I don't mind them enveloping the lens performance WRT maximum apature settings but that should be clear in their marketing also
They make beautiful Camears and this is one. that also stand out as great desingn against any manufactured product what ever it is . Leica is benchmark for industrial design. but they need a better technology exchange from theier marketing agreement with Pana, and get Sony sensors for Petes sake!
For whatever reason, and I think it a mistake, Leica is resisting built-in EVFs.
The external EVF is indeed far more than decent.
X is like fine dress leather shoes; lovely when walking slow pace in the city during a sunny day, but a nuisance when raining, snowing, when in the great outdoors or when one needs to run or walk very long distances.
I presume if Leica wanted to make a really good, sturdy, excellent performing and dependable photographer's camera within its X series and 35mm lens, they would endanger their M line and 35 mm cron/lux lens in particular.
Then, suddenly, those $2800 will be just a fine price to pay by any reviewer.
Where do people get this $2800 price claim? It retails for $2300, and it has shipped and been selling at that price for a least a couple of weeks.
The headshot of Sam Spencer is nice and has really amazing image quality. ;)
shot with a Panasonic Lumix GM5 ;)
What ever happened to the trusty, wonderful 50mm "normal" lens? The 50mm focal length used to be my most useful lens by far. It was great for most of my shooting situations and gave me the best quality images. Why is it being ignored these days? Why has it fallen out of favor? It just gets no respect.
35mm was pretty normal on Leica M bodies and this is pretty much the APSC version of a 35mm FF lens.
Samsung NX has a 30mm f2.0.
Fuji X has a 35mm f1.4.
Olympus has 25mm lens for the m4/3s system.
Those are all basically FF 50mm lenses, don't start with the DoF points.
The fact remains that many photographers shot Leica Ms with 35mm lenses, almost exclusively.
I also suspect different people concentrate their vision differently, I'm not implying an active choice here. But more like some people see/focus on a wider field than others.
And Olympus has got a lens thats equivelant to 35mm as well, so does canon, sony & nikon so whats your point?
Okay, but this isn't really a review, and there are no DNGs.
It doesn't claim to be a review.
DNGs from our test scene will be available soon.
Above is a post the website decided to double and post in separate locals.
And anyhow it's a sort of a problem that for example the Saab is not available as a DNG. (Also with the right software, the Saad jpeg can be worked so the shadowed bumper is easy to see and the sky is not blown--here PhotoShop CS6 is not the best.)
I have DNGs I've already shot with this camera, though I'm happy enough to look at the test scene examples too. Albeit this sensor is basically a known quantity.
I suspect Leica is using a little marketing white lie regarding the smaller apertures at closer distances. This behavior is the hallmark of a lens that extends from the camera at it's rear element to yield closer focus distances. You see this behavior in macro lenses. Leica may be doing the same thing with this lens, sacrificing aperture for distance. If so, there isn't any way to get around it and it is a bit disingenuous to say the camera is doing this to help the photographer get the sharpest image quality.
I think the reviews may be valid but I do not own or used the Leica X. I use DSLR's for event photography but I do own a Leica M8.
People who are enthusiastic about photography sort of expect a Leica to be special and this is where Leica have failed with the latest X camera. It undeniably looks great but in use it disappoints the reviewers who had high expectations.
My M8 is very outdated now but I absolutely love using it. To me it takes me back to how photography should be - you almost feel connected to the images it takes. Used with care the image quality is fantastic but it lacks the versatility of a modern camera.
If I take a bad picture with it I know it's my fault !!
What reviewers are you referring to? The ones above? Those are minor notes.
And what DNGs have you seen and extracted from this X?
Then with that DNG, can we get the same shot for download, taken at exactly the same time, with the Fuji XT1 and the Fuji 23mm lens--RAF of course?
To David Wentworth:
"a 35 mm equivalent f/1.7. The camera would not allow me shoot at f/1.7 when within a certain distance to a subject. Instead, the aperture would automatically "correct" to f/2.2 or f/2.8, even when in full manual mode."
I suspect that it is the same reason why did East Germany Jena Zeiss do the same thing with some of their lenses (2.8/35mm Flectogon and 3.5/135mm Sonnar at least). And the reason is simple: as you focus closer and closer, your lens moves further from film/sensor surface becoming "a longer focal length, while diameter of the hole ("aperture") that passes light to the sensor remains same. The ammount of light that reaches sensor is reduced. That is also why 2.8 macro lens when set to 1:1, becomes actually f5.6 (in other words, you`ll need for 2EV longer exposure).
Isn't the lens internal focussing? If so, there is no extension/bellows factor to worry about like with an old extending macro.
He said the effective focal length changes, not the external length of the lens.
Woops. I should have read your post before posting the same thing. This is a bit of marketing mumbo jumbo to hide a physical limitation of the lens.
Aperture of all lenses are marked for infinity focus. At all other distances the apertue becomes smaller. The question with this lens is if Leica is also stopping down the lens at the closest settings.
Formula is 1/F=1/O+1/I
F=F stop, O=object distance, I=Image distance (how far lens is from focus plane.)
Of course there are plenty of lenses that don't reduce their aperture at closer focal lengths (pretty much all lenses besides macro lenses) so this formula doesn't hold up.
The size of the aperture does not change. But when any lens is focused closer its focal length increases, so its f stop gets smaller. Light falls off at the square of its distance. So by the time a lens is extended to a 1:1 ratio, the falloff will be 2 stops compared to the same lens focused on infinity.
I am not sure if the Leica X lens in question is simply illustrating this fact or is additionally stopping the lens down to improve sharpness at close distances.
This is a 23mm lens that only focuses to 20cm (200mm). Macro lens optical rules would not apply. Neither focal length or extension would account for the described f-stop limits. For 1.5 stops, the focal length would need to grow as if a 1.7x converter were added.
The reviews mirror what other sites have stated. It never ceases to amaze me that a company such as Leica could turn out a product which is so esoteric. I don't believe I have ever seen one in use. This problem is not strictly Leica's. Canon has for years striven to produce digicams with wide appeal but always leave something out- be it a viewfinder (Optical or EVF) or a fast lens. The only company in solely my opinion, which has time and again succeeded in bringing out digicams with the widest possible appeal is Panasonic.
Fuji doesn't achieve highest possible appeal, but instead caters to a precise subset of photographers interested in vintage/classic ergonomics and high-IQ at the cost of modern conveniences. This is of course the exact mission Leica is famous for pursuing, and it's obvious why the two companies are so often compared.
It's kind of depressing that Leica can't seem to "keep up" with a company (Fuji) that is "cloning" it's style. Would be nice to have both companies put out excellent cameras and compete.
Still as a Fuji user it's a nice consolation to know that even Leica, given the opportunity to charge whatever they want, is unable to actually do better than Fuji's cameras which are a fraction of the price and have an ever-growing collection of lenses for all occasions and price points.
Fuji's best lenses don't match the optical performance of good Leica lenses.
It's way simplistic to think of Fuji being an easy substitute. And the Zeiss lenses for the Fuji X system aren't real exciting.
Really only leaving some heavy+big Samsung NX lenses to come real close to good Leica lenses, but those don't mount on Fuji cameras.
But of course you can always mount Leica (or Zeiss) M lenses on say a Fuji XT1 and focus manually.
I don't because of the prohibitive cost of lens development.
Then that requires developing a large line of new lenses.
So "they should" is telling Fuji how to spend money Fuji may feel spent better elsewhere.
Let's hope Sony improves the AF of the RX2 and improves the colour--even in raw.
Surely you mean that you hope they improve on the AF on the RX1 as the RX2 isn't out yet?
Given this review, it sounds like it doesn't have much to beat on the AF front.
Even if it's the same, it's still full frame vs a crop and for me (I have a FF DSLR and M43 system) that will probably offer more scope for use over another crop system.
Right: "That the AF of the RX2 improves upon the not great AF in the RX1."
The Leica X (117) has AF a good bit better than the Sony. I've played with it and others agree that the Leica's AF is decent. No one thinks that of the RX1.
Then there are the RX1's colour problems.
I won't tell Fuji what they have to do, but what I want them to do, as a consumer that appreciate their products, as an owner of F10, S7000, X100 and X100s.
And clearly I dream of an X2 serie with full-frame sensor, as I am moving to full frame (D610 actually, maybe D750 or D810 later), and would like to have a full-frame on my messenger bag each and every day.
I think it unlikely.
I like what that D750 can do.
I`m not trying to defend the X113. But the professional`s "review" is rather a piece of snobbery than a real camera review. If he can`t get a decent file with a state of the art 16MP aps-c sensor than it might be not the tool`s shortcomings. This 16MP Sony sensor is as good as FF sensors were a few years back. Good enough, for sure for many pro uses. "Inadequate DNG files....". Really?
My I suggest you look at the Saab example towards the bottom of the page?
I too was surprised when I read David's comments but, having tried to play around with the Raw files, I'd agree with him entirely. The shadows appear to be recorded with limited bit-depth or something, since they posterize to a surprising degree.
My first thought, with the Saab photo? Is the exposure optimal (or are there already highlights that are clipped in the raw file)?
ekaton - too true,
if a professional photographer cannot get a good result from ANY modern digital camera, then that is the photographers fault.
Its not as if he has taken potentially great photos that the camera has mulllered. His exposure, framing, composition is terrible. Really bad. They look no better than instamatic snap shots.
There's an easy way to recover the front of Saab shadows in the jpeg using PhotoShop CS6.
And other software has features that are in some ways better than PS CS6.
Please, don't misinterpret what I wrote. Of course, there are differences between cameras; of course some are better than others (at different things).
So, it IS true. If you hand ANY modern camera (or any old camera that is capable, say an OM1) to a good photographer, you will get good results.
These photos are terrible and say more about the ineptitude of the photograhpers, than the quality of a camera.
I'd put money on it that a good photographer would get stellar results from this camera.
Maybe these photograhpers would be better if they framed and composed their shots better, exposed them better; thought about lighting, highlights and shadows; rather than trying to polish a turd in photoshop, then complaining they can't...
Maybe DPR could use decent photographers to field test their cameras? Or maybe that would be too expensive? The web is full of amateur photographers that produce stellar shots with much less capable equipment, that puts this rubbish to shame.
Thanks dpreview for publishing these reviews. Too many reviews on the interweb are thinly veiled fanboy regurgitation of extended lists of specifications. Real world use by real people gives a much needed perspective. I suspected this camera was a miss for Leica in reading the "spec-reviews" , but these gents really nailed it. Thanks for striving for more objective journalism.
I, too, take both users' perceptions as valid and perhaps illuminating shortcomings with this model.
That said, to expand on your point, I think cocksure declarations reducing Leica to a status symbol belies user experience, something which certain photographers greatly appreciate. Are they misguided in their appreciation, mindlessly adherent to the Leica mystique? Largely, no. I think they are drawn to the user experience, optics, color rendering, etc. And, I don't think it is inappropriate to suggest that detractors temper their criticism if they have not shot with a Leica.
Agreed. Sometimes I wonder what if the reviews were really done in a Double blind process, what would be the results. Brand names like Leica, Hasselblad, etc. carry so much emotion that trying to get unbiased user review is next to impossible.
At the end of the day the question is, "Does the tool help the artist deliver a more accurate rendition of his/her vision?"
I don't think that is a bad question, jefenniejr, but it is not the only question. "Do you enjoy using your camera?" is also a good question. Leicaphiles seem to value this question considerably. I don't own a Leica (can't afford one) but I do appreciate the simplicity and sometimes wish my 5Diii was less of a computer.
TIME Magazine has named the Sony a7R III one of its top 10 gadgets of 2017. It was the only camera that made the illustrious list this year, receiving high praise from TIME, who dubbed it "one of the best mirrorless cameras ever made."
Thanks to Google Assistant integration, the Pixel 2's AI-powered 'Google Lens' camera feature will soon be easier and quicker to use.
Photographer Jenna Martin and her model friend Rachelle Kathleen set themselves a challenge: could they create beautiful portraits in an 'ugly' location? So they went to a local Lowe's hardware store and gave it a go!
The LG V30 differentiates itself from the competition with an expansive video feature set and a secondary wide angle camera, making it something of a Swiss Army knife for content creators.
We're counting down our top 10 most popular sample galleries of 2017. Holding down the top position is none other than the Nikon D850 – by a landslide.
It's been twenty years since Jeff Keller founded the Digital Camera Resource Page, one of the first websites dedicated to digital photography. Jeff, who has been at DPReview for nearly five years, looks back at the rise and fall of consumer digital cameras and his website.
We're counting down our top 10 most popular sample galleries of 2017. At #2 we have another staff favorite – the Sony Alpha a9.
Rotolight has released the Anova Pro 2 circular LED for stills and video, boasting a 70% increase in brightness and what the company describes as "unrivaled battery performance."
Designer Vinicius Araújo has imagined what he believes the perfect Adobe software keyboard might look like. From customizable touch pads, to a scroll wheel, to a little display that shows the tool in use, his design is pretty compelling.
Peak Design has teamed up with Leica to release a limited-edition backpack made special for fans of the Red Dot.
A portrait of an android woman has beaten over 5,700 pictures of humans to take third place in this year's prestigious Taylor Wessing Portrait Prize. The judges were not told the subject was an 'android' until after the winning images were chosen.
Hauling around C-Stands just got a whole lot less annoying thanks to these new Matthews shoulder and roller bags, which can hold two or three C-stand (respectively) plus accessories.
Neal Preston has shot timeless photos of everyone from Led Zeppelin, to Whitney Houston, to Michael Jackson. In this interview, he offers insights into his craft to up-and-comer Elijah Dominique.
Future prosumer Canon DSLRs might feature light-up buttons, if this newly published patent is any indication of the camera company's plans.
Sony's a7R Mark III shoots 42.4MP files at 10fps and incorporates a robust video feature set, large battery, refined ergonomics and more. It certainly looks impressive, but what is it like to use, and how does it stack up against the rest of the market? Find out in our full review.
We're counting down our top 10 most popular sample galleries of 2017 – the Fujifilm X100F takes the bronze and the #3 spot.
There's never been a better time to shop for a new camera, but the number of options available can be overwhelming. In this series of buying guides we've provided customized recommendations for several use cases, from shooting landscapes to buying a first camera for a student photographer.
Shopping for a camera with a set budget? No problem! We've rounded up our favorite cameras, broken them into price brackets and picked the best of the bunch.
Looking for a lightweight compact camera that's easy to bring with you anywhere? Or maybe you're smartphone-shopping and want the one that takes the best picture. And what if you want to shoot from above? In these buyers guides we have recommendations for the best compact cameras, smartphones and drones.
Despite reports to the contrary, analysis of DPReview images by our friend Jim Kasson confirms a disappointing fact: Sony a7R III is still a Star Eater. But there may be some improvements.
As the saying goes: A photo is worth a thousand words. And if you're sending that photo through Facebook Messenger, your thousand words now look twice as nice after today's update to 4K resolution.
Get to know the new Leica CL in short order by giving our 90 second 'First look' video a watch.
Leica has just released the CL, the forth in its series of APS-C L-mount cameras. Despite sharing a name with a camera released in the mid-70s, the new CL is a thoroughly modern ILC, with a 24MP sensor and built-in electronic viewfinder.
The Leica CL is a 24MP rangefinder-style mirrorless camera, which sits alongside the TL2 in the company's APS-C lineup. We've been using one for a few days – check out our gallery of images.
While it shares a name with one of Leica's most popular and affordable cameras of the 1970s, the new CL is separated from its namesake by more than just years. We've been using one for a few days - click through for a detailed first-impressions report.
We're counting down our top 10 most popular sample galleries of 2017, and the #4 ranking goes to the Leica M10.
Sigma is discounting 13 different high-performance 'Art' series lenses from today until November 30th. The company is calling it an 'unprecedented' sale.
See DJI's 'AeroScope' drone-tracking technology in action. This is the system that DJI says can help law enforcement and airport (among others) track and identify rogue drones.
iPhone X owners can already accessorize their new phone with high-quality smartphone photography lenses courtesy of Moment's new lineup.
Considering buying Sigma's exciting new 16mm F1.4 DC DN Contemporary lens for crop-sensor E-Mount and M43? Check out these official full-res samples first!


text:
Fortescue Metals has forecast it will continue to cut operating costs as it ramps up output. It will also try to get customers to prepay for iron ore, helping to alleviate cash pressures. In the June quarter, cash costs fell to $US36.01 a tonne, down 17 per cent and coming in at the bottom end of market expectations of a range between $US36 and $US38 a tonne.
The decline was booked against a rise in June quarter shipments of iron ore to 25 million tonnes, which lifted fiscal 2013 volumes by 41 per cent to 80.9 million tonnes, it said.
In the month of June, the "shipping run rate" reached an annualised 120 million tonnes, which was 5 million tonnes ahead of expectations.
"We'd like to think we will do better than that," Fortescue chief executive Nev Power said of the cost performance.
During the quarter, production from its Firetail deposit was stepped up, with the focus shifting to tapping the Kings deposit, which may lift costs for a time before the benefits flow from the higher output. The addition of processing facilities would allow a further reduction in operating costs, Mr Power said.
Fortescue was critical of the pressure from smaller operators such as Brockman Resources, which has been seeking access to its railway network.
"We welcome third parties on our network," Mr Power said, pointing out that it had already shipped more than 11 million tonnes of ore for other miners. But at the same time, there was a need to allow the railway network to handle these shipments.
"Therefore any third party must pay their way," he said. "We're not proposing to subsidise uneconomic projects to get them up and provide a solution for them."
Fortescue maintained its optimism over the outlook for iron ore prices, which it expects to range between $US110 and $US130 a tonne. No minerals resource rent tax was payable during the June quarter, the company said.
"We're not seeing any MRRT in our future ... we haven't even booked the tax benefit that's available to us," a company official said.
Fortescue continued to hose down speculation of any imminent sale of equity in its port and transport assets, saying that it has "nothing further to add".
At the same time, it is continuing to seek prepayments from customers, which is helping to increase its cash stockpile, which stood at $2.2 billion at the end of June.
"A particular take-out was the fact that the cash cost at $US36.01 a tonne was lower than guidance," one institutional analyst said of the June quarter production report.
"Clearly, the lower Australian dollar-US dollar exchange rate at 95¢ versus parity helped, but it has also pulled out more costs than anticipated."
Another development for Fortescue was its success in blending output from its Chichester and Solomons deposits to produce a marketable product, the analyst said.


text: Welp, they lasted over 10 years but I think I've got a problem in one of my main speakers. I actually thought it was operator error last time I hooked em up, couldn't figure out why I was getting constant phase errors when I used Audessy on my 3806.... Well I moved houses and attached it to the new 3312CI with improved Audessy and it came back reporting the same thing! I got close to the speaker and sure enough only the tweeter is working and nothing is coming out of the woofers when music and movies play. It may have actually been damaged for 2-3 years and I lived with it this long due to having my sub handle most of the low end I guess.... So thinking of a few options: -buy a single replacement monitor 7 off ebay. Long shot I guess. -Try to have it repaired. Is that even possible? -buy a new pair of equivalent fronts from Paradigm and keep the rest of my speakers - Ooof would be over $800 I bet. Anyone have any other suggestions? Might it still be operator error somehow? Is there anything I can do to service it myself? I reseated the clamp holding the upper and lower binding posts together, any advantage to removing that and using one or the other set? It has something to do with the difference between 4 and 8 ohm ratings, right?