Leica trots out D-LUX 4, C-LUX 3 and M8.2 digital cameras

We'll be straight with you -- we're still struggling to wade through Google's machine translation of a few Polish releases, but the long of short of it is that Leica has finally announced the long-expected M8.2, D-LUX 4 and C-LUX 3. All the good stuff (pricing, ship dates, availability regions, etc.) seems to be missing, but the Leica faithful won't mind paying a translator to figure out what the links below really mean.

Read - D-LUX 4 and C-LUX 3
Read - M8.2

[Thanks, Peer]

[Hoghdtr @ Sep 13th 2008 12:40AM]

Oh snap!

[apple fanboy @ Sep 13th 2008 12:46AM]

i dont understand whats so special about these cameras? any help without starting a flame war?

[TTP @ Sep 13th 2008 1:29AM]

Leica's are well known for their manual camera's exemplary reliability and optics. Their lenses have been the gold benchmark since the 1950's.

[fh @ Sep 13th 2008 1:54AM]

f/0.95 lens (the new noctilux)

If you understand that, you understand the incredible appeal (and corresponding pricetag) of Leica. If not, chances are these cameras aren't for you.

[Liam @ Sep 13th 2008 5:03AM]

Their cameras are solid enough to last a lifetime, and their glass is pretty much second to none. Added to all that, they look very smart and are relatively compact.

[Josh @ Sep 13th 2008 6:08AM]

@ Liam

"they look very smart"

I don't doubt that this is a nice camera and well made... but it looks ugly as sin. To me it looks like one of those old disposable Kodak cameras just without the yellow cardboard covering the middle.

@ omegamale

I own a Nikon D200 and I guess I fall under the "some bulky plastic spaceship penis extension". I love my camera (as well as the way it looks) and I guess I need some hands on time with this Leica but in all honestly it does not look comfortable to hold for more than a few minutes.

[Jason @ Sep 13th 2008 9:59AM]

A friend of mine has the M8, and it's an AMAZING camera. Just search Flickr for M8 photos to see for yourself. This little bugger takes shots that make a D3 look like a Polaroid. OK, maybe that's an exaggeration, but you can get a F.95 lens for this thing (although that lens is $12,000) which means a camera with light sensitivity that's better than the human eye. You can light your scene with a candle.

It's a hardcore camera for sure, you'll need $8-10K to get into it, and it doesn't come with auto-focus.

[Jim F @ Sep 13th 2008 10:41AM]

For me, it's all about the viewfinder. Modern DSLRs (with the exception of the D3/D700, 1ds Mark III, and with all likelihood the A900) simply do not have viewfinders that will allow me to manually focus an image with any sort of consistent success. I'm used to the viewfinders on old film SLRs (before the days of autofocus) and medium format cameras (a *joy* to focus and compose an image with, but *heavy* and big). My DSLR is a K10D, which has a pretty decent viewfinder compared to other cameras in its range -- but I just can't use my lenses in manual focus mode without some trial and error and a lot of thrown-away shots.

The M8 has an always-bright viewfinder (it's a dedicated finder, you are not looking through a lens) with lines to mark the framing of common focal lengths -- no zoom lenses here, you are dealing with fixed focal lengths, with the exception of their 16-18-21mm Tri-Elmar. To focus the camera you have a brighter area in the center of the finder, which shows a double image (imagine being *really* drunk, seeing double, hit on the head -- whatever, this is what it's like). Line the two images up by adjusting focus on the lens. This style of focusing takes a little bit of getting used to, but once mastered is a hell of a lot faster than a traditional spit-prism focusing screen found in film SLRs or the horrid focusing screens found in modern DSLRs.

There is an advantage to rangefinder optics that allows for more compact lenses. There is no mirror box, so the film/sensor plane and the back of the lens can be really close. This makes wide-angle lens designs much easier. I have a 35mm f/1.4 lens for my M8 (figured in for a penny, in for a pound -- and glass is not something that goes down in value if I ever needed to sell the camera to pay the real bills) that is big by rangefinder standards, but much smaller than most SLR lenses. I have a 21mm f/4 (the Voigtlander -- very nice, inexpensive wide-angle option) that is super-tiny.

Hope that answers your questions. I love the aesthetics of the M8, as well as the ergonomics (when used with the optional grip) -- it's about the same size as my Pentax ME, which is a nice tiny film SLR, and I think the sensor quality is great -- especially if you are going to use it for B&W images. (ISO 1250 makes a very pleasing, to my eye, noise pattern that looks like grain on B&W images)

[steezy @ Sep 13th 2008 1:00AM]

yay, but i want prices

[TTP @ Sep 13th 2008 1:29AM]

probably around $6k for the M8.2

[SFO Kevin @ Sep 13th 2008 3:03AM]

About $8k for the body and that Noctilux .95/f is $11K...

[xValentine @ Sep 13th 2008 1:07AM]

So..

When will Leica starts to move on and make more appealing camera designs ?

[sean @ Sep 13th 2008 1:37AM]

they already are.

[jordan turpentine @ Sep 13th 2008 1:57AM]

what are you talking about? these are some of the most appealing designs out today. They are a great contrast to the lumpy completely plastic looking dslrs of today.

and to the guy about the lens, it is an excellent hood on there that show the camera has internal focussing and that hood won't let in any nasty flair.

[SFO Kevin @ Sep 13th 2008 2:57AM]

I'll take my beautiful hand made piece of hand made German engineering over some assembly line like borg appendage any day...

[omegamale @ Sep 13th 2008 3:53AM]

i don't understand how some people just aren't 'getting' the design of these cameras.

this companies aesthetic on digital cameras is bloody bespoke!

really hardcore looking.

"a man's camera" if you like...

not some bulky plastic spaceship penis extension.

i'm considering a kill for one of these bitches

[BrotherhoodOfNod @ Sep 13th 2008 1:52AM]

Yikes, who hit this one with the Ugly Lens? Seriously...

But hey, functionality over form, I guess.

[CJ @ Sep 15th 2008 9:09AM]

Yes, functionality over form.

Last time I looked, the external asthetics of a camera came second to what said camera is capable of, especially from such a venerable company as Leica.

If you need your camera to look 'amazing', then you're probably not going to get one of these anyway, because you probably don't have any knowledge of photography beyond 'the lens points in that direction, and the button up the top make the picture happen'.

[fh @ Sep 13th 2008 1:52AM]

I've been wanting the M8 ever since it came out.

Just... way too expensive for me :/

[Kenjis9965 @ Sep 13th 2008 2:08AM]

I one day hope to own a leica

Why? Because they're not just useful photographic tools, they're fricking beautiful to look at...and you get the advantages of a rangefinder system...

[671GD @ Sep 13th 2008 2:41AM]

Wow, that is one atrocious looking hunk of plastic.

[Martlark @ Sep 13th 2008 5:04AM]

This looks like a serious camera. Pull this out and people will immediately strike a pose. All nature will become misteyed and fog trousered.

[SFO Kevin @ Sep 13th 2008 2:53AM]

Sorry to say that's not plastic...
That is $15K of handmade (By GERMAN hands) metal and honed crystal...

[DarkLight @ Sep 13th 2008 3:04AM]

Well, I'll get low-ranked too

Yeah this thing is FUGLY......

I understand and appreciate the functional part (for the M8.2), but, if you think it looks good, your brain must be stuck in 1950

[gad get @ Sep 13th 2008 3:32AM]

@ SFO Kevin

Wow, that is one atrocious looking $15k hunk of German-handmade metal and honed crystal.

Better?

[Haro! @ Sep 13th 2008 2:46AM]

I so wanted the silver M8 and now there is an M8.2. I'd totally spend the thousands of dollars I'd have to pay for one, these things are beautiful and top quality.

[gad get @ Sep 13th 2008 3:34AM]

You'd think such a precision-made, technologically advanced camera could stand to have some ergonomics.

[gad get @ Sep 13th 2008 3:37AM]

...And maybe just a hint of aesthetic sensibility about it.

[kidcanuck @ Sep 13th 2008 4:04AM]

There's something nostalgic about the design, and as a photography enthusiast, I can definitely say that the Leica design is timeless. They have been using that general form factor forever, it's iconic. They won't change it because when someone sees a camera like that, they know it's a Leica. The bottom line is that it's not built around ergonomics, or flashy sex appeal, it's built around functionality, and to a lot of people, it's a thing of beauty. If you don't like it, get something else.

[gad get @ Sep 13th 2008 4:38AM]

"The bottom line is that it's not built around ergonomics, or flashy sex appeal"

Since when is ergonomics in the same category as flashiness? Ergonomics is VERY important! How can you expect to reach the full potential of the camera or the artist, when the camera isn't as comfortable to hold as it could be? How does one take great pictures when one's hand is sore from an awkward grip? How can you enjoy using a camera with the ergonomics of an old point-and-shoot?

"it's built around functionality"

Ergonomics is a part of that.

"If you don't like it, get something else."

Like most photographers, I most certainly will.

[kidcanuck @ Sep 13th 2008 5:17AM]

I wasn't grouping ergonomics with flash, hence the or, and I guess the ergonomics part is something I mis-stated. I can't definitely say, considering I don't own one, but they are supposed to be quite comfortable to use. Famous photographers like Alfred Eisenstadt, one of the most prolific photojournalists of all time (the picture of the sailor kissing the girl), used an M3. If there is a more demanding (physically) discipline of photography than photojournalism, I can't think of one. I'm just saying that there is a reason that Leica is held in relative high regard, as far as camera manufacturers go- solid construction, ease of use, lens precision, the pros of a rangefinder, namely few moving parts, and faster flash sync, and ultimately, image quality.

Also, another commenter said something about this being a re-brand of a panasonic camera, and I am not totally positive but I think only the c-lux and d-lux lines are re-brands, the M8 is not.

[gad get @ Sep 13th 2008 7:44AM]

OK, I cannot believe I'm about to say this, but... the more I look at that camera, the more the look grows on me. To the point now where I actually, genuinely, LIKE the looks of it. I'm not just saying that; it's grown on me that much already. Who knew?

I'm still having a hard time seeing past the lack of a grip, though. The styling is classic and elegant, certainly, but I still think it looks like it's gotta be rather uncomfortable to use. If they just added a grip on it... Then I think I could actually love it. Not that I could afford it anyway, so I guess I don't need to worry. :P

[Lukino @ Sep 13th 2008 8:28AM]

I had the chance to try an M, and even with my big hands I feel those cameras are far more comfortable than actual DSLR. Lenses are lightweighed compared to to classical reflex ones, so camera stands balanced in hand. Anyway, there are lot of Leica and third-parties made hand grips, for those who like (well, it might be useful with longer lenses)

[SFO Kevin @ Sep 13th 2008 1:32PM]

No worry Get Gad... the grip is a $300 add on... We LOVE Leica!!!...

[kornelt @ Sep 13th 2008 4:02AM]

these are again just rebrands of the lumix line with a slightly better lens and software. Availability is october this year. And expect to pay a premium over the panasonic equivalents.

[pizzicato @ Sep 13th 2008 5:42AM]

Would you be so kind to inform us what this Leica has in common with a Lumix at all?

[Kornel @ Sep 13th 2008 6:17AM]

Sure. Panasonic makes these compacts for Leica. The Leica D-LUX 3 is basically the same device as the Panasonic LX2. The difference is in software, a slight cosmetic change, and I believe a slightly different lens. The D-LUX 4 has matching specs to the LX3. Its the same with the C-LUX, it has a corresponding model in the Lumix line. Happy? :)

[9lives @ Sep 13th 2008 12:14PM]

Unfortunately, the rebadges don't get a better lens. The entire camera is Panasonic built with little exception other than the red dot. What you do get is a far better warranty and always at least $100 more worth of software in the box.

You also get a Leica branded battery and charger that, if you must insist on purchasing, you will sacrifice your pension for; while the Panasonic versions of the same battery and charger will suit it fine.

I love Leica and have sold them for 12 years and we fell for the hype when the original C-Lux and D-Lux came out. Now we know better. EXACT same camera, with cooler stuff in the box.

[SFO Kevin @ Sep 13th 2008 1:36PM]

We are talking about the M8 here not all that mass produced crap that is on the other side of the velvet rope...

[kash @ Sep 13th 2008 4:12AM]

All the nay-sayers will certainly change their minds and be wowed with a hands-on experience.

[arash @ Sep 13th 2008 6:14AM]

there is something you dont understand and thats it: its no matter how ergonomic or fashionable it looks to you,no matter how much is it resolution,price is not anything here. when you hold a leica in your hand your shot will seems just like what a leica did.

[Lenneth @ Sep 13th 2008 6:16AM]

Wow these models look amazing. I don't mind the looks as functionality is more important to me. I would consider upgrading to it depending on if my next purchase is a dslr or not.

[Arkenklo @ Sep 13th 2008 6:22AM]

Is that for real? It's fucking ugly.

[tha-don @ Sep 13th 2008 6:37AM]

D-LUX sounds a lot cooler than C-LUX.

[gad get @ Sep 13th 2008 7:46AM]

D-LUX... Deluxe!

C-LUX... clucks?

[Patrick @ Sep 13th 2008 7:11AM]

Beautiful camera, no question. But in the digital age I'm really wondering if this is anything else than just a pure luxury product.

In the analog age I would've really thought about buying one of these. A camera for your lifetime, good investment into nice optics.

But today this is different. Here, it's not just the film material that gets better but the whole camera (the sensor). The value of this device will degrade much quicker in the digital age.

Don't get me wrong, I really like Leica. Never owned one, would like to, but it just doesn't make any sense to me today.

[Freakin Ijit @ Sep 13th 2008 8:15AM]

> ...The value of this device will degrade much quicker in the digital age....

That's a key point.

The only thing this camera has going for it is the historically-important name and the lens.

And you can get Leica lenses on other cameras like, say, from Panasonic.

But the CAMERA part of the camera is literally not worth the extra bucks.

[letstakeawalk @ Sep 13th 2008 12:04PM]

@ Freakin ljit

You obviously haven't priced Leicas on Ebay. I've had two Panasonic Lumix, and based on the images their Leica lenses can produce, I've begun to lust after a used Leica. They hold their values very well, so I might have to save up for a while.

[SFO Kevin @ Sep 13th 2008 1:43PM]

Leica is innovative in one way I wish others would emulate... I can send them my M8 (Previous model)... and they will upgrade it to an 8.2 by disassembling it and installing the upgraded parts... How many other manufacturers do that?...

[Kizul Emeraldfire @ Sep 13th 2008 1:01PM]

…am I the ONLY one who thinks that these cameras actually look cool?

Looks aside, if I had the money — I would TOTALLY get one of these. No clue (yet) as to exactly what I'd take pictures of, but I would SO get one. o.o