[Clamchop]

Price sensitivity re: children and breaking things is going to depend on financial situation and intention. This is a person that shoots a $10k Leica, so I'm going to guess there's more than enough money and a strong intent to share an "authentic" photography experience (a camera of traditional form) with their kids. The latter appears to be this camera's gimmick.

They describe this camera as "cheap" even!

[0_____0]

The Kodak Brownie addressed exactly this issue and was released 125 years ago!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak_Brownie

[neepi]

He should try some of the new ass end mirrorless cameras that are designed to be cameras and not fashion accessories. That might scare him off his Leica and this turd.

[999900000999]

Leica is obviously social signalling.

He gets to let us know he REALLY cares about photography.

Photography is ultimately subjective anyway, if he feels a 10k camera worth it that's cool.

IMO if your new wait for a sale or buy someone else's failed ambitions off eBay. I'm no pro but plenty of very capable cameras can be had under 1000$. The lenses are the expensive parts

[petre]

> Leica is obviously social signalling.

I used to think that as well until I got one of their lenses for m43. It's a niche market which Fuji also captured quite well.

[ninjin]

I think it is fair to mention the aspect of Leicas being fashion accessories, but it is equally unfair to pretend that they are just fashion accessories. Let me try to explain.

If what you are looking for is image quality (especially when considering quality per pound spent) Leica is not where you should be looking. However, they fill a very unique niche: small(-ish) and light(-ish), full-frame sensor, and operation that is nearly identical to a film rangefinder. What does this mean? It means that you can have a system where you shoot the same lenses, filters, etc. on both digital and film bodies and the cameras and lenses will behave the same way. This, in addition to me subjectively liking the way that rangefinders operate, is why I have a digital Leica. Although I unashamedly shoot Voigtländer and Zeiss film bodies (both made by Cosina in Japan) as they are compatible and come at a fraction of the cost of a film Leica. Before I head out, I ask myself: "Do I feel like film or digital today?" and then I pick the body, my favourite 50mm lens (because to me, that lens is so important that it dictates the rest of my system), and off I go.

You are correct that mirrorless cameras in many ways is where "the game" is right now, but do not make the mistake to counter the foolish Leica elitism with an equally foolish elitism of your own. As a photographer your aim should be to have a setup that works for you, to realise your vision, and while my setup works for me and my digital/film setup, I readily recommend others that do not care about film to explore the mirrorless Fujifilm X-series as they are fun to shoot and price effective. If you want to explore film, the sensible thing is to just pick up an old point-and-shoot or SLR before you invest into a costly system as maybe you will not like film in the end?

As for the "Leica fashion" market, I am actually kind of thankful for it as a Leica shooter because it fills up the second-hand market so that I can get two or three generations old digital Leica cameras at less insane prices. Although what I really wish for is a cheaper competitor to Leica with a full-frame, M-mount, digital alternative so that I could dump Leica and still have my system work. For example, the Epson R-D1 from 2004 had better ergonomics than any digital Leica until the M10 was released in 2017, but 6.1 megapixels and a sensor that becomes borderline unusable over ISO 400 is sadly not viable unless you are going for some sort of retro-digital look. So, the "sane" digital Leica choice these days is likely a used M10 or maybe M10-R (or a Typ 240 if you are "poor", like me) and the M11 largely looks like a lot of money for next to no benefit (but I am thankful that it exists and drives down the prices of the digital Leicas I want to shoot).

[spaqin]

That's a lot of words to completely disregard the fact that autofocus M adapter exists for Z and E mounts, allowing you to keep the same lenses, but with AF on digital - see Techart. Nikon Z system cooperates best thanks to a thin sensor filter stack, not too far from Leica's.

On vacay I can carry a practical 24-120 zoom and a light M-mount 35mm for portraits or lower light situations, without the pretense.

[ninjin]

I just do not understand the hostility where all there is is different approaches. A charitable take (there are plenty) for example would be that I (like many) have about twenty years of legacy gear investment that I need to consider and/or was unaware of the rather recently introduced (2018?) Nikon Z system. You clearly have "a system" that works for you and that is great! Can you even get autofocus on a 1930s Elmar with that setup? Because would just be bonkers to think of from a technical perceptive.

Personally, I prefer to shoot manual to keep the operation the same between film and digital and I am fast and competent enough with a rangefinder patch that I do not feel that autofocus gives me that much and I only shoot primes (28 and 50mm). The Nikon Z system looks really interesting though, so thanks for bringing it to my attention. It is great to see innovation in this space that is not just Fujifilm; I will make sure to try my hands on one next time I am in one of the big camera stores.