Special edition Leica designed by Jonathan Ive and Marc Newson

A one-off to be sold at auction in November, the proceeds will go to AIDS, TB and malaria charities. Since the Leica M costs $7k in its normal incarnation, heaven knows what a special edition, cut by two designers so good they each received knighthoods, will go for! [Wired]

Looks kinda like a cheap bluetooth speaker.

Notable Replies

  1. jerwin says:

    More pics and a description of what's missing here.

    Apparently Ives and Newson decided that certain functional bits were superfluous. Considering that a Leica is meant to be used, the focusing tab might well be a serious oversight.

    (Apparently, on Leicas, the focusing tab allows the photographer to quickly focus with the thumb)

  2. An interesting piece of design. I am skeptical about it's usefulness as a tool.

  3. ish.. see, this is the problem with blender, (yeah, they're probably not using blender but...) ok, so, two cylinders, check.. one rectangular bit to stick them together, good, and a cylinder for the lens. done!

    this type of design is what i hate about the "new" beetles, it's a bunch of reeeally basic polygons stuck together and hit with the "smooth edges" function. where are the compound curves? where are the ergonomics? where is the sexy?

    leicas are not the most eye friendly cameras for sure, but cameras are freaking ugly by default (from a "design" standpoint, anyway) if they're made for taking photographs. this, this is just.. ehhhhhghhh... they need to get rid of the leica mark and just put "CAMERA" there in a big, generic font.

    the list of what was left out of this camera is telling as well, but the look kills it for me instantly. (not that i could afford it anyway, heh)

  4. Their lenses are very high quality, but if your eyes are satisfied with what your smartphone can do, I doubt you'd find it worth the money. It's one of those things (like an art degree) where after you educate yourself enough about the subject it seems worth it to buy the most expensive equipment... but the rest of the population wants to show you photos of their kids on a 3.5" LCD that were taken through a 2mm lens.

    I went to San Jose Camera and licked a Leica once. Astonishingly, they wouldn't let me keep it after that.

  5. I rock the Canon 5Dii with bits of film gear for various artistic reasons (medium format, Polaroid, etc).

    Any camera is going to be a compromise and based on what you consider important. I just met a guy who typically shoots with a Hasselblad digital camera but still takes out his Canon DSLR when he wants to carry less stuff. But the Hassy allows him to sell some shots that can be used on massive prints, so he usually uses that.

    Other people I know care more about sports or birds, so they need FPS and fast focus. Other people shoot music clubs and need fast lenses with low noise in high ISOs. I shoot architecture and night photos, so I like sensor size and lens flexibility. Having a little person around also means I don't have time to wait for the autofocus.

    The difference in your hawk photo example is what you do with the image after you take it. Putting it on a bus? You'll notice. Making a book? You'll notice. Putting it online with a matched resolution of 900x600? Not so much. So it's fit and feel AND what your goals with the image are.

    So the real question you need to think about before moving up is WHY you want to move up and what that means. Going out and spending two grand on a camera that's too big for you to want to use daily is no good. Spending three hundred on a camera that can't take decent photos of your kid inside is no good either. So what do you want to shoot and what do you feel like your cell phone camera limits you to?

Continue the discussion bbs.boingboing.net

12 more replies