You are correct, as after Oskar Barnack died the marketing men moved in to propagate the design with money signs in their eyes. The original concept was lost after about the 1950's to special editions, snakeskin coverings, gold versions, you name it. But let’s not forget the original concept that Oskar Barnack created. The early Leica’s were probably the finest cameras ever created in the history of chemical photography.
With the money from a sale of a Leica could one get hundreds of those Mickey Mouse cameras for example and really prove their stands.
You don't need hundreds of Mickey Mouse cameras. You just need one. And there is nothing to prove. Besides, scanning film really levels the playing field.
Are we still doing this?? Seriously???
Are we still doing this?? Seriously???
Meh, even a N65, N2020, minolta x-9, fm10, F601... will be easier to use and willl yield equal results most of the time.
It’s just that, once over 40 years old, One doesn’t want to fiddle with cheaporino stuff anymore (as a general rule).
Using a X700 was fun, it was cool to have access to such good quality for dirt cheap money, but there comes a time when a Honda motorcycle will not cut it anymore versus a Harley. Sure, Honda yadda yadda yadda but STFU once and for all, Y’all: a Harley is a Harley. a Leica is a Leica.
And blue jeans comes from the French "bleu de genes" or Genoese blue, a cloth used for Genoese sailor's clothing.No.
We've moved on. Now discussing the longevity of denim.
Speaking of... I was watching a Rick Steve's episode where he visited Provence. Did not know that denim was invented in Nimes. Hence the name. From Nimes.
And blue jeans comes from the French "bleu de genes" or Genoese blue, a cloth used for Genoese sailor's clothing.
It is remarkable how many non-Leica users rant on what they do not have and they might never have. Those that rant on their Leicas compared to other cheaper stuff they own, why don't they just sell their Leicas and buy a bunch of those cheaper ones. With the money from a sale of a Leica could one get hundreds of those Mickey Mouse cameras for example and really prove their stands.
Dungarees come from a region of India, Dungaree where they made dungaree trousers (work clothes / outside clothes as opposed to pants which are formal / slacks ( or undergarments depending on what part of the world you live ) )Hmm, now I'm wondering where dungarees came from.
D'ungari - from the Ungari I assume is way off.
I believe it comes from a Hindi word, the name of a village where cheap work clothes were made.Hmm, now I'm wondering where dungarees came from.
D'ungari - from the Ungari I assume is way off.
I thought Levi Strauss used denim in the ancestor of tractor pulls, "mule pulls" thus the tagNo.
We've moved on. Now discussing the longevity of denim.
Speaking of... I was watching a Rick Steve's episode where he visited Provence. Did not know that denim was invented in Nimes. Hence the name. From Nimes.
They've been making gold plated cameras covered in reptile skin since 1929, but I doubt the 'Leica as fashion brand' ever amounted to much until this century. Leica failed to keep up with autofocus cameras in the 90s and with digital in the early 21st century, and was in trouble by the time Andreas Kaufmann took over in the mid 00s. Leica was then reinvented as a less accessible luxury brand, complete with its own boutiques. The price of a bread and butter lens like the 35/2 rose by something like 80% in 5 years. The cost of the M film cameras went up and up. Once comparable to the price of a top of the range Nikon, by the time the F6 was retired last year, when it was selling for under £1500, the film Ms had reached a stratospheric £4100 (with or without a meter).You are correct, as after Oskar Barnack died the marketing men moved in to propagate the design with money signs in their eyes. The original concept was lost after about the 1950's to special editions, snakeskin coverings, gold versions, you name it. But let’s not forget the original concept that Oskar Barnack created. The early Leica’s were probably the finest cameras ever created in the history of chemical photography.
Fed 3 was my favorite Soviet rf. I just found it felt and worked better than all the others. A really excellent RF choice for little money.
If one is content with what he/she has, then why wining about others using something different?
The idea is that the possession of either one is a symbol of discriminating taste and better social standing, more disposable income, and snob appeal. They belong to a special "club." It has become a status and hipness symbol, even when not adorned in exotic animal skin or a special edition signature.think they are better photographers — or even better persons
T.. For instance, *some* Hasselblad owners/users also think they are better photographers — or even better persons, whatever that means — because they use a Hasselblad.
..
There was a question about the Fed 3 and Nikon S2/3?
Fed 3 was my favorite Soviet rf. I just found it felt and worked better than all the others. A really excellent RF choice for little money.
I prefer the Nikon S2 over the S3 because it has a clearer VF (like an M3 - just 50mm shows) and a better RF patch.
Problem w the S2 is that it has an awkward shutter speed dial.
Problem with the S3 is that it has that stooopid focus wheel, and aperture ring that rotates while you focus. (same for all Nikon rfs). You can manually focus with the lens, but should only do this slowly as it wears on the gears.
Someone mentioned a Konica RF? First off - how dare you Sir! (I actually love the design. Would get one if they didn't have that E error albatross). Loading an complete autoload camera is the easiest solution.
But of the manual load RFs, the Leica quickload is the quickest.
I have a Zorki 5 that I redid many years ago now. Replaced the shutter curtains and since the slowest speed was 1/25 I underwound the shutter springs so it would be 1/12 which is more useful. It is wonderfully quiet because of that. Nice camera now but I never use it. Lol. I also had a Fed 2 at one point. That was a nice camera. Simple. A Zorki 4 was a bit awkward and crude in comparison. I always wanted to pick up a Zorki 3m. That would be a fun camera I think.
The Hexar is worth having but, yeah, lottery. Lol. Mine has worked fine since I bought it maybe 13 years ago. I've worn the paint off it in some areas. I've used it alot. Can't beat titanium covers. Always wondered if Leica ever made a Titanium covered camera or if they were just titanium colored? For what they cost these days they should be titanium. If I could tell Leica to make a camera it would be like the Hexar but a Leica of course, If they did that then it would probably cost like 20 grand. lol.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?