Leica photographers - the naked truth

[rknewcomb]

You missed my winky at the end of my comment ->

Yes I did, sorry about that.
Robert

 

[PerTulip]

What would the Internet be without its trolls?

Every single article featuring Leica: "I hate Leica!" and "I love Leica!"
Every single article featuring Apple products: "I hate Apple!" and "Apple ist the best!"
Every single article featuring a SUV: "I hate SUVs" and "My SUV is the best!"
....and so on.

Leica made decisions on the pricing of their products. We don't have to agree. They cleary market towards collectors and "lifestyle". So what, if they are willing to pay for it, Leica would be dumb to offer the cameras for half the price. Will I buy a Leica: no. Would I buy a Leica if they were half the price: yes, maybe. Do I hate Leica: no.

 

[Pieter12]

Leica made decisions on the pricing of their products. We don't have to agree. They cleary market towards collectors and "lifestyle". So what, if they are willing to pay for it, Leica would be dumb to offer the cameras for half the price. Will I buy a Leica: no. Would I buy a Leica if they were half the price: yes, maybe. Do I hate Leica: no.

Leica at least substantiates their high prices with high quality, limited production products. They are just not willing to succumb to making mass-market equipment. It always surprises me to see folks using second-rate optics on Leica cameras (not that there aren't first-rate alternatives). The camera itself is nothing without the superb Leica glass.

 

[NB23]

Leica at least substantiates their high prices with high quality, limited production products. They are just not willing to succumb to making mass-market equipment. It always surprises me to see folks using second-rate optics on Leica cameras (not that there aren't first-rate alternatives). The camera itself is nothing without the superb Leica glass.

Me too. How and why do people mess with cheap lenses is beyond me. You will never see me play with a holga, a cheap 17mm plastic lens, or whatever else.

There’s nothing special about coming up with an ok/acceptable image with cheap glass. Nothing heroic about it.
Like, what do I care if you come up with an image made with a Lomo minitar. Yeah, so? Need applause?

The drama, however, is that every shot one makes with cheap glass is a shot not made with good
Glass. Just like with anything else: every moment spent with bad quality is a moment NOT spent with good quality.

End of story.

 

[btaylor]

Leica at least substantiates their high prices with high quality, limited production products. They are just not willing to succumb to making mass-market equipment. It always surprises me to see folks using second-rate optics on Leica cameras (not that there aren't first-rate alternatives). The camera itself is nothing without the superb Leica glass.

Uh, a Leica with a lens other than "superb Leica glass" is a Leica with a different lens screwed onto it. Isn't that one of the perks? Gazillions of LTM and M optics out there by many makers to try for every taste and project? They all fit that very nice Leica body.

 

[PerTulip]

Leica at least substantiates their high prices with high quality, limited production products. They are just not willing to succumb to making mass-market equipment. It always surprises me to see folks using second-rate optics on Leica cameras (not that there aren't first-rate alternatives). The camera itself is nothing without the superb Leica glass.

Reminds me of the guy I saw back in the day with a brand new Nikon D3 (with the yellow "Nikon D3" strap) and a plastic kit lens.... :-D

 

[henryvk]

This been posted yet on this thread?

https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

 

[Jim Jones]

. . . The camera itself is nothing without the superb Leica glass.

Not necessarily so. Many photographers cannot justify the expense of Leica lenses in every focal length, and occasionally use lenses from other makers when needed. The Canon 50mm f/1.4 I used long ago for indoor sports was that important one stop faster than my Summicron, but good enough where getting the action was more important than an advantage in image quality. Also, the total reliability of one Leica body for 4 decades of heavy use was important. My Canon P and 7S that are little older than the Leica are long dead.

 

[removedacct1]

Me too. How and why do people mess with cheap lenses is beyond me. You will never see me play with a holga, a cheap 17mm plastic lens, or whatever else.

There’s nothing special about coming up with an ok/acceptable image with cheap glass. Nothing heroic about it.
Like, what do I care if you come up with an image made with a Lomo minitar. Yeah, so? Need applause?

The drama, however, is that every shot one makes with cheap glass is a shot not made with good
Glass. Just like with anything else: every moment spent with bad quality is a moment NOT spent with good quality.

End of story.

The sheer volume of judgement in these statements is astonishing. Your "my way or you're worthless" attitude is discouraging.

 

[btaylor]

The sheer volume of judgement in these statements is astonishing. Your "my way or you're worthless" attitude is discouraging.

Well, it’s just one person with an extremely limited view of the field of photography. Hit the ignore button and it goes away!

 

[faberryman]

There’s nothing special about coming up with an ok/acceptable image with cheap glass. Nothing heroic about it.
Like, what do I care if you come up with an image made with a Lomo minitar. Yeah, so? Need applause?

Are monkeys more likely to write the complete works of Shakespeare with better typewriters?

 

[NB23]

The sheer volume of judgement in these statements is astonishing. Your "my way or you're worthless" attitude is discouraging.

Incredible, eh? Still, I will repeat:
Every moment spent with bad quality is a moment not spent with good quality.

You are free to understand this any way you like.

 

[Robert Maxey]

Not necessarily so. Many photographers cannot justify the expense of Leica lenses in every focal length, and occasionally use lenses from other makers when needed.

I went the other way. I bought Yashica cameras because i thought the RTS was a tad too expensive. i wanted the Zeiss optics. Even then, i would not spend big dollars for some Zeiss lenses. I bought a 500 MM Yashica mirror lens because the Zeiss version was a tad costly. Oddly enough, I never used the lens. Not once.

Bob

 

[NB23]

Are monkeys more likely to write the complete works of Shakespeare with a better typewriter?

They will surely enjoy themselves much more. Better experience throughout.

And yes, the better typewriter likely won’t break halfway through their book, as opposed to the low-quality typewriter... Which, in turn, will end up with a finished book with a least a few recognizable words. A game of probabilities which favors the good typewriter for sure.

The chances are vastly greater that the monkeys will type a better book, throughout, with the better typewriter.

If the monekeys were a metaphor for people copying shakespeare’s work, word for word, then yes, the good typewriter will be a much better suited tool. Why you ask, is there any doubt?

So my answer is a solid yes. Final answer.

 

[Robert Maxey]

Are monkeys more likely to write the complete works of Shakespeare with better typewriters?

Yes. They are switching from Royals to a Selectrics, because monkeys type really fast. These days, they write adult novels because there is more money in it and Francis Bacon, I mean Shakespeare has fallen out of favor.

Bob

 

[faberryman]

They will surely enjoy themselves much more. Better experience throughout.

And yes, the better typewriter likely won’t break halfway through their book, as opposed to the low-quality typewriter... Which, in turn, will end up with a finished book with a least a few recognizable words. A game of probabilities which favors the good typewriter for sure.

The chances are vastly greater that the monkeys will type a better book, throughout, with the better typewriter.

So my answer is a solid yes. Final answer.

Whooosh.

 

[NB23]

Whooosh.

Exactly, good point you are making here, sir.

Whoosh, Deep Purple’s last (and excellent) album involves Great musicianship, executed with the best possible equipment available to men.

No fisher Price guitars, pianos and microphones, in Whoosh! No sir!

 

[removedacct1]

They will surely enjoy themselves much more. Better experience throughout.

And yes, the better typewriter likely won’t break halfway through their book, as opposed to the low-quality typewriter... Which, in turn, will end up with a finished book with a least a few recognizable words. A game of probabilities which favors the good typewriter for sure.

The chances are vastly greater that the monkeys will type a better book, throughout, with the better typewriter.

If the monekeys were a metaphor for people copying shakespeare’s work, word for word, then yes, the good typewriter will be a much better suited tool. Why you ask, is there any doubt?

So my answer is a solid yes. Final answer.

Pathetic. Its very obvious that you simply enjoy pissing people off. That's your prerogative, of course. But you're back on ignore, bucko.

 

[NB23]

Pathetic.

I’ve got a hater! The sign that I must be doing something good.

Wait, I am maybe mistaken.
Please correct me if I’m wrong. We are talking about Leica users and owners, not about students or people in a dire economical situation, right?

Please mister paulbarden, why would someone who owns a perfect summicron decide not to use it, and favor a Yongnuo 50mm instead? Please stay in the Leica realm. Don’t stray with your preconceived hatred against me.

 

[MattKing]

I'm trying to figure out how I can say the following in a post that makes everything sound like a Barry White voice:
"If you kids don't quiet down, we are going to turn around and go right back home!"
No religious (Leica vs. everything else) arguments please.

 

[NB23]

“Yongnuo” with a Barry White voice is pretty weird, I agree.

I'm trying to figure out how I can say the following in a post that makes everything sound like a Barry White voice:
"If you kids don't quiet down, we are going to turn around and go right back home!"
No religious (Leica vs. everything else) arguments please.

 

[fdonadio]

The drama, however, is that every shot one makes with cheap glass is a shot not made with good
Glass.

What about the shots made with @Sirius Glass ?

 

[fdonadio]

Every single article featuring Leica: "I hate Leica!" and "I love Leica!"
Every single article featuring Apple products: "I hate Apple!" and "Apple ist the best!"
Every single article featuring a SUV: "I hate SUVs" and "My SUV is the best!"
....and so on.

I guess what the OP had in mind (I’m too lazy to get back and check now) is not about Leica (the company) or its products being good or bad.

The problem (as I see) is the possibly small share of Leica users that think they are themselves better than the other photographers because they own a Leica.

I think discussing Leica product quality is pointless. They are some of the best cameras one can buy, but since I can’t afford them, I’m happy to use my Nikons. If I could afford a Leica, I would probably have one by now.

Just 2 more of my cents…

 

[PerTulip]

...The problem (as I see) is the possibly small share of Leica users that think they are themselves better than the other photographers because they own a Leica.…

I guess Leica attracts some Uber-Gearheads. I have noticed some Leica owners in my own surroundings who always try to steer the conversation towards the superiority of their gear.

....They are some of the best cameras one can buy...…

Depends on what "best" is for you. I shoot a lot of wildlife and sports, so Leicas are not even close to being "good". :-D

 

[removedacct1]

I guess Leica attracts some Uber-Gearheads.

IE: snobs