• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

What fuel Leica hatred...

Much of the Leica R&D budget comes from these special editions cameras. Most Leica shooters are not going to buy the special edition cameras, but do benefit from the subsidized NRE cost of the next generation camera. It's a business model that has kept them going for a long time. So, that's how I think about it. I shoot mostly with the M9, M Monochrom, and M8 these days. The M Monochrom required a sensor replacement out-of-warranty, was done free of charge. Maybe someone bought a Lenny Kravitz camera with the price of my sensor folded into it. If so- thankyou.

Chip J- you are very welcome. I think your friend will like the 7Artisans lens. Have them post here or on Leicaplace if they have any problem with it on the M3DS. The newest versions should be revised for it- as Maxwell Smart said, "Missed it by THAT much". about a fraction of a millimeter in the case of my M3DS. The mount on the digital Leica's extend from the camera, the older M3DS- the mount is almost flush, the release has a collar around it, and the button is slightly bigger.
 
cramej said:
partly from knowing they make a huge profit
Click to expand...
Making profit is the goal of every company. Leica’s profit is surely decent, but I would question the fact that it is “huge”: they make cameras in low volumes with high quality standards. All this comes at at cost.

I think the hatred is a (stupid, if you ask me) natural reaction from some people who feel attracted by the product but cannot justify (or afford) spending this kind of money on one. We see the same with other brands or products, e.g. Nikon Df, or Apple computers, etc. I’m sorry, the “they are milking the poor consumer” argument simply does not work in my opinion. I am not trying to defend those companies, but no one forces anyone to buy.

Coming back to Leica’s price tag, a famous French comedian, Coluche, once said “As long as they find idiots who will pay for it” This is marketing 101. Find your market segment. Leica needed to move up market when facing with competition from Japanese camera makers who designed their products for a lower production cost. This brought them in the situation they are now. Others were not as successful (Franke & Heidecke went insolvent, Hasselblad was in trouble until very recently, etc.)

I doubt we will find “insane” product margins anywhere in the consumer industry, even in the high-end market segment. My advice to anyone who wants to criticize a company for their profit margins is to look elsewhere, pharmaceuticals, food, dinance, etc.
 
Why would I hate Leicas when I can and do own Hasselblads?
 
The problem stems from the snobs/narcissists who think their pictures are better because their camera cost more. They act like it too. Hate to tell you but the pictures you take of your cats with the Leica aren't any better than the ones you wife takes of the cats with her Nokia.

Not sure why people get so gear obsessed. I guess it is for a lack of talent? No one buys a Steinway then thinks they can go play at Carnegie hall. Really is bizarre.
 
The cameras with the more costly optics generally have better glass [Nothing beats a good piece of glass.], better coatings and better sharpness [MTF curves]. With the better equipment some potential problems are overcome, thus making it easier to get a better photographic image. Better equipment does not improve exposure decisions [where to put 18% gray, color balance, back light, fill-in flash, white on white, black on black, ...] nor improve composition. However, once the optical issues are improved, if the photograph is poor then the photographer can only blame themselves and are not allowed the luxury of blaming the equipment.
 
chip j said:
You want INSANE PRICING?--check out Hi-end audio!
Click to expand...

Buying high end used camera equipment is much less expensive than digital equipment. Check out the prices for used Leica, Rollei and Hasselblad film cameras.
 
How about a Stylus (needle) for 8 grand that has to be replaced regularly, or a pair of stereo speakers that weigh 600 lbs. each??
 
Sirius Glass said:
Buying high end used camera equipment is much less expensive than digital equipment. Check out the prices for used Leica, Rollei and Hasselblad film cameras.
Click to expand...
So we are back to the film is less expensive than digital argument. And used Leica is more expensive than almost anything else used, so I am not sure where you are going with it.
 
faberryman said:
So we are back to the film is less expensive than digital argument.
Click to expand...

Not an argument, just the facts of life. The cost of the computer upgrades and the software such as Fauxto$hop would greatly exceed the cost of my Zeiss lenses alone.
 
Sirius Glass said:
The cost of the computer upgrades and the software such as Fauxto$hop would greatly exceed the cost of my Zeiss lenses alone.
Click to expand...
Internet fairy tale. I haven't upgraded my desktop or laptop computers since 2011 (long before I bought my digital camera) and they are both still running LR/PS fine. I am even on the Creative Cloud subscription and it is less than two rolls of film a month. My biggest recurring expense is mat board for mounting my prints, and it is agnostic to film or digital.
 
Last edited:
I paid $18.50 ($30 including shipping) a few months ago for a Panasonic CF-52 Toughbook. In camera terms, about a KEH EX cosmetically and works perfectly. Put DOS and XP on it. DOS, using PharLap DOS extenders, running at 2.2GHz on a Core 2 with 4GBytes of memory is fast. The computer when new was over $3300. It's the same age as my M8. The build quality on the Toughbooks is 1st rate. I spent a lot of money on computers in the 1980s, $2500 for a CP/m computer, $2500 for an 8Mhz Leading Edge Model M, $3500 for a 6MHz 80286 Zenith Z-241. Of course I got paid to use them.

Too bad Digital Leicas don't depreciate as fast as the CF-52 did. After the M10 came out, you'd be able to get an M9 for $50 or an M240 for $100.

I need to be telling a lot of people that the M10 will make them better photographers, their pictures will be better, and they should dump all that old stuff while they can. My CF-52 would of course pay for an M10 for me, I still get paid to write code.
 
Leica just has a lot of nauseating sycophants. As a company they make a lot of fine products. They also make a lot of not so fine products, that still happen to be hugely expensive. Their blatant rebranding of Panasonic cameras is particularly egregious. I can't help roll my eyes when people I know ran out to buy the M-A as if the M4 doesn't already exist in large numbers. They were just itching to spend as much as they possibly could on a MP with the meter taken out. It's sort of like people who buy too many watches, cars, or guns. I probably "shouldn't" judge them, but I do.

Meanwhile my F6 is still the reigning 35mm champ. I don't care how sharp a 'Lux is. Sharpness is for suckers.
 

Not a fairy tale. I would have to upgrade my computer and buy the software, however since you are such a flippant arrogant know-it-all why don't you put your money were your mouth is and send me a check forthwith?
 
It seems the Leicaphools went out of control about the same time the red dot appeared.
But Leicaphools really aren't a patch on audiophools - my favorite item by far was the "pre tested" speaker fuses. The special wood knobs for volume controls were pretty good too.
 
Sirius Glass said:
Not a fairy tale. I would have to upgrade my computer and buy the software, however since you are such a flippant arrogant know-it-all why don't you put your money were your mouth is and send me a check forthwith?
Click to expand...
What sort of computer do you have now? Processor, RAM, hard drive? I have a Windows 7 machine that might fit the bill for you for the cost of postage.
 
Last edited:
Dali said:
Anyone who really loves Leica should be stunned by a brand that clearly maintains the ambiguity between real dedication to photography and unqualified flattery for a nouveau riche clientele. Sad.
Click to expand...
It's a pretty schizophrenic company these days. On the one hand they maintain an admirable focus system with a mechanical heritage into the digital era. On the other they sell pre-brassed bodies. Their sensors have a history of premature failure and quirky rendition, but enthusiasts talk about them as though they're discussing a Barnack.

Leica have always attracted people who want-the-best but wouldn't know a good photograph if it bit them on the @rse, but the tendency accelerated some time in the late 1980s/early 90s when their cameras and lenses became investment hedges. This tendency went into overdrive in the digital era, when the brand became a kind of insurance against the instant redundancy of a fledgling medium. Leica became a totem of instant kudos for every hipster and retro-grouch with a few thousand to throw at camera jewellery.

The problem is if you want a well made interchangeable lens rangefinder camera, there aren't too many choices that are better value on the used market, and none if you want a digital rangefinder. While ever that situation obtains Leica can charge what the hell they like and their fans will cough up for the privilege.
 
faberryman said:
What sort of computer do you have now? Processor, RAM, hard drive? I have a Windows 7 machine that might fit the bill for you for the cost of postage.
Click to expand...

Windows 7 is losing if not lost support so being vulnerable is hacking is a possibility. And the up to date software?
 
Sirius Glass said:
Windows 7 is losing if not lost support so being vulnerable is hacking is a possibility. And the up to date software?
Click to expand...

Microsoft will continue to support and provide security updates for Windows through January 14, 2020. I could install Lightroom 5.5 and Photoshop CS6. But I can tell you are not really interested.
 
faberryman said:
Microsoft will continue to support and provide security updates for Windows through January 14, 2020. But I can tell you are not really interested.
Click to expand...

Talk to me when the resolution is better than film.
Talk to me when the color is better than film.
Talk to me when the latitude of exposure is better than film.
Talk to me when the equipment cost is better than film.
Talk to me when the equipment is better than film.
Talk to me when the equipment reliability is better than film.
Talk to me when the equipment does not depend on batteries.

...
The list is long and extensive.
 
To play devil's advocate...
Format/film size for size is in d*g*t*l's favour, depending on the viewing medium and print size.
Colour is debatable. The best colour film is more attractive, D* has less noise/grain/texture at same ISO.
They tell me the latitude of the latest D* cameras is numerous stops
Used equipment price depends how you work it out. A secondhand entry level 18mp DSLR is around £200 with no further running costs.
Equipment better? Lots of D* cameras are better made than my film point and shoots.
Reliability see above.
D* batteries are rechargeable. The ones in my old Nikon F601 cost the equivalent of three rolls of processed paid film slide film each, and lasted for 72 exposures with flash on every shot.
 
Sperdynamite said:
Meanwhile my F6 is still the reigning 35mm champ. I don't care how sharp a 'Lux is. Sharpness is for suckers.
Click to expand...
... or for knives
Agree with you on that point. I wouldn’t place the alleged « advantage » of a Leica in the resolution or contrast of its glass, in particular when considering Nikon’s $80 50mm f/1.8 performance! But a Leica has other advantages, pocketability, shooting experience etc. Both the F6 and rangefinders have their place. One is not better than the other, just different.
 

someone has just offered you a computer for free and you speak to them like that

you want to check your mind man
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register