Why Buy a Leica?

bjorke · Sep 18, 2007

Unless my Contax breaks, I'm happy with that and my RF645.

Just with the Bronica had a focus lever

copake_ham · Sep 19, 2007

David H. Bebbington said:
And ... accurate register between the lens and focal plane. And ... a shutter that operates smoothly and quietly with minimum vibration and reliably for thousands of exposures in all temperatures (same for wind mechanism). And .. a focusing device that is accurate and easy to use in bad light. If these requirements are not met, the choice of lens is irrelevant - every lens will deliver lousy results!

You miss my point - perhaps deliberately - perhaps unknowingly.

If one must choose b/w the glass and the body - always go with the former.

FWIW, I can buy about ten R2/R3's for the price of a M7.

I can store them and wear out each one out in turn.

Of course the downside, if you've seen the thread on "The New Yorker" magazine article, is that I'm not wearing the "right kind" of bling necklace!

Teitur · Sep 19, 2007

You can get a leica cheap.

In Sweden, I saw an ad for a m6 and 35 summicron and 50 summicron for 1,250 USD. of course used but no damages to either lenses nor body. So hearing all this talk about the expensive leica makes me laugh, it's just bullsh*t.
Well yeah expensive if you buy it new. But who buys new cameras!!?

so if you search a little, on ebay or were ever you buy youre used stuff on over there, you will find that it is affordable to buy a Leica.

Teitur · Sep 19, 2007

and to all you silly people who are talking about M7 out there, who are you talking to, really?

Roger Hicks · Sep 19, 2007

Teitur said:
Well yeah expensive if you buy it new. But who buys new cameras!!?

Somebody has to, or there wouldn't be any second-hand ones...

I'm just going out to take pictures with one of mine. The sun has recently risen.

Ian Grant · Sep 19, 2007

Perhaps it's you thats missing a point.

When you depend on a camera reliability and rugged build quality are important particularly when working away from home. It isn't about price or Leicas wouldn't sell.

It's a bit like comparing a FWD Lada with a Land Rover, both will do what they are designed for, but one is going to substantially outlast the other and over time provide far greater value for money.

We make our own choices

Ian

copake_ham said:
You miss my point - perhaps deliberately - perhaps unknowingly.

FWIW, I can buy about ten R2/R3's for the price of a M7.

I can store them and wear out each one out in turn.

Roger Hicks · Sep 19, 2007

Ian Grant said:
Perhaps it's you thats missing a point.

When you depend on a camera reliability and rugged build quality are important particularly when working away from home. It isn't about price or Leicas wouldn't sell.

Dear Ian,

George is one of two people on my ignore list, so I didn't see his original post, just your quote.

A further analogy that occurs to me is that you can buy an awful lot of Big Macs for the price of a decent steak. I know which I'd rather have.

Cheers,

Roger

Soeren · Sep 19, 2007

Roger Hicks said:
Dear Ian,

George is one of two people on my ignore list, so I didn't see his original post, just your quote.

A further analogy that occurs to me is that you can buy an awful lot of Big Macs for the price of a decent steak. I know which I'd rather have.

Cheers,

Roger

Roger
Hmm I don't think that analogy is quite spot on. An awfull lot of Big Macs will either feed me for, lets say, a week (God forbid. I'd rather have that steak afterall) or feed me, my family and some poor starving...................... one day. The steak(uhm) will feed me almost one day, be a great pleasure and make me hate myself for eating Big Macs ever after
Note: I don't recall the last time I ate a Big Mac or the like and thats not due to poor memory.
Kind regards
Søren

David H. Bebbington · Sep 19, 2007

copake_ham said:
You miss my point - perhaps deliberately - perhaps unknowingly.

If one must choose b/w the glass and the body - always go with the former.

FWIW, I can buy about ten R2/R3's for the price of a M7.

I can store them and wear out each one out in turn.

Of course the downside, if you've seen the thread on "The New Yorker" magazine article, is that I'm not wearing the "right kind" of bling necklace!

I don't think I've missed anything! There have been numerous postings recently from a number of people including me concerning the durability (or lack of it) of the Bessa R family. I don't propose to repeat myself.

Roger Hicks · Sep 19, 2007

Soeren said:
Roger
Hmm I don't think that analogy is quite spot on. An awfull lot of Big Macs will either feed me for, lets say, a week (God forbid. I'd rather have that steak afterall) or feed me, my family and some poor starving...................... one day. The steak(uhm) will feed me almost one day, be a great pleasure...

Dear Soeren,

That's why the analogy struck me as so accurate. Most of us on this forum are not so poor that we have to live on Big Macs, even if we cannot eat prime steak every day (which would soon get boring, anyway). Likewise, many of us are not so poor that we cannot afford a Leica, if we REALLY want one, even if it has to be second-hand (as almost all of mine have been).

But we can be too mean to buy a steak, because it's 'not worth it'; or we may not care much about food, so we eat whatever is cheap and filling, at which point a Big Mac is 'just as good'. Or we can be reverse snobs, who think that cheaper is automatically better. There's a flaw in that last line of thought, but some seem unable to spot it.

Cheers,

Roger

Soeren · Sep 19, 2007

Roger Hicks said:
Dear Soeren,

That's why the analogy struck me as so accurate. Most of us on this forum are not so poor that we have to live on Big Macs, even if we cannot eat prime steak every day (which would soon get boring, anyway). Likewise, many of us are not so poor that we cannot afford a Leica, if we REALLY want one, even if it has to be second-hand (as almost all of mine have been).

But we can be too mean to buy a steak, because it's 'not worth it'; or we may not care much about food, so we eat whatever is cheap and filling, at which point a Big Mac is 'just as good'. Or we can be reverse snobs, who think that cheaper is automatically better. There's a flaw in that last line of thought, but some seem unable to spot it.

Cheers,

Roger

That flaw is easy to spot, its "automatically". Cheap or cheaper isn't automatically inferiour either.
Darned now were back to post #1
"Why buy a........"
Kind regards
Søren

Rolleiflexible · Sep 19, 2007

copake_ham said:
If one must choose b/w the glass and the body - always go with the former. FWIW, I can buy about ten R2/R3's for the price of a M7. I can store them and wear out each one out in turn. Of course the downside, if you've seen the thread on "The New Yorker" magazine article, is that I'm not wearing the "right kind" of bling necklace!

That is as harsh as it is illogical. Why insist on using a new M7 as the benchmark? A 1930s-vintage Leica III will cost the same as a Bessa. The III is a lot smaller than the Bessa, built much better than the Bessa, and is a pleasure in the hand, much more so than the Bessa.

That "bling" remark's a cheap shot. Good industrial design delights the eye and the hand. There is value in that. I want to love my tools. It is easy to love a III. Besides, chicks dig it.

Roger Hicks · Sep 19, 2007

Rolleiflexible said:
That "bling" remark's a cheap shot.

It's not even a cheap shot. The truth is that the vast majority of people don't even know what a Leica is, and if they do, they don't know whether they're still making them: the latter is a question I am asked quite often. I've also been asked pretty regularly, of Bessas, "Is that a Leica?"

Among photographers, the Leica is justly legendary, and if you've never handled one, or talked at any length to someone who uses them, it seems understandable to me to be curious, as I might be about a camera with which I was unfamiliar.

There are always reverse-snobs and sour-grape merchants, but most of the people who have actually tried Leicas and not liked them (in itself, not a huge band) are quite mild about it: "Didn't get on with it" or "Couldn't see the magic, myself." That's the way I feel about TLRs, but I'm perfectly happy to believe that if you find a Rollei ergonomic (I don't), it is well worth the money as a reliable, solid machine delivering superb quality. This casual dismissal is not the same as saying that Rolleis (or Leicas) are no good, or overpriced, or that cheaper cameras cost less money (hardly Nobel Prize-level economics).

In other words, the number of people you'd impress by wearing a Leica as bling is pretty tiny, and probably about equal to the number of people who would immediately write you off as an ignorant nouveau riche. This makes it a zero-sum game -- except, I suppose, that I'd have a higher opinion of someone who knew and admired Leicas as cameras, than of someone who wrote them off as bling because they knew little or nothing about them. I don't know if George is in that last category or not, but I have met more than enough who are.

Finally, addressing the rest of your post, I'd go for a IIIc or later as a cheap user, because the die-cast chassis is stronger than earlier models; I find the side-by-side eyepieces easier to use; and they're newer. On the other hand, the fact that we are still discussing cameras made in the 1930s and 1940s as everyday users is something of a tribute to their build quality.

Cheers,

Roger

Mike Kovacs · Sep 19, 2007

Like the cameras, can't stand a significant fraction of the owners on the internet.

Ian Grant · Sep 19, 2007

Yes Mike but 99.999% of flashgun owners and APUG posters know that a flashgun can be used with any camera regardless of format.

So a flash that works with a Rollei works with a Leica or a Linhof

Ian

Soeren · Sep 19, 2007

Ian Grant said:
Yes Mike but 99.999% of flashgun owners and APUG posters know that a flashgun can be used with any camera regardless of format.

So a flash that works with a Rollei works with a Leica or a Linhof

Ian

Really? With TTL et al?
Cheers
Søren

Sirius Glass · Sep 19, 2007

Soeren said:
Really? With TTL et al?
Cheers
Søren

He did not say that all the features worked. Besides I love the TTL, AF and zoom features on the Linhof!

Steve

naturephoto1 · Sep 19, 2007

Stever said:
He did not say that all the features worked. Besides I love the TTL, AF and zoom features on the Linhof!

Steve

Really, I must have missed those features on mine.

Rich

eddym · Sep 19, 2007

Stever said:
He did not say that all the features worked. Besides I love the TTL, AF and zoom features on the Linhof!

Steve

Yes, I'm enjoying my Tech V so much more since I upgraded it to Program Auto Exposure!

eddym · Sep 19, 2007

Mike Kovacs said:
Like the cameras, can't stand a significant fraction of the owners on the internet.

I beg your pardon; have you met a significant fraction of the owners of Leicas on the Internet?

Tom Duffy · Sep 19, 2007

Mike Kovacs said:
Like the cameras, can't stand a significant fraction of the owners on the internet.

Well, I own a Leica and I think that I'm adorable!

Mick Fagan · Sep 20, 2007

Ian Grant, with due respect, I have been unable to figure out how a camera flash can be successfully operated, with my Horizon 202 swinging lens camera!

Sometimes, a sweeping statement can get you into difficult territory

Mick.

Roger Hicks · Sep 20, 2007

Mick Fagan said:
Ian Grant, with due respect, I have been unable to figure out how a camera flash can be successfully operated, with my Horizon 202 swinging lens camera!

Sometimes, a sweeping statement can get you into difficult territory

Mick.

He didn't say it exposed the whole of the negative, either...

Question: are photographs made with swing-lens cameras sweeping statement in themselves, given the way the lens sweeps from side to side?

Ole · Sep 20, 2007

Mick Fagan said:
Ian Grant, with due respect, I have been unable to figure out how a camera flash can be successfully operated, with my Horizon 202 swinging lens camera!...

You know Mick, all it takes is a bit of lateral thinking:

Use the flashgun as a support for a piece of magnesium ribbon - about 2cm should cover the longest exposure with a Horizon 202.

Mick Fagan · Sep 20, 2007

Roger, touché!

Ole, great idea, one problem though, my flash would end up as a molten metz.

Mick.

Why Buy a Leica?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency