money burning a hole in your pocket? here's a solution. M9 + Noctilux

A fraction of the price of a Ferrari, and half the price of even a modest boat. Why do so many people have so much of a problem with Leicas? Because they're smaller than Ferraris or boats? Offer me a Ferrari, a boat and a Leica, to use not to sell, and it's a dead easy choice for me.

Cheers,

R.
 
I wonder how many rolls of TRI-X, Neopan 1600 and Fuji 400H that I could buy with that money?? I would imagine that I would need an extra fridge just to store all of that film, so perhaps it wouldn't be such a good move^^
 
Andy Kibber said:
You can't take pictures with a Ferrari or a boat and you don't use a camera for transportation. 🙂
Click to expand...

Quite. But if you're going to spend money on a hobby, that observation is completely irrelevant. As is the observation that you can't take pictures with a set of golf clubs or a complicated-movement watch.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
A fraction of the price of a Ferrari, and half the price of even a modest boat. Why do so many people have so much of a problem with Leicas? Because they're smaller than Ferraris or boats? Offer me a Ferrari, a boat and a Leica, to use not to sell, and it's a dead easy choice for me.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...


The perceived value just isn't there for a lot of people Roger ... why can't you just accept that and stop defending what is an overpriced product in a lot of people's minds by constantly comparing it to genuine luxury items that are in a totally different realm.

No driver needs a Ferrari (F1 excepted 😛) but a lot of photographers would like to have access to a better priced digital rangefinder for reasons other than having their egos massaged by owning what is perceived as being exclusive and 'the best' ... and priced accordingly!

YMMV of course and we know it does ... so I've probably totally wasted my time by typing this! 😀
 
Keith said:
The perceived value just isn't there for a lot of people Roger ... why can't you just accept that and stop defending what is an overpriced product in a lot of people's minds by constantly comparing it to genuine luxury items that are in a totally different realm.

No driver needs a Ferrari (F1 excepted 😛) but a lot of photographers would like to have access to a better priced digital rangefinder for reasons other than having their egos massaged by owning what is perceived as being exclusive and 'the best' ... and priced accordingly!

YMMV of course and we know it does ... so I've probably totally wasted my time by typing this! 😀
Click to expand...
Dear Keith,

You have. It IS a luxury product. If people can't get their heads around this, it's their problem, not mine or Leica's.

Mephisto shoes are a luxury product too, at several times the price of cheap ones. Or vintage Bollinger at several times the price of Spanish Cava. Or a Rolls Royce at several times the price of a Ford. And yet, they are a pair of shoes, a bottle of fizz and a motor car. You don't want an MP or M7? Buy a ZI or a Bessa. You don't want an M9? Buy.... um...

It's nothing to do with having your ego massaged. It's what it costs. PERCEIVED value is meaningless, because it depends on who's perceiving. To me, the perceived value of a Ferrari is less than my old Land Rover: I don't want to spend that much on buying and maintaining a motor car, and if someone gave me a Ferrari tomorrow, I'd sell it. Unlike an M9.

No-one has a divine right to buy whatever they like, at whatever price they like.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
yes but we spend so much time on our feet and poor footwear can lead to other health issues that spending $200-300 for shoes doesn't faze me if they're going to allow me to get from a-b-c-d in comfort and will last more than a few years.
 
newsgrunt said:
yes but we spend so much time on our feet and poor footwear can lead to other health issues that spending $200-300 for shoes doesn't faze me if they're going to allow me to get from a-b-c-d in comfort and will last more than a few years.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And if a camera will give me the pictures I want, I feel the same way. I wear Mephisto walking boots at about $350 a pair. I buy most of my other clothes in chain-stores, because I don't care about clothes as long as they're comfortable and hardwearing.

Cheers,

R.
 
I had an M6 TTL and a noctilux in 2004; had about $4,800 in both . . . only one person ever stopped me and knew what I had dangaling around my neck.

A couple of my friends went to a local camera store and asked to see a Leica - the salesman didn't know what they were talking about.

Oh if only there was one more real estate boom, I promise to only buy Leica's
 
I absolutely live in these ... $89.00 and I get about five years out of a pair.

I have two pairs of course ... one pair for gardening, work etc and another for going out in! 😀


UBBK.jpg



And of course they can be ellegant as well as functional!


p395419470.jpg
 
right on Keith. after years of Blundstones, I'm now a Redback booter. Got my last few pairs at Rays Camping in Melbourne, a fine place for those with camping GAS.
 
Keith said:
I absolutely live in these ... $89.00 and I get about five years out of a pair.

I have two pairs of course ... one pair for gardening, work etc and another for going out in! 😀
Click to expand...

Dear Keith,

And?

First, a lot depends on what fits. I had a marvellous pair of shoes I bought in a German cheapo-market for 12€ or so. I bought them as a laugh: they were red suède. I wore them until they fell to pieces, and they were sublimely comfortable. Most shoes I buy aren't, so it's cheaper to buy one pair of well-fitting, long-lasting boots than lots of cheaper pairs.

Second, this still doesn't address the question of luxuries. What have you against luxury goods? For that matter, how do you define luxury goods? And why shouldn't a camera manufacturer make a luxury camera?

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom