dave lackey
Veteran
Leica is a treasure in the photographic world with the rich history, the rangefinder experience, and all of those other qualities we appreciate.
Nikon and Canon are the refrigerators of the photographic world with excellent products and good (not perfect) reliability.
BUT, and this is a huge but, Nikon's top of the line camera these days in expensive. Same price range as the M9. (Forget the S2 and it is in an entirely different market with Hasselblad)
Having used some of the very expensive glass (read that as fast glass, both primes and zooms) from Nikon, I am also keenly aware of how expensive it is.
So, why is it that some people on this forum (and maybe elsewhere) are continually taking cheap shots at Leica for being expensive? Even the excellent D700 is expensive in my household even before you think about buying the fast glass. The D3, D3x, D3s, and whatever is next in a few months? Same price range as Leica's top digital rf camera.
I never see anyone complaining and taking cheap shots at Nikon or talking about those D3 cameras that arrive at their doors and don't even work. Or the glass that has to be returned.
IMO, one buys what he/she wants and/or needs. It puzzles me to wonder why Leica has a reputation (especially on this forum) for being outrageously expensive.:angel:
Nikon and Canon are the refrigerators of the photographic world with excellent products and good (not perfect) reliability.
BUT, and this is a huge but, Nikon's top of the line camera these days in expensive. Same price range as the M9. (Forget the S2 and it is in an entirely different market with Hasselblad)
Having used some of the very expensive glass (read that as fast glass, both primes and zooms) from Nikon, I am also keenly aware of how expensive it is.
So, why is it that some people on this forum (and maybe elsewhere) are continually taking cheap shots at Leica for being expensive? Even the excellent D700 is expensive in my household even before you think about buying the fast glass. The D3, D3x, D3s, and whatever is next in a few months? Same price range as Leica's top digital rf camera.
I never see anyone complaining and taking cheap shots at Nikon or talking about those D3 cameras that arrive at their doors and don't even work. Or the glass that has to be returned.
IMO, one buys what he/she wants and/or needs. It puzzles me to wonder why Leica has a reputation (especially on this forum) for being outrageously expensive.:angel:
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
because you get less for that same money.
back alley
IMAGES
plus...guys like you set leica up for the big slam...just read your second line...it's insulting to canon or nikon users...
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
You're opening a can of worms. Hold on, let me get the popcorn ready 
In short, I think it's because a Leica is expensive for what it is. Compare the feature list of the Leica M9 to the Nikon D3x. The D3x is infinitely more versetile, offers more resolution (and perhaps image quality), autofocus, 1 gazillion point metering, yadda yadda yadda... all while being less expensive.
Oh, and the cost of Nikon glass doesn't even touch the cost of Leica glass for compareable lenses...and remember that the Nikon glass is AF.
Also, I'd almost argue that the Nikon D3x compares more closely to Leica's S2...a MUCH more expensive camera.
In short, I think it's because a Leica is expensive for what it is. Compare the feature list of the Leica M9 to the Nikon D3x. The D3x is infinitely more versetile, offers more resolution (and perhaps image quality), autofocus, 1 gazillion point metering, yadda yadda yadda... all while being less expensive.
Oh, and the cost of Nikon glass doesn't even touch the cost of Leica glass for compareable lenses...and remember that the Nikon glass is AF.
Also, I'd almost argue that the Nikon D3x compares more closely to Leica's S2...a MUCH more expensive camera.
Last edited:
dave lackey
Veteran
Less what? Less is more some times.
Slam on Nikon and Canon? Hell, I have used Nikon for 40 years and being called the refrigerator of cameras is a helluva compliment! Think Toyota. Nothing usually breaks, just great cameras.
Anyone else want to bash Leica? Now is your opportunity. I have my popocorn ready, too.
Bet ya this thread gets deleted before the end of the day.
Slam on Nikon and Canon? Hell, I have used Nikon for 40 years and being called the refrigerator of cameras is a helluva compliment! Think Toyota. Nothing usually breaks, just great cameras.
Anyone else want to bash Leica? Now is your opportunity. I have my popocorn ready, too.
Bet ya this thread gets deleted before the end of the day.
back alley
IMAGES
dave, read your opening lines again...can you honestly say that sounds complimentary to anyone but leica?
i have nothing against leica, have owned and used leica cameras and lenses...but to the rest of the world that has chosen the dslr as the machine of choice comments like yours are just silly.
i have nothing against leica, have owned and used leica cameras and lenses...but to the rest of the world that has chosen the dslr as the machine of choice comments like yours are just silly.
shyoon
Well-known
Because high end Nikon's can do stuff like this:
Whilst Leica lens prices just go up and up for (seemingly) no reason:
Whilst Leica lens prices just go up and up for (seemingly) no reason:
Phantomas
Well-known
Let me get this straight - don't compare S2 because it's in a different category but compare D3* with M9 because... they're in the same category?
dave lackey
Veteran
Complimentary? That was not my point. The point is why we have so many rude people slamming Leica and those of us who like the brand. I have used Nikon for 40 years and still swear by them. But where else are you going to get a full frame state-of-the-art rangefinder? Nikon quit making rangefinders decades ago.
I now use Leica equipment for different purposes and enjoy them as well. Can I afford an M9? Of course not, I have been out of work 3 years and my wife's medical bills are skyrocketing. But I have my dreams.
Communicating what I am posting about is certainly my problem and I can only apologize for that. But it still does not explain why so much Leica bashing is on a Leica rangefinder forum, for god's sake.
You like the X100. Great! Do you see me bashing it? No.
I am just at a loss understanding the mental gyrations of people who continue to bash Leica.:angel:
kshapero
South Florida Man
I agree here with Joe.
BTW a D700 is about $2600 new, a far cry from the $7000 Leica gets for an M9. And lenses? Forget about it.
dave lackey
Veteran
Yes, they are in a different category, would you compare a Hasselblad system to the D3?
With this exit statement, Joe, go ahead and delete this thread. I give up.
dave lackey
Veteran
I agree here with Joe.
BTW a D700 is about $2600 new, a far cry from the $7000 Leica gets for an M9. And lenses? Forget about it.
And you think $2600 is not a lot of money?
Phantomas
Well-known
Yes, they are in a different category, would you compare a Hasselblad system to the D3?
With this exit statement, Joe, go ahead and delete this thread. I give up.
Would you compare D3 to M9? They are not in a different category?
I give up too, I already feel sad for replying to this thread.
back alley
IMAGES
first of all, it's not a leica rangefinder forum...it is just a rangefinder forum.
inevitably when one brand is deified others who use different brands will react...
i like leica but it is not the best camera out there. nikon rangefinders require much less time/energy and money to maintain and make great images also.
yes, i like my x100 but i don't constantly compare it to a leica...in fact i never do. why would i?
leica bashers, i believe, just get tired of the near non stop leica gushers.
inevitably when one brand is deified others who use different brands will react...
i like leica but it is not the best camera out there. nikon rangefinders require much less time/energy and money to maintain and make great images also.
yes, i like my x100 but i don't constantly compare it to a leica...in fact i never do. why would i?
leica bashers, i believe, just get tired of the near non stop leica gushers.
250swb
Well-known
If you find a Leica a productive camera its not expensive, if you don't it is. If you find a DSLR a productive camera its not expensive, if you don't it is.
A DSLR to me is expensive because I don't use one very often, so bang for buck it costs more than a Leica just to own it. I'm sure camera forum punters may not work things out in exactly the same way, but if somebody wants to criticise Leica for being expensive it's most likely they can't see themselves getting more out of one than they would a DSLR (etc). If they are cheap shots is just human nature, hardly worth worrying about.
Steve
FrankS
Registered User
Hi Dave. I know what you are saying, but it's a touchy subject. Those who appreciate Leica, appreciate Leica, but it rubs a lot of other people the wrong way. It's kind of like the first rule of Fight Club. (the book and movie)
dallard
Well-known
In 2006, a new M8 cost $4500. Now it costs about $2500 used.
In 2006, a new Nikon D2xs cost $4700. Now it costs about $1600 used.
So which one would have been better in the long run? Not to mention if you bought Leica the lenses would have doubled in value by now while the Nikon lenses would be worth less than you paid for them. Leica isn't expensive at all, in fact it's dirt cheap!
In 2006, a new Nikon D2xs cost $4700. Now it costs about $1600 used.
So which one would have been better in the long run? Not to mention if you bought Leica the lenses would have doubled in value by now while the Nikon lenses would be worth less than you paid for them. Leica isn't expensive at all, in fact it's dirt cheap!
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Simple really, the indefensible (on a cost to performance ratio) gets bashed and has to be defended. The best and only defense of the M9 and it's cost is that it is the only DRF love it or leave it. There are plenty of negative comments on DSLR forums about Nikon/Canon gear but this is not a DSLR forum. On those DSLR forums you get the same bashing and defending. Just human nature.
Bob
Bob
back alley
IMAGES
i think what folks are fundamentally missing in this argument is that it is not the camera that is the issue...it's the people and how they view/treat/talk about the camera.
FrankS
Registered User
That's correct Joe, on both fronts: the gushers and the bashers.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.