peterm1
Veteran
Wrong link - deleted.
Is this why Leica and some other expensive cameras are REALLY so desirable?
- Thread starter peterm1
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 31
- Views 859
peterm1
Veteran
Is this why Leica and some other expensive pieces of kit are really so desirable?
I truly think it is part of it. Not that there is anything wrong with it - As Seinfeld would say.) 🙂
After all it's why some people buy an Audi over a Toyota for example.
Watch it and learn.
I truly think it is part of it. Not that there is anything wrong with it - As Seinfeld would say.) 🙂
After all it's why some people buy an Audi over a Toyota for example.
Watch it and learn.
Last edited:
lynnb
Veteran
I love the shutter feel and sound of my IIIc and M7. The OM1 is also pretty good, but not as satisfying as the Leicas. The Topcon RE Super is at the other end of the spectrum! 😂
peterm1
Veteran
I must say I have had similar experiences with different cameras. For example, I always much preferred the authoritative sound and feel of the Nikon D700s shutter over that of the d200 which preceded it. The latter had a kind of "lazy" clack-clack operation which sounded as if it was almost in slo-mo, while the former was much more business-like somehow.
And interestingly, while I now own a Leica SL, in this case I actually much prefer the sound of my relatively humble and venerable Sony A7s which sounds like a "real" camera when I fire the shutter By comparison the SL sounds a little wimpy - not horrible, and not enough to put me off the camera, just not as good - more electronic perhaps (and maybe it has an electronic shutter, I have not found out). I have often felt that these kinds of characteristics add to or detract from how people feel about using such equipment.
Valkir1987
Well-known
The psychology behind it is very interesting. They made coffee machines that grind fresh beans more silent, but after some research people preferred the more noisy ones. Some parts need to operate smooth and swish, yet other parts need to be clacky and noisy. The person who buys that Audi probably wants a loud exhaust of some sorts. Phones and digital cameras often 'imitate' the noise of a shutter and winder.
pmu
Well-known
Out of all of the cameras (a LOT of them) I have owned and tried a film M bodies gives the best sound and feeling when pressing the shutter. It most definitely is one of the things that I would "want" in my photo gear too, if I could choose.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
If someone makes tons of money it sometimes only means been smart on earning money in particular way.
If it is expensive it is best is very common approach.
Sony was sitting on it for too long and lost a lot to Samsung due to this dependans on stupidity.
Leica can't lost it with M cameras, much, except one tiny competition, but they are not in such monopoly for M lenses anymore.
My colleague from India told me how his previous boss was openly saying here is no need for full blown Oracle archive, which they were selling.
But where are plenty of those who won't listen. Especially if money not exactly theirs.
If it is expensive it is best is very common approach.
Sony was sitting on it for too long and lost a lot to Samsung due to this dependans on stupidity.
Leica can't lost it with M cameras, much, except one tiny competition, but they are not in such monopoly for M lenses anymore.
My colleague from India told me how his previous boss was openly saying here is no need for full blown Oracle archive, which they were selling.
But where are plenty of those who won't listen. Especially if money not exactly theirs.
JohnGellings
Well-known
I do not think "trick" is the right term. That makes people who like these things seem stupid for liking them. The reason is due to enjoyment plain and simple. Welcome to life in a consumer culture.
pvdhaar
Peter
But probably still in the visible part of it. The Zenit-E on the other hand...
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
People want quality products. It’s no trick. If it’s a trick then Apple got it right. Making laptops, phones etc out of a block of metal when their lifespan is under ten years and less due to software and ever changing systems requirements. Even the packaging is first class with tolerance literally so tight you can feel air pressure keeping the lid down when you try to open that box with your AirPods. Apple absolutely has changed expectations when comes to product presentation.
JeffS7444
Well-known
Some Leica products have been more magical to me than others. Ironically, some of the Leicas I felt the least emotional attachment to were IMO the most genuinely useful. I enjoy fine-machinery aspects of cameras, but seem to get most meaningful work done with cameras which function as really good picture-taking appliances.
Original M8 shutter sound was not what I'd consider hushed/refined. M9 was much better, but IMO, the real master was Canon, delivering the goods even in entry-level SLRs sold in big-box stores.
M6/M8/M9/Trinovid out-of-box experience struck me as okay, if not particularly luxe. Too many little plastic bags. M6 shipped in a hard plastic clamshell case which didn't seem to have any obvious secondary uses. Not that I particularly wanted to, as I thought it looked less boutique and more outlet mall.
Nevertheless, I enjoyed the heck out of these things for many years, at least other small cameras with large sensors appeared, starting with the original Sigma DP1.
Almost forgot to mention Leica T: In a way, too bad it didn't gain more traction, as I think it was an honest effort at delivering more of a craft-made product. I thought the original in silver with one of the optional silicon straps was fetching. But more than anything else, I guess I just wanted to take photos.
Original M8 shutter sound was not what I'd consider hushed/refined. M9 was much better, but IMO, the real master was Canon, delivering the goods even in entry-level SLRs sold in big-box stores.
M6/M8/M9/Trinovid out-of-box experience struck me as okay, if not particularly luxe. Too many little plastic bags. M6 shipped in a hard plastic clamshell case which didn't seem to have any obvious secondary uses. Not that I particularly wanted to, as I thought it looked less boutique and more outlet mall.
Nevertheless, I enjoyed the heck out of these things for many years, at least other small cameras with large sensors appeared, starting with the original Sigma DP1.
Almost forgot to mention Leica T: In a way, too bad it didn't gain more traction, as I think it was an honest effort at delivering more of a craft-made product. I thought the original in silver with one of the optional silicon straps was fetching. But more than anything else, I guess I just wanted to take photos.
Timmyjoe
Veteran
I always liked the feel and sound of the Leica M3, M2 and M4 shutters, especially when fitted with one of Tom A's mini-softies. My M6 TTL doesn't feel/sound the same, and that's a shame.
The one camera that I've had for over thirty years, and rarely get's used, is a Nikon FM-2N, and the sole reason is I can't stand the sound and feel of that shutter. It clacks and clunks like a cheap camera that's about to die. Works perfectly, spot on shutter accuracy, FFD is perfect, but it just sounds and feels like crap to use. So yeah, I agree with the guy in the video. It's not just things need to work, they need to feel and sound good too, for consumers to desire them.
Best,
-Tim
The one camera that I've had for over thirty years, and rarely get's used, is a Nikon FM-2N, and the sole reason is I can't stand the sound and feel of that shutter. It clacks and clunks like a cheap camera that's about to die. Works perfectly, spot on shutter accuracy, FFD is perfect, but it just sounds and feels like crap to use. So yeah, I agree with the guy in the video. It's not just things need to work, they need to feel and sound good too, for consumers to desire them.
Best,
-Tim
peterm1
Veteran
After owning an M3 and an M4P two of the biggest disappointments with the M8 when I bought it were the unsophisticated sound of its shutter when actuated and the teeny, tiny viewfinder magnification. I thought I could get used to these but really never did. It was the viewfinder issue that caused me to sell it in the end as my eyes grew older, but the shutter sound still annoyed me. Imagine buying a Mercedes car and finding its exhaust sounded like a 1950s Volkswagen. It was that kind of "cringe" feeling (even if no one else noticed.)
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
We can appreciate quality in different ways but touch, sight and sound get our attention with cameras. Smell and taste with food. Many folks have mentioned shutter sounds as important. And viewfinder image, too. Did anyone mention image quality?
That's what drives me, image quality. I put up with Pixii's quirks and orneriness for good images. It does do that. And an M9 or M240 with a good retro or a good Sonnar will always make me happy. So while I surely do enjoy the fine machinery that Leica offers it is for the sensor. The lens does not have to be Leica. The only one I have is a disappointment. So clicks and peeks are important but to me it is the sensor that is most important.
That's what drives me, image quality. I put up with Pixii's quirks and orneriness for good images. It does do that. And an M9 or M240 with a good retro or a good Sonnar will always make me happy. So while I surely do enjoy the fine machinery that Leica offers it is for the sensor. The lens does not have to be Leica. The only one I have is a disappointment. So clicks and peeks are important but to me it is the sensor that is most important.
peterm1
Veteran
For me, image quality is taken as a "given" or a "must have". Without it you have nothing, but one assumes that up to a point, all contemporary cameras contribute good image quality (though this changes over time arguably - at least till the technology is fully matured). And different people will have differing views as to what they regard as image good or great quality. There are a few exceptions to this I think - Fujifilm's different sensors and innate color science for example puts it in a class of its own as it offers quite special image quality for those who appreciate its kind of magic.
(Unlike you I do believe that for the most part lenses do contribute more than does the camera.)
But my point is more that this thread was more about the things that add the cherry on the cake - image quality IS the cake.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
I think we pretty much agree, but I am unsure whether the lens or sensor is more important. I like very much my M9 and M240 and see improvements in them with different lenses. Very much so to us, not so much to regular folks, folks not camera geeks. Sensors, the M9 has nice solid, saturated color, the M240 is more subtle. The X2D just runs away from the pack in my estimation. The X2D - XCD 55V dance team is an exquisite duet, both graceful and powerful.
Sensors, the X2D and the Fuji GFX 100S are reputed to both run the same Sony sensor. In all my viewing of YT videos and of posted images the X2D has the better color science. So there is that additional dimension, color science. Folks who know tell me that the M9 color science is such that it could/can be improved. But it is a "mature product" which is corporate for, "We don't care anymore."
The M8 itself, which you have, has a noble color palette. I like it and how it sees things. And some lenses bless it more than others. So maybe it is like a three-legged stool: lens, sensor, color science.
Otherwise it is pistols at dawn! 🤣
peterm1
Veteran
What's the old saying?
"Pistols for two, coffee for one!" 😆 😆
I don't think we need to go to those lengths though, we are not far apart on key points. 🙂
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Easy peasy lemon squeezy:
I just connect with some cams ( and lenses) in a non-tangible way that is half practical and half psychological. Example....M2 is extension of me when making images. Then came digital. M8 didn't quite " do it". M9 much better. M240 really messed with me.... performance pretty good but using it just wasn't that pleasant "extension" like with M2. Then the M 10..... finally!!!! I tend to take M2 and M10 out together to explore the world. The remainder of those perfectly fine bodies.....they see use more out of pity than anything else.
So weird.
I just connect with some cams ( and lenses) in a non-tangible way that is half practical and half psychological. Example....M2 is extension of me when making images. Then came digital. M8 didn't quite " do it". M9 much better. M240 really messed with me.... performance pretty good but using it just wasn't that pleasant "extension" like with M2. Then the M 10..... finally!!!! I tend to take M2 and M10 out together to explore the world. The remainder of those perfectly fine bodies.....they see use more out of pity than anything else.
So weird.
wlewisiii
Veteran
I get what you're saying but for me, the 240 just fits. I can use it all day and just be happy. Put one of my 50's on it and go.
As for the "noisy" coffee machine thing... I wonder if one of the things that is so neat about the Rolleiflex vs the Rolleicord is the WAY the advance & cocking lever swings forward and back, in an arc, quick and done. On the 'cord you twist the one knob till it stops then have to cock the shutter separately. Not as fast or intuitive.
As for the "noisy" coffee machine thing... I wonder if one of the things that is so neat about the Rolleiflex vs the Rolleicord is the WAY the advance & cocking lever swings forward and back, in an arc, quick and done. On the 'cord you twist the one knob till it stops then have to cock the shutter separately. Not as fast or intuitive.
DownUnder
Vamoosed (for a while)
Right and wrong here. My MacBook Airs are 2013 and 2015 respectively. Still functioning 90%+ as new. I've done two regular services every 4-5 years, nothing exceptional was wrong with either laptop, mostly to check the innards and clean out the cat hairs and one time, a small ant infestation (I'm in Indonesia in a household of five cats so such events are commonplace here). Where Apple shines for me is in their approach to software - they give it away free. Which goes a long way to make up for the lack of quite a few good basic software packages which makes me keep an old (ca 2012) Acer laptop so I can run my non-Apple programs.
As for the packaging, you are spot-on right. The late Steve Jobs and his cohorts were spot-on with their vision of how and why people buy products, looks and packaging aren't everything but they rank highly on the desirability list. When I bought my two MacBooks I was told there was a good market for selling the boxes and packaging (this in Australia). I posted them on Ebay and they sold. Ditto some early Apple software I found in a local charity shop, especially Aperture which apparently functions super well on the older machines and still has a cult following.
Apple is not without its faults but it does have its good points. Ease of use is on top of my list.
We are now looking at buying an Apple PC as my eyesight is no longer what it was (age-related) and I need a larger screen for my post-processing work. One basic problem with buying Apple anywhere in Asia is price. So much so that we will be looking at secondhand monitors, our local tech market has several shops specialising in good quality used gear and apparently a good stock of Apple and Ben (which all local photographers here use) monitors.
Thread viewers
Similar threads
