L Collins
Well-known
Posted by Joe Blow:
"Let's face it: Leica's have become jewelry for camera fondlers and status seeking gearheads. If you disagree, just take a trip to rangefinderforum.com and partake of the inanity re: Leica. You'll find a dedicated group of lawyers/dentists/corporate hacks who once took an Intro to Photography class in college and have convinced themselves they could be the second coming of HCB if only someone would recognize their genius, which they attempt to document by posting pictures of their cats taken with the most expensive "glass."
It's the functional equivalent of collecting Patek Phillippe watches. If your goal is to own a time piece that keeps accurate time, then a quartz Seiko will do that much better while the Patek will need to be rewound and adjusted for time every few days. But a Patek is so much better at projecting status and fine taste, which, of course, is the real reason people buy them. Which is all well and good, but don't attempt to convince other's of your choice based on it's perceived superiority of performance, because then you'll have to lapse into all sorts of disengenuous reasons why you prefer what is ultimately just a marker of status.
Was this always so? No. Leica film cameras remain wonderful mechanical instruments capable of outlasting your grandchildren, and the optics are almost uniformly excellent. But the mistake is to extrapolate the dated concepts of the film age to the digital era. I have no problem if you want to spend $8k on a digital camera. Just don't try to explain to me it's worth to you based on its performance, because that's not what you're paying for, and you know it. Your paying for perceived status, period. At least be honest about it."
Discuss.
"Let's face it: Leica's have become jewelry for camera fondlers and status seeking gearheads. If you disagree, just take a trip to rangefinderforum.com and partake of the inanity re: Leica. You'll find a dedicated group of lawyers/dentists/corporate hacks who once took an Intro to Photography class in college and have convinced themselves they could be the second coming of HCB if only someone would recognize their genius, which they attempt to document by posting pictures of their cats taken with the most expensive "glass."
It's the functional equivalent of collecting Patek Phillippe watches. If your goal is to own a time piece that keeps accurate time, then a quartz Seiko will do that much better while the Patek will need to be rewound and adjusted for time every few days. But a Patek is so much better at projecting status and fine taste, which, of course, is the real reason people buy them. Which is all well and good, but don't attempt to convince other's of your choice based on it's perceived superiority of performance, because then you'll have to lapse into all sorts of disengenuous reasons why you prefer what is ultimately just a marker of status.
Was this always so? No. Leica film cameras remain wonderful mechanical instruments capable of outlasting your grandchildren, and the optics are almost uniformly excellent. But the mistake is to extrapolate the dated concepts of the film age to the digital era. I have no problem if you want to spend $8k on a digital camera. Just don't try to explain to me it's worth to you based on its performance, because that's not what you're paying for, and you know it. Your paying for perceived status, period. At least be honest about it."
Discuss.
gho
Well-known
Oh well, I could not care less if someone buys a 10k camera for imagined perceived status or wears a gold bar around the neck.
It is simply not my problem.
Pete B
Well-known
Not perceived status.
Rangefinders are the only cameras I can hold level. With SLRs my photos are always tilted.
I like the focus distance range of SLR lenses, and the character of their optical imperfections, but I prefer the quicker short throw of the Leica M lenses.
I like the film loading mechanism of the M2 but I know others hate it.
I like the quiet shutter of my M2 compared to my Olympus and Nikon SLRs.
I think I probably prefer the big knarly shutter speed dial of my FM3a, but I can change speed with one finger on my M2 and M9-P.
The M9 is the only "affordable" full frame digital for Leica M lenses, but I agree it has many issues.
I like the indestructible feel of my Nikon FM3a.
Yes, I like the appearance of my Leicas but I don't perceive them as jewelry. My Nikons are more "Bling". I don't think of value if someone's Leica catches my eye.
I don't know where this idea of "status" comes from. They are owned by people of all backgrounds.
As soon as another manufacturer produces a manual focus body with a full-frame sensor, interchangable lenses, with a good shutter speed dial on top and an aperture dial on the lens I'm ditching my M9-P and Leica glass.
Pete
Rangefinders are the only cameras I can hold level. With SLRs my photos are always tilted.
I like the focus distance range of SLR lenses, and the character of their optical imperfections, but I prefer the quicker short throw of the Leica M lenses.
I like the film loading mechanism of the M2 but I know others hate it.
I like the quiet shutter of my M2 compared to my Olympus and Nikon SLRs.
I think I probably prefer the big knarly shutter speed dial of my FM3a, but I can change speed with one finger on my M2 and M9-P.
The M9 is the only "affordable" full frame digital for Leica M lenses, but I agree it has many issues.
I like the indestructible feel of my Nikon FM3a.
Yes, I like the appearance of my Leicas but I don't perceive them as jewelry. My Nikons are more "Bling". I don't think of value if someone's Leica catches my eye.
I don't know where this idea of "status" comes from. They are owned by people of all backgrounds.
As soon as another manufacturer produces a manual focus body with a full-frame sensor, interchangable lenses, with a good shutter speed dial on top and an aperture dial on the lens I'm ditching my M9-P and Leica glass.
Pete
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
2WK
Rangefinder User
Seems like bit of a jealous rant. Being angry that people use something that you do not want to, or do not want to pay for. Sure his DSLR images look good enough/amazing and that rationalizes.
One thing that is often overlooked, besides all the other rangefinder benefits, is the reaction of the person I'm shooting. Sometimes with a bulky DSLR, you get an agitated portrait, the person is a bit uneasy or annoyed. And this isn't every time, but when I'm shooting with a Leica, or even my Xpro I am able to capture a look of curiosity or interest. Subtle differences, but enough for a different photograph altogether. People are usually very curious about a rangefinder.
The other day a a woman asked me about my M6. Her face lit up as she told me about how growing up on the farm, her dad had a camera just like that, "and it used to take the most beautiful black and white photos". How cool is that? Of course my first response was, "Yes where is that camera now hmm?" She was dumbstruck...."I don't know, but I'm going to find out!"
One thing that is often overlooked, besides all the other rangefinder benefits, is the reaction of the person I'm shooting. Sometimes with a bulky DSLR, you get an agitated portrait, the person is a bit uneasy or annoyed. And this isn't every time, but when I'm shooting with a Leica, or even my Xpro I am able to capture a look of curiosity or interest. Subtle differences, but enough for a different photograph altogether. People are usually very curious about a rangefinder.
The other day a a woman asked me about my M6. Her face lit up as she told me about how growing up on the farm, her dad had a camera just like that, "and it used to take the most beautiful black and white photos". How cool is that? Of course my first response was, "Yes where is that camera now hmm?" She was dumbstruck...."I don't know, but I'm going to find out!"
Ben Z
Veteran
That's a sensible approach IMO. Far too many people get their knickers in a twist about how others spend their money!
+1. That rant the OP quoted has whiskers. It was trotted out daily on the old Pnet forum, it reeked of petty jealousy then and it still does. The mistake many people make is allowing themselves to get manipulated into a defensive posture. The only person I feel obligated to explain why I choose the camera/watch/car I buy is my wife...and she really doesn't give a flying fk.
ShinX414
camera geek
who the hell is that guy?
a short internet recherche just shows that the so called nick "joe blow" just talks trash about all systems he/she does not own...
a short internet recherche just shows that the so called nick "joe blow" just talks trash about all systems he/she does not own...
mgermana
Established
Haters gonna hate.
dreamsandart
Well-known
To each their own. As my father once said in response to my mother asking why I use such expensive cameras [many moons ago], "Because that's what he uses." Yes, for me there's nothing like a Leica.
In fact, in celebration of this wonderful thread I'm going to head out with my M9 today for some 'guilty' pleasure
In fact, in celebration of this wonderful thread I'm going to head out with my M9 today for some 'guilty' pleasure
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
<shrug>....
YYV_146
Well-known
The lesson here is perhaps more along the lines of "appreciate the finer things in life"...
I use expensive audio equipment, build my own desktops, make my own coffee (inside a college dorm) , and I have a lovely LED lamp on my desk that costs me $250.
Can I make do with OEM headphones, a cheap out-of-the-box computer, Nestle powder and a $15 lamp? Sure, but I'd be a much more miserable person. I'd argue that the Leica bodies are as good as the Canon/Nikon flagship counterparts in terms of IQ, more suitable for street and documentary photography, takes lenses that are the best of any 135 system, and much, much better made. An M will (at times) take better pictures and (always) feel nicer than a Canon 1D or Nikon D4. Whether that is worth the extra money is an entirely personal choice.
I use expensive audio equipment, build my own desktops, make my own coffee (inside a college dorm) , and I have a lovely LED lamp on my desk that costs me $250.
Can I make do with OEM headphones, a cheap out-of-the-box computer, Nestle powder and a $15 lamp? Sure, but I'd be a much more miserable person. I'd argue that the Leica bodies are as good as the Canon/Nikon flagship counterparts in terms of IQ, more suitable for street and documentary photography, takes lenses that are the best of any 135 system, and much, much better made. An M will (at times) take better pictures and (always) feel nicer than a Canon 1D or Nikon D4. Whether that is worth the extra money is an entirely personal choice.
redisburning
Well-known
let them eat polycarbonate
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
For me no one needs to justify what they spend their hard earned money on by stating that the Leica is a cut above the other brands or pointing out that you don't eat beans when you've worked hard enough to be able to afford caviar.
This is just about some twisted f*** who gets his rocks off by licking the cherries off other people's icecreams ... nothing more!
This is just about some twisted f*** who gets his rocks off by licking the cherries off other people's icecreams ... nothing more!
Shade
Well-known
LOL, that guy can say whatever he wants, its not going to affect me in any single way. Although the same would go for people who doesnt NEED a Nikon d800e or a Canon 1dx yet still buys them.
Besides, what if the cat is a special cat that had special meanings?
In discussion to the post he made, it seems like he has so much hatred in regards to a Leica (and Patek!), as if he himself is trying to convince his otherside in order to purchase a Leica yet does not want to shell out the dime for it.
I have also understand that we (or at least I) here in the rangefinder forum has never tried to convince anyone that Leica is the best camera and him and his neighbours should use one. I buy my camera for myself, God forbid if I spend that much money because I was persuaded by an internet website. And wouldnt it be obvious that RF forum will say good things about RFs and a Canon forum would say good things about Canon and so on? I cant imagine the otherwise..
However, in light of situations, Leica is not the best nor it is entirely better, but its different. Same goes for other brands. If there is such a BEST camera then all other companies would shut down.
The way Leica is different, is very visible. My wife with no photography experience, can tell if I printed my picture from a Leica or not. But she cannot distinguish the difference between my Fuji and my Om-D. But she can 95% guess correctly if I took it with my Leica. Especially in black and white.
People can say what they want, everyone and their mom is entitled to their own opinion.
Besides, what if the cat is a special cat that had special meanings?
In discussion to the post he made, it seems like he has so much hatred in regards to a Leica (and Patek!), as if he himself is trying to convince his otherside in order to purchase a Leica yet does not want to shell out the dime for it.
I have also understand that we (or at least I) here in the rangefinder forum has never tried to convince anyone that Leica is the best camera and him and his neighbours should use one. I buy my camera for myself, God forbid if I spend that much money because I was persuaded by an internet website. And wouldnt it be obvious that RF forum will say good things about RFs and a Canon forum would say good things about Canon and so on? I cant imagine the otherwise..
However, in light of situations, Leica is not the best nor it is entirely better, but its different. Same goes for other brands. If there is such a BEST camera then all other companies would shut down.
The way Leica is different, is very visible. My wife with no photography experience, can tell if I printed my picture from a Leica or not. But she cannot distinguish the difference between my Fuji and my Om-D. But she can 95% guess correctly if I took it with my Leica. Especially in black and white.
People can say what they want, everyone and their mom is entitled to their own opinion.
f16sunshine
Moderator
What the... ?
What the... ?
Must not be much going on when there are threads about other forum comments.
What the... ?
Must not be much going on when there are threads about other forum comments.
ShinX414
camera geek
if it wasn't such a bad post i would say it would be a good SEO post for this forum xP
perzpective
Zack Cluley
This just made my morning. ^_^
I shall be using this expression for the foreseeable future hahaha.
flash
Member
I gladly traded my 20kg of Canon gear for 6 kg of Leicas. I'm using the smallest and lightest 35mm sensored camera in the world and the best manual focus system available for a digital camera. These two things are important to me. I suspect that there are far more D800E's and EOS1Dx's supporting egos, than Leicas.
And since almost no-one knows what type of camera I'm carrying when I shoot a wedding (compared to the constant lens worship form guests with the Canons), my poor fragile ego would be absolutely shattered if I had bought a pair of M9's just to raise my social status. I'll just have to console myself with all the money they've made me in the last two years.
Gordon
And since almost no-one knows what type of camera I'm carrying when I shoot a wedding (compared to the constant lens worship form guests with the Canons), my poor fragile ego would be absolutely shattered if I had bought a pair of M9's just to raise my social status. I'll just have to console myself with all the money they've made me in the last two years.
Gordon
MichaelToye
Well-known
'Arguments' like that should be challenged with, "So, what small full frame camera with superior image quality should I buy with the 10K burning a hole in my pocket?"
MikeAUS
Well-known
He's sort of right about the cats bit We could do with less cats on RFF
We could do with less cats on RFF