For M8/8.2/9 owners

...had a couple people ask if it was film because it looked old, but that's it.

As for showing off - sure why not! I always wear it with that bright red dot outwards so people can see I have an M9. And I always, always allow it to swing by the face of the person sitting on a bench since it's at eye level. Every 30 ft, I bend down & pretend to tie my shoe lace with my M beside me on a gold-trimmed, red patch of cashmere so as to not scratch that baseplate.

Sometimes I press the shutter...

😉
 
I find quite a few people get curious about my M's, be it the digital or film. This is especially true when in the vicinity of a museum or exhibition of some sort.

The real comment magnet is the Nikon SP. Maybe because people see and recognize the brand yet the form is so different. I get asked about it quite regularly.

A Leica that people used to ask about was my Null Series with gunsight finder. You have to hold it out about two feet to get accurate framing so people thought it was digital quite often.
 
I have been stopped four times in two years by people who asked about my camera and each time the initial assumption was that it was a film camera. This suits me fine, its four people too many, but not enough to get grumpy 😀

I suppose the ratio would be similar if I were still using my film M's as much as the M9, but then the reaction would be incredulous that I was still using film, perhaps because I'm poor and can't afford a digital camera.

I do know other photographers often recognise my M9 by the looks it gets, but they are carrying Canon's or Nikon's, so they probably wouldn't have much to say anyway. But its nice to spend five minutes having a chat with people, yet there is one question I never know how to answer, its when they say 'so how much does that cost then....?'


Steve
 
In the 15 months that I have had the M9, no adult has shown any interest or commented. I like it that way.

Kids are different. They don't know what it is, but they know that it is "cool camera!"
 
coelacanth said:
It goes both ways. Many asked me "is that the digital Leica?" when was carrying M2 or MP, and some said "wow that's an old camera!" when I had my M8.2.
Click to expand...


The M8 tends to "confuse" people (it's a crapshoot question re: is it digital or film), but the M2 people get right away that it's a film camera (how many digital cameras out there are made with unmistakably thick shiny metal?), specially after I've done that old-fashioned film winding.

People love the M2 far more than the M8 at first sight. When I tell them how many photos I take on an average week, they do some quick math and realize that a crazy guy like that ought to be shooting digital.
 
I taped my M9 up for a while, until I came to realize that no one below 50 years old knows what a Leica is anymore. Anyone who is going to steal from me is going to do so in spite of me carrying an obviously ancient camera around, not because of it.

Like several folks in the thread, I get compliments on my ancient MP and M9, and inquiries about why I don't shoot digital.
 
In the last 5 years I've probably had 1 comment per year regarding my M8s. 4 have been about it being a Leica (just people somewhat interested) and the other was a client perplexed at seeing me use an (acceptable) Canon dSLR but disconcerted that I'd also shoot on a small (compact?) camera - the price of it reassured him though😉.
 
hteasley said:
I taped my M9 up for a while, until I came to realize that no one below 50 years old knows what a Leica is anymore. Anyone who is going to steal from me is going to do so in spite of me carrying an obviously ancient camera around, not because of it.

Like several folks in the thread, I get compliments on my ancient MP and M9, and inquiries about why I don't shoot digital.
Click to expand...

Not sure where you live but these days the Leica is noticed more than most other cameras, regardless of branding etc.
 
I get the "nice camera" comment on my RFs (not necessarily Leicas as many people think all RFs are "Leicas") about once or twice/week. About 1/2 of those making that comment about the M9 think it's a film body.

I think anyone who's "showing off" a Leica of any kind is doing so to a very small group of people, predominantly photo nerds, but also quite a few art school grads, design aficionados who've dabbled (or dabble) in photography, & working photographers. The M9 is likely to impress only a subset of that already small group that's up on the latest tech. However, if that's your thing, it does sort of work on occasion. When I shot a J. Crew fashion event for a local web site, we were trying to interview the head men's designer. He immediately recognized the M9 & we chatted about it a little, which may have helped break the ice for the writer to do his job.
 
In NYC, I get asked about my M9 a lot and my X100 occasionally. Sometimes the X100 is mistaken for a Leica. I'd say I get youngish women and older men asking about the Leica and youngish men for the X100. I think the youngish women know luxury brands even if they aren't into cameras. Perhaps it says "rich guy" to them? Well, the only rich guy thing I own is a Leica...
 
I've never had anyone anywhere other than at an LHSA meet-up ask me about the M8 or M9, or in fact any Leica I have ever owned. I've never taped up nameplates or logos either. It seems to me anyone who knows what a Leica is worth can recognize it even if the logos are taped up.
 
Last edited:
almost every comment i get is about how good it is that someone's still shooting with a film camera.. and an old one at that... 🙂
 
Yes, all other things being equal. Everyone I know who has the Fuji X100, for example, has had people mistake it for a film camera; I doubt it would happen as often w/a black version.

Relatively few "modern" (post late 1980s) cameras have chrome or visible metallic parts, whereas most cameras from about the late 1920s through the early '80s that I can think of had some kind of chrome or silver finish as part of their design. Of course, black paint & finishes was available long before the '80s, but that was mostly for photojournalists, etc., starting in the '50s. Really old cameras from the late 1920s & before were often black, too, but those usually have other visible features that make them obviously vintage (bellows, large size, wood, etc.).

Bruin said:
Do you guys think a chrome body is more likely to be mistaken for an old film camera?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom