Stu W
Well-known
Okay, my family was heavily involved in the Toys for Tots drive once again. My youngest is now promoted to Head Elf and she got to organize and delegate to all the Helper Elves. Anyway, over 4000 toys were collected in our neighborhood, which once again was the biggest single donation to the drive.
Now, on to the subject. Naturally, there were reporters there from several papers. Everyone carried a digital Nikon or Canon, all were huge, in your face and intimidating. I can understand why the stars get annoyed at the papparazzi. The cameras all looked like a weapon out of star wars. As this wasn't a pro football game I thought these photographic weapons were overkill. An M8 would have worked nicely in these close crowded conditions. Does Leica provide M8's to journalists? At least a discount? There were plenty of well healed people at this event who may have noticed the M8? This was clearly a case of bringing a sub-atomic laser blaster to a knife fight. Stu
Now, on to the subject. Naturally, there were reporters there from several papers. Everyone carried a digital Nikon or Canon, all were huge, in your face and intimidating. I can understand why the stars get annoyed at the papparazzi. The cameras all looked like a weapon out of star wars. As this wasn't a pro football game I thought these photographic weapons were overkill. An M8 would have worked nicely in these close crowded conditions. Does Leica provide M8's to journalists? At least a discount? There were plenty of well healed people at this event who may have noticed the M8? This was clearly a case of bringing a sub-atomic laser blaster to a knife fight. Stu
Stu W
Well-known
Seeing a pro using a piece of equipment to me is like an endorsement for the product. If it's good enough for someone who relies on it to make a living, it's good enough for me. Canon and Nikon were the only 2 names represented that night. Stu
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Pros are demanding customers. Amateurs will live with not having their camera for a couple of weeks. Professionals won't. If a company can avoid having professional customers, it will. Professionals are, if anything, a slim minority of Leica M buyers.
cmedin
Well-known
Stu W said:
And here I was thinking that the stars get annoyed at the papparazzi because they're stalking them 24/7 trying to get pictures of them to sell to the sleaze rags... when in reality they're just annoyed because the papparazzis aren't using rangefinders!
Thanks for clearing that up.
Mudman
Well-known
Hey Mate, I'll tell you something. I was shooting with my pentax spotmatic F last night, and people noticed the SLR (and its not even a big bad AF toting monster lens camera). I shoot with my Leica, no one looks up. Of course, if there are 30 other people with cameras, that might make a difference
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
The fact that M8 production is limited, and Leica doesn't seem to need any marketing help to sell the ones they can make, is decisive here. I can remember when Leica did have regional reps who would help out individually with pro requests (e.g., I was able to borrow a 135/2.8 Tele-Elmarit to photograph Mikhail Baryshnikov rehearsing; his publicist had specifically said no SLRs allowed, but Leicas were OK) but I think that's long-gone now.
However, the next company to introduce a digital RF (if there ever is one) might find this sort of pro loaner program to be a useful marketing tool. Any more, most photographers don't even know what an RF camera is, let alone what makes it special and useful. The sight of other working photographers using one might be enough to get them interested in investigating further.
I strongly suspect a pro market would exist for an RF as a supplementary camera, if it were versatile enough and would fit smoothly into the system the photographer was already using. (In a recent post, I outlined the technical feasibility of Nikon or Canon designing a modern, electronically-controlled true optical RF that would be based on an existing DSLR chassis and use existing DSLR lenses.)
I remember a while back when I was shooting some photos for the local children's theater/school of their "family day" event, using my R-D 1 and three lenses in a little Tamrac belt pack. A shooter from the local newspaper was there too, lumbering around under the usual newspaper-shooter load of several Canon DSLRs and big zooms in a gigantic shoulder bag.
I was getting better shots than he was because it was so much easier for me to thread my way through the crowds; his gear was so bulky that he couldn't really get spontaneous pictures at all, and was having to resort to posed setups. At one point we wound up side-by-side. He glanced at my R-D 1 setup with unconcealed envy and said, "Man, that's nice!" before lumbering away again.
For this particular event, that guy would have been a lot better off leaving his regular gear (which, admittedly, he probably needed for the other things on his shot list) in the trunk of his car, and carrying a smaller, lighter, more mobile setup. I think that if a lot of pros saw another pro using a practical piece of gear that was helping him/her get better shots, they'd say, "Hey, I ought to check into that..."
However, the next company to introduce a digital RF (if there ever is one) might find this sort of pro loaner program to be a useful marketing tool. Any more, most photographers don't even know what an RF camera is, let alone what makes it special and useful. The sight of other working photographers using one might be enough to get them interested in investigating further.
I strongly suspect a pro market would exist for an RF as a supplementary camera, if it were versatile enough and would fit smoothly into the system the photographer was already using. (In a recent post, I outlined the technical feasibility of Nikon or Canon designing a modern, electronically-controlled true optical RF that would be based on an existing DSLR chassis and use existing DSLR lenses.)
I remember a while back when I was shooting some photos for the local children's theater/school of their "family day" event, using my R-D 1 and three lenses in a little Tamrac belt pack. A shooter from the local newspaper was there too, lumbering around under the usual newspaper-shooter load of several Canon DSLRs and big zooms in a gigantic shoulder bag.
I was getting better shots than he was because it was so much easier for me to thread my way through the crowds; his gear was so bulky that he couldn't really get spontaneous pictures at all, and was having to resort to posed setups. At one point we wound up side-by-side. He glanced at my R-D 1 setup with unconcealed envy and said, "Man, that's nice!" before lumbering away again.
For this particular event, that guy would have been a lot better off leaving his regular gear (which, admittedly, he probably needed for the other things on his shot list) in the trunk of his car, and carrying a smaller, lighter, more mobile setup. I think that if a lot of pros saw another pro using a practical piece of gear that was helping him/her get better shots, they'd say, "Hey, I ought to check into that..."
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
sitemistic said:Never wanted to be a papparazzi after seeing how dorky Ron Galella looked in that football helmet.
Jackie had a heck of a right jab!
That was Marlon Brando that punched Galella in the jaw, not Jackie Kennedy.
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
The free gear for the PJ`s stopped with the M3`s and M4`s .........back in the good ole daze at Wetzlar, the 1980`s killed what was left of the hardcore professionals using the M`s
Leica`s just a name now and like Ferrari doesn`t have to prove anything to anyone anymore, (which is the wrong way to run a company) Leica`s lost alot of their loyal customers (I would only buy new Leica if the digital M was more afforable) or if they provided a digital back for vintage cameras (at a good price)
I don`t think they will be giving out any free M8`s ANYTIME SOON (and at $5,500 with all the bugs and problems they have - that`s the ONLY way that I`d want one) JMO
Tom
Leica`s just a name now and like Ferrari doesn`t have to prove anything to anyone anymore, (which is the wrong way to run a company) Leica`s lost alot of their loyal customers (I would only buy new Leica if the digital M was more afforable) or if they provided a digital back for vintage cameras (at a good price)
I don`t think they will be giving out any free M8`s ANYTIME SOON (and at $5,500 with all the bugs and problems they have - that`s the ONLY way that I`d want one) JMO
Tom
Last edited:
Avotius
Some guy
time was the photojournalist camera of choice was a nikon, now nikon and canon fill the bill, leica is of the past, sony and the others have not made it mainstream enough to be in there. Its just the way it is. I love my rangefinders and wouldnt hesitate to use them in a situation like that, but that said as a working photographer I choose economy over luxury. The canon 20D I use is cheap, easy to maintain, highly reliable, and a hell of a lot cheaper then a M8. But what you say is valid, some canon lenses are so big it scares people, I tend to try and use more small primes (which suits my style of shooting better to) rather then the big zooms.
That said, if I had to do it all over again, I would still choose my canon stuff, why? It works, I know it does. I am unsure of the modern Leica, and have taken a great leap of faith starting to invest into the system.
That said, if I had to do it all over again, I would still choose my canon stuff, why? It works, I know it does. I am unsure of the modern Leica, and have taken a great leap of faith starting to invest into the system.
infocusf8@earthlink.
Established
No Freebies
No Freebies
If you've been keeping up with Leica's financial situation you know that Leica was a breath away from going bankrupt. They are slowly making a recovery and the recovery is not going to take place with pros who want everything for free. If Leica survives against formidable companies like Canon (who's R&D dept. is larger than all of Nikon) and Nikon it will only be because they have developed a loyal customer base, from the past, who have appreciated the superb optics and build quality of their cameras. There are not many young photographers who are interested in rangefinders because they grew up in the SLR age. How many people use a typewriter these days although they are still around? Heck, I sell Leicas, use one, my work with the M8 is on LFI's website and I can't even get a free hat.:bang:
No Freebies
If you've been keeping up with Leica's financial situation you know that Leica was a breath away from going bankrupt. They are slowly making a recovery and the recovery is not going to take place with pros who want everything for free. If Leica survives against formidable companies like Canon (who's R&D dept. is larger than all of Nikon) and Nikon it will only be because they have developed a loyal customer base, from the past, who have appreciated the superb optics and build quality of their cameras. There are not many young photographers who are interested in rangefinders because they grew up in the SLR age. How many people use a typewriter these days although they are still around? Heck, I sell Leicas, use one, my work with the M8 is on LFI's website and I can't even get a free hat.:bang:
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
The problem with developing your customer base "from the past" is that customers from the past grow old and die -- and if you aren't developing any replacements from the present and the future, then you're out of business!
Besides, I don't think the original poster's idea was about giving highly visible photographers free goods (even though that's exactly what Canon does), but rather a free trial or loaner program.
I think such a program would be potentially a good way to recruit new customers -- but I still feel it would be a better bet for some potential future manufacturer of a more mainstream-oriented DRF, rather than Leica.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
sitemistic said:
Yeah, I remember seeing a photo once of Brando and Mr. Galella posing together. This was after the incident in which Brando punched Galella in the jaw, and Galella was wearing the football helmet while photographing Brando again. The caption in the magazine I saw it in (American Photo, I think, sometime in the late 90's) said that Brando was amused by the helmet and when another photographer asked him to pose with Galella, he said yes and the two men posed together for the photo.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
infocusf8@earthlink. said:
A lot of us young people would love to own and use a Rangefinder, but Leica's prices are simply unnatainable to my generation. The M8 costs half a years income to me, and even for young people who aren't poor artists, the cost is several months pay. I could afford a Nikon F4 when they were current. I could afford a Mamiya 645. I still have both of those old cameras, which I bought brand new, and I have several lenses for each. I couldn't afford a Leica back when I bought my F4 and 645, and even if I'd have gotten a body I could never have gotten another lens.
Leica's making a product (digital camera...the M8) that must be mass produced to be profitable, yet they price it like it is a handmade luxury item...a sculpture or piece of jewelry. Its neither, its a camera and a digital one at that. Their film cameras have gone up dramatically in price in recent years to the point that many of thier customers are buying 2-30 yr old used cameras like the M3, M2, and M6 because these can be bought at middle class prices. Those customers are not keeping Leica afloat because they're not buying a thing from Leica. So they might just as well be using Canon or Nikon.
Mudman
Well-known
ding ding ding. I would never buy a new leica, as the prices are insane. However a nice user M3...
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
There's a lot to what Chris says. When I was in my 20s and working as a small-town newspaper photographer (definitely NOT a high-paying profession!) I was nonetheless able to afford to buy a brand-new Leica CL and a 90mm f/2 Summicron lens, along with various other used but recent items.
If I recall correctly, the CL cost me roughly 5% of my annual income, or about 2-1/2 weeks' worth of pay. Yes, it was a big investment for a low-paid 20-something photographer, but I could afford it and it helped me with my job.
Now I'm much older, have long since gotten out of the newspaper business, and make (at least in raw numbers) considerably more money. I can afford to live in a much nicer place than I did then, drive a nicer car, and engage in nicer hobbies.
But in terms of income percentage, a new Leica M8 would cost me almost double what my old CL cost, and Leica lenses are proportionally more expensive yet. It's no wonder that Leica has become largely irrelevant to "working class" photographers.
Of course, they seem to do fairly nicely nowadays as a boutique maker of tchotchkes for the uber-rich, but that doesn't do anything to advance the relevance of RF photography. And if the uber-rich eventually lose their taste for this particular form of tchotchke, they're going to be in the same bind Cadillac got into when American fatcats decided it was more prestigious to drive a Mercedes-Benz or a BMW...
If I recall correctly, the CL cost me roughly 5% of my annual income, or about 2-1/2 weeks' worth of pay. Yes, it was a big investment for a low-paid 20-something photographer, but I could afford it and it helped me with my job.
Now I'm much older, have long since gotten out of the newspaper business, and make (at least in raw numbers) considerably more money. I can afford to live in a much nicer place than I did then, drive a nicer car, and engage in nicer hobbies.
But in terms of income percentage, a new Leica M8 would cost me almost double what my old CL cost, and Leica lenses are proportionally more expensive yet. It's no wonder that Leica has become largely irrelevant to "working class" photographers.
Of course, they seem to do fairly nicely nowadays as a boutique maker of tchotchkes for the uber-rich, but that doesn't do anything to advance the relevance of RF photography. And if the uber-rich eventually lose their taste for this particular form of tchotchke, they're going to be in the same bind Cadillac got into when American fatcats decided it was more prestigious to drive a Mercedes-Benz or a BMW...
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Thanks guys. Several months ago, maybe a year ago, I got flamed real bad on another forum when I stated that Leica was no longer a professional camera. My reasons were that few professional's could afford them and that those who could were buying 22mp Canons because those offered what pros need. The high end Canon costs $8000, but it offers 22mp resolution, lenses that are financially within the reach of professionals, a wider system of lenses than Leica, a worldwide system of support for pros, versatility to handle anything from macro work to architecture to portraits to landscapes. Its expensive, but it can do EVERYTHING.
Leica's are more specialized and few pros today could use just a Leica. The camera needs to be within the financial reach of those pros who could make use of them. Photojournalists, documentary photographers, and fine art photographers are the main people who could really use an M8, or an MP or M7. None of them earn enough on average to afford one.
Michael Reichmann on the Luminous-Landscape recently had an article written by James Russell, a prominant advertising photographer. Russell bought an M8 for personal use and was writing about it. That's the thing...only commercial photographers with big incomes like Russell can afford one, and they're the ones who really can't use it for their work that pays them.
Leica's are more specialized and few pros today could use just a Leica. The camera needs to be within the financial reach of those pros who could make use of them. Photojournalists, documentary photographers, and fine art photographers are the main people who could really use an M8, or an MP or M7. None of them earn enough on average to afford one.
Michael Reichmann on the Luminous-Landscape recently had an article written by James Russell, a prominant advertising photographer. Russell bought an M8 for personal use and was writing about it. That's the thing...only commercial photographers with big incomes like Russell can afford one, and they're the ones who really can't use it for their work that pays them.
Last edited:
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Mudman said:
We hear that all the time on this forum, and no company can survive when those who use its products keep saying "I would never buy a new....."
Remember, Leica makes nothing when a used Leica changes hands.
projectbluebird
Film Abuser
There may not be many of us, but we are out there! Who is the youngest member of RFF anyway?infocusf8@earthlink. said:
My rangefinder collection currently outnumbers my SLRs, and I'd love to go digital with it. But I simply cannot afford even the RD-1, much less the M8. For that matter, I can't really afford the 5D (evil dSLR) that I'm saving up for. At least it's only nosebleed territory pricing (~20% of my annual income), compared to the astronomical pricing of any new Leica gear (~40% annual, for the M8).
I know I'm weird, but I did! Until the one store that still sold ribbons for it stopped carrying them that is...infocusf8@earthlink. said:
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
projectbluebird said:
There's a high school kid named Jeremy Langford who posts a lot in the Evil SLR forum asking questions about his Minolta SRT-101 that he bought for his school photo class. I think he's about 16...that's the youngest I've seen. You and I are among the younger ones even though you're in your mid twenties and I'm 32. Most people here are a lot older, and have a lot more money than we will likely ever have. My father graduated from high school and got a job as a lineman for the phone company making, in todays money, 40,000 a year at age 18. Those days are gone and when old men like him retire the whole economy will be $7 an hour pay with $30 an hour costs of living.
pachuco
El ****
Leica did give photojournalist Bruno Stevens an M8 to try out for his assignment in Iran but I think Bruno is rather special that way. Click here for the story. I think his is the third post down.
Crappy thing about getting paid to shoot is that you need to nail the shot, can't blame it on the equipment so you go with what gives you the best chance of getting the shot. In my case that is the big o' Canon DSLR and so far that has worked the best.
Crappy thing about getting paid to shoot is that you need to nail the shot, can't blame it on the equipment so you go with what gives you the best chance of getting the shot. In my case that is the big o' Canon DSLR and so far that has worked the best.