Has Leica alienated photographers?

Has Leica alienated photographers?

  • Yes, I feel alienated by Leica's High Prices

    Votes: 170 38.1%

  • Maybe, sometimes yes, sometimes no

    Votes: 86 19.3%

  • No, I want Leica quality and that means Leica prices

    Votes: 122 27.4%

  • YES, I am alienated by Leica targeting bling marketing (late poll addition)

    Votes: 68 15.2%
  • Total voters
    446
Has photographers alienated Leica, by getting crap wages and buying poor quality, low cost imports?

Or has aliens photographered Leica?
 
Oh look it's the monthly/weekly Leica is too expensive thread....BRB need to find a dead horse to beat.
 
In film days, Leica was visually superior in final product.

Not so today as the lens quality gap has closed and digital manipulation has closed it further.

Now there are issues with dead pixels and red line that cost a small fortune to remap and months of downtime. Don`t forget corroded sensors although my M9 is fine. I treat it like a baby. Cosmic ray I CAN NOT HELP.

They need to fix the red line issue either home remap or readout and let PS fix the dead one like all the other cameras.

This stuff is so expensive I am afraid to be in a urban area. A camera and 3 lenses, $20.000 . And it is not easy to hide.

Maybe I`ll keep my M8 and some older lenses for that stuff.
 
Funny how people read what they want to read.

Not a leica bashing thread. Not a price bashing thread.

Some interesting points made throughout. Just curious that's all.

I'm sure one can find quality work made with modern leica gear by photographers who get paid fairly.

It seems that Leica rides on an old heritage, that's all.
 
bonatto said:
I was thinking today about the prices of Leica bodies and lenses today, and the amount of alternatives available that, when pixel comes to pixel, deliver the image.

In 1969, an M4 with a 35mm and 50mm sum micron set would set you back about $700. In today's dollars, about $4600.

The modern equivalent will cost you just under $12.000 at Adorama.

Leica relies today on a heritage built by working photographers of all different walks in order to sell what can only be understood as luxury products.

In doing so, I wonder if they've not completely alienated a generation of photographers who now turn to alternatives?
Click to expand...

And in 1969 you could buy a Nikon F with a 50 1.2 lens for just a little more than $400. So top o the line Nikon was less than half the price of Leica M. Now Leica digital M is about the same price as top of the line digital Nikons and Canons. So wouldn't that make Leica the better deal. What was once over twice the price is now about equal? All digital stuff is way to expensive but it is what it is.

I remember when I bought my Canon F-1s the new ones in 1983 Leica M was almost twice the price. When I bough my Blads in 1986 they were about 5 times as much as Canon F-1s. It's all relative. Leica has aways been expensive when compared to the alternatives.
 
The digital Leicas are probably too expensive for what they offer.
But not at all the film Leicas:
Paying about 4000€ for a camera you can use 50 and more years if you only take a little bit care for it, which you then even can give to your children for using before you pass away.....
Well that is an excellent deal!
A film Leica is a "once in a lifetime" camera, and therefore considering its lifespan a very cheap camera with excellent price-performance ratio.

Cheers, Jan
 
I look at digital cameras the same way that I look at computers.

And that raises a difficult question for me, is there such a thing as a luxury computer?
 
I got lucky and made great deals on used Leica gear a few years ago and never changed since. What's most important ? My main interest is making picture and having fun doing so, not chasing the most exciting new toy.

Also, for all those doing inflation math, let me know how salaries and purchasing power have progressed (or regressed) over the same period of time.
 
Hsg said:
I look at digital cameras the same way that I look at computers.

And that raises a difficult question for me, is there such a thing as a luxury computer?
Click to expand...


My belgium relatives have some Apple Pro Station. Huge price tag and it was needed for work. They are using it as only home PC now and I never seen video so good from Web camera as from their Mac on Skype connection to Canada. It is kind of luxury to use professional computer for home needs.

Mac laptops seems to be luxury comparing to regular laptops. With Macs to be more limited in terms of use.

Leica rebranded Panasonic cameras seems to be in luxury category.
RF aren't, because where is no other digital and film (soon) RF in-production cameras on the market.
 
I do black and white and now use M246. Below is my math to justified it ... had I stick to 35mm films, it will cost me:

Development: $10 a roll development x 10 rolls a month x 12 months x 5 years (planned) = $6,000
And I can double this price for contact sheets and test sheet printing.

My current iMac handles the files nicely. I have the following new computer related expense:
New external hard drive for file backup: $100
Lightroom on Creative Cloud: $10 a month x 12 months a year.

So, has Leica alienated photographers? Not me!

John
 
Has Leica alienated photographers?

How would I know?

But this is what I do know.

They appear to be profitable when other companies are losing money.

They continue to make and sell digital M cameras.

They continue to make and sell film M cameras.

They continue to expand their product line.

They worked hard to correct a problem with a sensor from one of their digital cameras that was introduced 5 years ago.

And every now and then they produce a limited edition version that we can all make fun of.

If that is alienating photographers than I think I want more of it. :D
 
i actually think it's both ways. why do you think used leica gear is so expensive ? - bcos someone is willing to pay the money. i never understood how a 40 years old summicron is going from 1000-2000, but that's probably just me. and there's always the wonderful zeiss glass which in some cases is even better than leica ( optically speaking ). Leica is what it is bcos it got cult status among the photo market, and they make it to the digital world. Not bcos it's better than anything else and i actually mean it. It's not 50's anymore and the market is full of options. But, ofc a Leica camera is a pleasure to use - that's something you can't ignore :)
 
Roger Hicks said:
"Has Leica alienated photographers"

As the company appears to be doing quite well at the moment, the only easy way to get a "yes" answer is to restrict "photographers" to "people of whom I approve".

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

If "doing quite well at the moment" is the only requirement for determining a companies customer satisfaction and therefor viability, then you are correct. If not, then a "yes" answer needs little restriction to obtain.
 
I remember reading about a PJ who would use two or three compacts, tied together on a lanyard, so that he could operate quickly. 3 shot burst on each one, pick up the next one during buffer and carry on. Her covered Iraq 2 for big publications. May have won a prize. Can't remember the name.
 
bonatto said:
I remember reading about a PJ who would use two or three compacts, tied together on a lanyard, so that he could operate quickly. 3 shot burst on each one, pick up the next one during buffer and carry on. Her covered Iraq 2 for big publications. May have won a prize. Can't remember the name.
Click to expand...

Here you go:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/multi_page8c1c.html?cid=7-6468-7844

Story stuck out to me at the time too... I found this article because I remembered the cameras used.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom