Has Leica alienated photographers?

[Roger Hicks]

It won't always be that way. Many of us use 2009 technology and are perfectly happy with it. Not everyone needs night vision iso and print on a billboard resolution. Product cycles are getting longer and innovation opportunities more limited. Look at how long Canon took to update the 7D and Nikon the D700, and then tell me this technology is changing quickly. Leica is not an outlier here, the market now is not what it was when the M8 was announced. (And yet many still use M8s happily.) Meanwhile smart phones are stealing the bread and butter of mainstream camera makers, but not impacting the top end of the market.

I think Leica is not alienating photographers, it is rather preparing for a future where dedicated cameras are in a niche market, and it is lining itself up to cater to photographers in that market quite well. (OK, and rich luxury buyers too, but someone has to subsidize the rest of us!)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You have to be right. Look at Model A, Model B, Model C, Model C standardized register or Standard, II, III, IIIa, IIIb, IIIc, IIIf, IIIg, M3, M2.... The more a technology matures, the longer the "upgrade" cycle, though minor differences can always be introduced: 1/1000 instead of 1/500 for IIIb/IIIa, closer-together eyepieces for IIIb/IIIa.

There's a big difference between trying to persuade people to buy worthless "upgrades", and slowly improving the base camera for new buyers who want a camera that isn't too far out of date, or for people who are replacing old cameras.

The trouble is that a lot of people are so attuned to "upgrades" (cf iProducts) that they completely lose sight of why any sane person buys anything new.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Bill Pierce]

In roughly the “sixties” a lot of professional photographers used Leicas as their 35mm film cameras of choice. Those sales weren’t enough to support Leica, but Leica was quite public about those folks using their camera and why they used the cameras - and that contributed to a lot of non professionals choosing to purchase Leicas. As SLRs made inroads Leica seemed to counter with promotions involving celebrity hobbyists, exotically colored leathers, collectable editions and other marketing devices that made the cameras conspicuous consumption items. Conspicuous consumption items are almost by definition expensive, not affordable by the masses.

Sadly the rangefinder is no longer the most accurate way to focus fast lenses (nor is the rangefinder smaller and more compact than other small cameras). But if you give up the rangefinder, it isn’t a Leica. It isn’t unique. It has to compete with cameras that are not conspicuous consumption items. I don’t know a single professional photographer still using a digital Leica. And a lot of them were when the M8 was first introduced. Of course there are professionals using them. But not among my acquaintances, many of whom are well known and respected photographers who still have a couple of old film Leicas that still mean the world to them even if they can’t use them on most of their professional assignments.

Somewhere, a long time ago, with strange “editions” of cameras that seemed to be made for collectors’ shelves as much as taking pictures, Leica let go of the working stiffs and their friends. I can’t tell you how bad I felt when I sold my Leicas or how much I want them to succeed with a modern non-rangefinder camera. But for me and a lot of the folks I know, it will have to be a non rangefinder. A lot of people will say that’s not a Leica.

 

[CameraQuest]

In roughly the “sixties” a lot of professional photographers used Leicas as their 35mm film cameras of choice. Those sales weren’t enough to support Leica, but Leica was quite public about those folks using their camera and why they used the cameras - and that contributed to a lot of non professionals choosing to purchase Leicas. As SLRs made inroads Leica seemed to counter with promotions involving celebrity hobbyists, exotically colored leathers, collectable editions and other marketing devices that made the cameras conspicuous consumption items. Conspicuous consumption items are almost by definition expensive, not affordable by the masses.

Sadly the rangefinder is no longer the most accurate way to focus fast lenses (nor is the rangefinder smaller and more compact than other small cameras). But if you give up the rangefinder, it isn’t a Leica. It isn’t unique. It has to compete with cameras that are not conspicuous consumption items. I don’t know a single professional photographer still using a digital Leica. And a lot of them were when the M8 was first introduced. Of course there are professionals using them. But not among my acquaintances, many of whom are well known and respected photographers who still have a couple of old film Leicas that still mean the world to them even if they can’t use them on most of their professional assignments.

Somewhere, a long time ago, with strange “editions” of cameras that seemed to be made for collectors’ shelves as much as taking pictures, Leica let go of the working stiffs and their friends. I can’t tell you how bad I felt when I sold my Leicas or how much I want them to succeed with a modern non-rangefinder camera. But for me and a lot of the folks I know, it will have to be a non rangefinder. A lot of people will say that’s not a Leica.

For those not familiar with my friend Bill Pierce,
read his many words of Leica wisdom in the 15th Leica Manual of 1973 introducing the M5
-- arguably the very BEST of all the Leica Manuals!

Developing and Printing by Bill Pierce
Available-Light Photography by Bill Pierce
Artificial Light by Bill Pierce
Getting the Most out of Black-and-White Film by Bill Pierce

The 15th edition boasts other sections by similar notables including David Vestal, Theo Kisselbach, Ansel Adams, Ernst Haas, Norman Rothchild, Elliott Erwitt, Jacob Deschin, Andre Kertesz, Rolf Fricke, Beaumont Newhall, Bob Nadler and Rudolph Kingslake.

In other words, when Bill talks about Leica, many including myself have the opinion he knows more about Leica than the current management.

Stephen

 

[giganova]

In roughly the “sixties” a lot of professional photographers used Leicas as their 35mm film cameras of choice.
...
I don’t know a single professional photographer still using a digital Leica.

With all due respect, Bill, but this isn't the 60s anymore and people have a lot more choices these days. That's why Leica decided to capture the niche market, and quite successfully so. I know a lot of professional photographers who use digital Ms. If you swing by a Leica store, you'd be surprised how many young people are hanging around and are shopping there.

Also, many people argue on this board that no established photographers would trade their existing gear for a Leica SL. I would agree, but people seem to forget that that there are tons of emerging, new and talented photographers entering the scene every single days, and many of them will find the SL system very appealing.

 

[tonal1]

Just a few observations:

Yes, many Leica products are overpriced. But Leica has always been a boutique product. Leica didn't sell 200,000 M3's just to press photographers. "Lawyers and doctors" bought a few as well. I think it's always been the case that most new Leica kit was largely purchased full price wealthier enthusiasts and then "trickled down" to working, documentary, etc. photogs on the second hand market.

Modern Leica lenses are, obviously, technically superior to their vintage production lenses. They are more expensive in relation to the competition, but they are arguably higher end than they were at various times in the past. They were always expensive, just more so now.

Aside from many of us being priced out, the real tragedy is
that all the processing and printing jobs and talent that have been lost—the money saved by the shooter is now rolled into the initial purchase price. Those extra thousands of dollars most of us used to shell out for developing and skilled printing now go to the manufacturers bottom line. This is true of most high end digital gear, but especially true of the super-luxury Leica kit.

 

[Bill Pierce]

With all due respect, Bill, but this isn't the 60s anymore.

That's exactly the point I was making in my comments. In the sixties the Leica was the working tool of many photographers. Today it is both a tool and a conspicuous consumption item. But it is unaffordable for many photographers who might find it a useful tool and often a piece of prestigious jewelry for those with only a minor interest in photography.

 

[fireblade]

Leica is not over priced, only if you don't have the money is it so.
As a company they manufacture a product for a price that meets demand of their customer base (their choosing).
Its futile.

 

[Pioneer]

Bill, I think your points are very well made. However, I do think that the current Leica cameras are still surprisingly useful tools.

I was out enjoying Halloween (a rather odd US Holiday) a few days ago with friends and family. I was carrying a Nikon F6 with Delta 3200, a Pentax K5iiS and my Leica MM v1.

Guess which camera brought home the most keepers...by quite a wide margin.

I know this was all done in good fun but if I were asked to put together a newspaper or magazine spread I would seriously consider packing the Leica again. It may not be the fastest focus but when the focus is correct you know it.

 

[Bill Pierce]

Bill, I think your points are very well made. However, I do think that the current Leica cameras are still surprisingly useful tools.

I was out enjoying Halloween (a rather odd US Holiday) a few days ago with friends and family. I was carrying a Nikon F6 with Delta 3200, a Pentax K5iiS and my Leica MM v1.

Guess which camera brought home the most keepers...by quite a wide margin.

I know this was all done in good fun but if I were asked to put together a newspaper or magazine spread I would seriously consider packing the Leica again. It may not be the fastest focus but when the focus is correct you know it.

I think you are absolutely correct. It's a good camera and an especially good camera for certain kinds of photography. My Leicas were good companions on some incredible adventures. I regret that a young journalist today can't afford them. (I say "them" because between protection against breakdown on lengthy travels to weird places and fixed focal length lenses, you need more than one body.) I am saddened that some kid who photographs wars and poverty to show how awful they are and photographs a spectrum of people to show how wonderful they are can't afford a new digital Leica and someone who wears it as expensive jewelry can. I know those are extreme examples. The kid probably can't afford a Bentley either. Lack of a either Leica or a Bentley probably does not bother him, but I'm a grouchy old man.

 

[Pioneer]

I think you are absolutely correct. It's a good camera and an especially good camera for certain kinds of photography. My Leicas were good companions on some incredible adventures. I regret that a young journalist today can't afford them. (I say "them" because between protection against breakdown on lengthy travels to weird places and fixed focal length lenses, you need more than one body.) I am saddened that some kid who photographs wars and poverty to show how awful they are and photographs a spectrum of people to show how wonderful they are can't afford a new digital Leica and someone who wears it as expensive jewelry can. I know those are extreme examples. The kid probably can't afford a Bentley either. Lack of a either Leica or a Bentley probably does not bother him, but I'm a grouchy old man.

This is likely the worst part, not the grouchy old man part, the part where a lot of upcoming young photographers are not able to experience using a Leica as part of their work.

I know that a lot of the reason that Leica became a luxury item was strictly survival, but it would be nice if they could develop a program for budding pro photographers and photojournalists to help offset the cost of the equipment.

I still think that Leica brings a lot of capability to the table and it would be good for the future of the brand if some young pros who may not be able to afford to, had a chance to experience that.

 

[fad gadget]

no, it's the other way around. it's not Leica's fault the average joe can't keep up...

 

[Manuel Patino]

I do believe that the RF Leica is a special thing. There is a big difference in the experience of shooting with it and the results when compared with other cameras that I've used. I like it and I'm happy to have it. Anyway, I don't think the intrinsic value of the Leica M240 or MM or the lenses is in question. But it seems that the cost is too high for many. I understand the feeling or wanting something and not being able to obtain it. And arguably, one could say that they are overpriced (although I don't really think so for several reasons).

Anyway, what I don't really understand is why one would feel "alienated" from Leica because of the prices they command. One definition of alienation is: "the state or experience of being isolated from a group or an activity to which one should belong or in which one should be involved." Now, I say that feeling that one "should belong" or "should be involved" in owning or shooting with a Leica (or any other camera) presumes a feeling of entitlement. It's kind of silly or presumptuous to feel alienated from Leica since no one is entitled to own or use one.

Simply, either you can afford to buy one if you choose or not. It's not like Leica has drawn away from you or withheld it's products from you that you rightfully should have... Hey, almost anybody can make the choice to buy and own a Leica. It just takes making sacrifices and priorities. Maybe that's not worthwhile and the Leica is not as important as your other necessities or indulgences. It doesn't matter, you can have one or not, but feeling "alienated" just doesn't sound quite appropriate....

 

[Peter Klein]

To me, Leica equals rangefinder. I have no desire for their non-RF offerings. For me, the rangefinder is still the best camera for certain types of photography involving people and fleeting expressions. The viewfinder has no delay, blackout, or lack of dynamic range. It focuses where you focus it, not where an algorithm thinks it should.

I also shoot Olympus micro 4/3. It's a much more versatile system, but it doesn't have the same sense of direct connection with the human drama going on in front of me. It's more like watching it on television, a fraction of a second behind the actual action.

I often use the mirrorless for convenience, but I still prefer the Leica. Now, while I'm not quite as old or as grouchy as Bill Pierce 🙂 I believe I know how he feels. I've got a lifetime of practice using the rangefinder, and I get tired of arguments about features lists and obsolescence. If something works, it works. But if you can't afford it, it doesn't matter to you whether it works or not. As Bill mentions, working pro PJs would need two bodies. And they would be well advised to have another kind of camera on hand at all times.

Since I don't have to make a living with my cameras, I can shoot what I like. I've chosen to shoot with an M8 I've had since 2007, and an MM I recently bought used. Since I already have some Leica-mount lenses, it wasn't as much of a stretch as it would've been if I was coming into the system cold. Yes, I dislike the high prices. I dislike the popular misconception that anybody who shoots Leica is a rich snob who knows nothing about photography. I dislike the QC issues and the finickiness of the digital M bodies compared to the film bodies. But I like shooting digitally, the rangefinder way, with Leica lenses (and VC lenses, and even a couple of Sovietskii optics that have infiltrated my kit). So I do what I gotta do. If one buys used, with patience and with care, it's still possible to get an excellent kit.

 

[jaapv]

For those not familiar with my friend Bill Pierce,
read his many words of Leica wisdom in the 15th Leica Manual of 1973 introducing the M5
-- arguably the very BEST of all the Leica Manuals!

Developing and Printing by Bill Pierce
Available-Light Photography by Bill Pierce
Artificial Light by Bill Pierce
Getting the Most out of Black-and-White Film by Bill Pierce

The 15th edition boasts other sections by similar notables including David Vestal, Theo Kisselbach, Ansel Adams, Ernst Haas, Norman Rothchild, Elliott Erwitt, Jacob Deschin, Andre Kertesz, Rolf Fricke, Beaumont Newhall, Bob Nadler and Rudolph Kingslake.

In other words, when Bill talks about Leica, many including myself have the opinion he knows more about Leica than the current management.

Stephen

Yes, Steve, but "not knowing a single professional photographer using Leica" is widely off the mark. At least on LUF there are dozens, if not hundreds. I would guess that a considerable larger percentage of M users is professional compared to, say, 5D users. The difference in perception comes from the absolute number of cameras. Even if Leica were selling their entire production to professionals (and thus being a 100% pro camera) a Leica-pro would be a rare bird indeed.

 

[Alberti]

The thread has a strong word in it.
Alienation as I see it is also 'Verfremdung' which for a lack of a quick English equivalent (estrangement? The Thesaurus has more than a page.)
It means then that Leica turns its back on a lot of customers.

Skillfully, the M market base has shifted upwards.
- look at it from a marketing point of view: there is a space for buyers of these incredible camera's at high prices, but (as many observe) there is also a (bigger??) slice of the market where people would buy a cheaper version of the RF. Now they have the likes of the A7. But would prefer a real camera. The M-E at a lower price than the M fills the gap to some extent.

I myself bought a used camera. That did not alienate me.

 

[jaapv]

I don`t think Leica has alienated people.
Still selling plenty of cameras and compared to the cost of other pastimes the cost of a Leica is very reasonable.

Yes ,you can buy cheaper cameras ... so buy them and stop worrying about the price of Leica.

Quite right. A decent bicycle costs in excess of 5000 Euro, a friend of mine mine pays 4000 a year for a marina spot and needed a new suit of sails: 12.000, what about golf, guitars, hifi, etc...

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

I seem to recall reading an article about Leica prices in a magazine printed in the 30's. (I have a heap of them that have accumulated over the years.) FWIW, there's nothing new in what I'm reading here...

Regards, David

 

[David Hughes]

...The trouble is that a lot of people are so attuned to "upgrades" (cf iProducts) that they completely lose sight of why any sane person buys anything new.

Cheers,

R.

Hi,

Yes, I'm always amazed they don't have the word "upgraded" engraved somewhere conspicuous on the front of them. Like books put "new" into the title...

Regards, David

 

[icebear]

Leica cameras and lenses are the cutting edge of mechanical engineering.
Assembling these pieces of equipment with very tight tolerances requires skilled workers and time. These are not assembled at 10 pieces an hours per person. Count in the small numbers they are selling compared to the big guys, there comes your price sticker. Shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Of course they are expensive but you won't get that level any cheaper.

You can take an iconic photo with any other camera as well when you know how to use it and you are at the right spot at the right time. No photographer or photo journalist needs to use a Leica to be successful.

Obviously the passionate debate shows that there is something about using a Leica (esp. M) that no other camera manufacturer was/is able to deliver. Since there is no alternative for the original, the bickering about the pricing will go on forever😉.

And btw I use a 2/50 Planar on my MM and it is stunning.

 

[Hsg]

I think you are absolutely correct. It's a good camera and an especially good camera for certain kinds of photography. My Leicas were good companions on some incredible adventures. I regret that a young journalist today can't afford them. (I say "them" because between protection against breakdown on lengthy travels to weird places and fixed focal length lenses, you need more than one body.) I am saddened that some kid who photographs wars and poverty to show how awful they are and photographs a spectrum of people to show how wonderful they are can't afford a new digital Leica and someone who wears it as expensive jewelry can. I know those are extreme examples. The kid probably can't afford a Bentley either. Lack of a either Leica or a Bentley probably does not bother him, but I'm a grouchy old man.

Perhaps one might reverse that sentiment by saying that its sad for Leica that young ambitious photographers are not using their [digital] cameras due to cost and reliability.