Has Leica alienated photographers?

[pgk]

That's the thing....

In the film era, you could pay the small premium for a Leica film body over something else and know that the "bite" might only happen perhaps once. The fact that the older digital bodies aren't being supported makes them a riskier 'investment' and throws that logic off.

Ahhh. Investment - I see. Thing is, we live in a digital age. Electronic goods or equipment containing electronics are NOT investments. Like cars (even medium expensive ones), they have a life and beyond that everything is a bonus. Once the electronics are no longer backed by spares that's it -breakdowns are terminal.

I'm baffled by some of the posts here. Leica build expensive electronic consumer cameras. You don't HAVE to buy them. Personally most hold no interest to me - I simply like their rangefinders, but I'm not alienated by their other products - their existence is pretty irrelevant for the most part to me (and I won't be buying any). I won't by any expensive cars either - should I be alienated by the fact they exist? I don't think so.

 

[noisycheese]

Thing is a lot of time it isn't going out to eat at nice restaurants that eat up some peoples money its spending $5-10 each morning for a cup of coffee and pastry then another $7-15 each day for lunch which can add up to $200, $300 or more dollars a month.
So if you think about it one could still go out to eat at a very nice restaurant each week or a few times a month and still afford to buy a Leica digital M if they simply took coffee from home and brown bagged it for lunch each day.
The way I see it rather than thinking WOW I have to give up all these things to afford to own a digital M I think now if I just give up just 1 or 2 that really aren't that important to me then I'll be able to afford a digital M or maybe take a nice vacation some where each year.

Agreed to all the above.

no one is entitled to anything.

That was one of the points I was trying to make earlier.

When it comes to material goods and possessions, a person is entitled to what they can pay for and not one thing more than that.

 

[kevin m]

leica alienating photographers because of price is as ludicrous as bugati alienating drivers...

I think Leicas are used to take pictures more than Bugattis are driven, but good point, anyway.

I went to the Leica SL unveiling at my local Leica boutique last week. I spent most of my time chatting up the professional photographers in the audience, and NONE of them used their Leicas for the paying work, despite the professed love of using the cameras. One pro, who shoots documentary work for pharmaceutical companies, said he doesn't use his M's for that, even though I assumed they would be ideally suited for such work. Instead, he uses a pair of Fuji X-T1's. He gushed enthusiastically about their high ISO performance, relative to his M9's, and the utility of the articulated screen and EVF focusing aids.

 

[pgk]

.....and NONE of them used their Leicas for the paying work, despite the professed love of using the cameras.

I do (25 years as a freelance this year).

Depends what they are doing. Horses for courses and all that. I shoot Canons underwater (my specialism) but Leica M9s above (90% of the time). The Canons would be as effective to use everywhere in many ways but are too heavy.

Despite what you might think from reading the web older cameras are still very effective tools and lusting after the latest, greatest reiteration is more about attitude than reality.

 

[Brian Atherton]

Has Leica ever not alienated photographers in terms of pricing?

Were not the cost of Leicas in the 30s, 40s, 50s… expensive compared to an average (UK) income? Also they were pretty scarce, too.

Leica cameras, lenses and accessories have always been ‘top-end’, which for many involves substantial financial sacrifice in making a purchase.

Nothing has changed.

 

[FrankS]

Every expensive premium brand product will alienate a segment of the marketplace that is looking for an inexpensive product. Simply look at the car market. Call me Captain Obvious.

I'm very happy that the premium offerings exist because I can afford some of the Leica offerings on the used market. And because they are so well build, they continue to work well.

 

[JPSuisse]

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 don't exactly understand Bill's sentence. But, maybe it expresses what could be happening here. I am not going to get involved in the money discusion, because good tools cost money. This is just a fact.

BUT, the result of Leica's marketing is questions/comments I have shouldered like, "Is your Leica "covered in alligator hyde"," which implicitly means the person asking the question just (1) assumed that because I have a Leica I can't take a picture or (2) felt envious because he suspected me to be a richer than him.

Somehow, making expensive tools seems legit to many more people than making luxury products does. Ergo, we have alienation that I occasionally encounter, which does somehow alienate me a little too.

 

[aoresteen]

Bought my first Leica in 1979 - a used M3. I haven't bought a new Leica lens since 1983 when I bought a 50 Summicron and a 90 Tele-Elmarit. I've NEVER bought a new Leica camera. Last month I did buy a new +2 diopter for my 1981 Leica M4-P. I got tired of waiting for a used one to show up at KEH or eBay .

Leica prices are too rich for me. I buy used - just bought a Canon Serenar 28mm f/3.5 and a Serenar 85mm f/2. Sent them both to Don for a CLA before even putting them on a camera.

In the early 2000s I did buy new Voigtlander lenses for my Leicas - 15mm, 21mm, 28mm 1.9, & 35mm Pancake II. Sill have them. Leica lenses were just to expensive. I have only two Leica lenses - 90mm Tele-Elmarit & a 135mm f/4 Elmar (used only on my Hasselblad 2000FC/M with bellows).

Yes, I'm alienated by Leica. Always have been.

 

[Pioneer]

In September 2014 Leica announced that they had finally decided to build "my" dream camera. I ordered my M-A immediately and have not regretted that purchase once.

I'm not alienated at all.

If you can't afford a new one, save your pennies until you can afford a used one. And while you're saving money you might want to ask yourself why a used M3 still goes for $800-$1000; why a used M8 will still cost you about $1500. Quality has never been inexpensive. But it is almost always worth it.

 

[FrankS]

Has Leica alienated photographers?

Sure, some of them. Just like exotic cars like Ferrari alienate some drivers. So what? It is what it is.

I can't afford to buy new Leica, but I love that their stuff is so well built that when I buy used, it is still a joy to use.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I do (25 years as a freelance this year).

Depends what they are doing. Horses for courses and all that. I shoot Canons underwater (my specialism) but Leica M9s above (90% of the time). The Canons would be as effective to use everywhere in many ways but are too heavy.

Despite what you might think from reading the web older cameras are still very effective tools and lusting after the latest, greatest reiteration is more about attitude than reality.

Never let professional facts stand in the way of amateur fantasy.

Went full-time freelance 35 years ago next Christmas...

Cheers,

R.

 

[noisycheese]

Maybe we should have another poll with the question, "Why are some photographers butt-hurt at Leica?"

 

[Roger Hicks]

What is this obsession a couple of the posters with not going out to restaurants and bars?

Not go to Max's Kansas City, The Odeon, The Racoon Lodge, Barnabus Rex, the Ocean Club, and Max Fish? And that is only one city!

Hoping to run into artists at the gym?

Dear Fred,

It's easy to be obsessed with not spending money in restaurants and bars when you don't have the money to spend in restaurants and bars.

And (to be honest) I've never worried about the fact that I've never been to or even heard of Max's Kansas City, The Odeon, The Racoon Lodge, Barnabus Rex, the Ocean Club, and Max Fish. Quite liked McSorley's 30+ years ago, though.

In any case, if we're going to be parochial, I'd back the Fad'Oli in Arles against any of 'em.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Pioneer]

... I knew artists who never seemed to have a dime, but drank anyway...

I don't remember ever calling these guys "artists" in my neck of the woods.

 

[Oscuro]

Cmon guys,

Everybody uses everything.

Anecdotal "evidence" doesn't equate to (all) photographers.

The prez of Magnum did a fine line of work with Olympus so-called point-and-shoot cameras. Now he uses Leica digital.

A poster on this thread says he uses Leica M digital for dry land work.

Burnett used (last I bumped into him - years ago) Canon pro-sumer full frame digital.

I shot Leica waaaay back. But I earn my living with Nikon and now, to a certain extent, Fuji.

I see lots of DSLRs when there are other photographers around but I also see some - not a lot mind you, but some, Leica. That's anecdotal as well and as such is as meaningless as anything else you might read on the web - deep, dark, or otherwise.

ALIENATION EXISTS ONLY IN THE MIND OF THE SO-CALLED ALIENATED.

It has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with Leica.

"Alienation" in this case would seem to be all about expectations and then frustration.


"The only thing that matters is the finished photograph." Stieglitz to Newman

 

[FujiLove]

Has Leica alienated photographers?

Sure, some of them. Just like exotic cars like Ferrari alienate some drivers. So what? It is what it is.

I can't afford to buy new Leica, but I love that their stuff is so well built that when I buy used, it is still a joy to use.

Yes, that's exactly what I was going to say.

 

[FrankS]

Is my perception accurate: that there are fewer but higher priced art paintings being sold today than back in the 70's? Back in the day, did art support more artists, if only marginally, than today? Just a gut feeling, could be wrong. And a frivolous question: Why did the 70's artists seem cooler than the artists of today? While both groups largely scrape by, the old guys seemed to do so with a greater joie de vivre, and today's artists generally feel differently?

 

[FrankS]

Thank you, phhotomoof. I was hoping you'd respond. Your first hand experience in the active art scene in the 70's in one of the hot spots for art, is priceless. I daresay you could write a book based on your experiences then.

I couldn't open your post's thumbnail image.

 

[FrankS]

Thank you. That's funny because I did not know your attachment was a book.

Perhaps we just tend to romanticize the past, thinking those artists were cooler?

I wonder if any other RFF members were there then, experiencing this milieu.

 

[Gregm61]

Leica prices have always been above my pay scale. Pick a year, any year. Same old story. Still, I manage to put together enough if there is something I really want, like the M262 I just purchased.