High-end photographic tools vs. Luxury goods

I agree with the OP, they have been a luxury brand for a long time, but I would say parallel to the line aimed at photographers (not collectors)
My friend works in a Leica store, he's heard of M6s and M4s not needing repair or CLAs for years, while M9s frequently go to tweek and adjust this and that. Not speaking of S2 or v-lux either.

I guess one would have to see how much it would cost to buy an M3 or M4 back in the day, in today's money, then compare. Anyone ?
 
Keith said:
So it's all about the buying experience and less to do with photography ... who would have thought that? :D
Click to expand...

So could I go through the buying experience then return the camera for a full refund minus $5? Cause it now sounds like we're going on a carnival ride. Then again, we ARE being taken for a ride of some sort.

Phil Forrest
 
First of all, there's nothing wrong with luxury goods. Most luxury goods are designed well and are durable. I would rather call them the top tier products. It makes sense for people whose income is in the top tier to buy top tier products. If there's any reason to hate or get angry, people who are not in the top tier can and should blame either 1) the government who created the economy we are in 2) themselves for not making enough income to be in the top tier 3) society for not valuing their work as much as they think they should deserve 4) god (if you believe in it.

There's no reason to blame a company for delivering products to customers that they intend to serve.
 
Lauffray said:
I agree with the OP, they have been a luxury brand for a long time, but I would say parallel to the line aimed at photographers (not collectors)
My friend works in a Leica store, he's heard of M6s and M4s not needing repair or CLAs for years, while M9s frequently go to tweek and adjust this and that. Not speaking of S2 or v-lux either.

I guess one would have to see how much it would cost to buy an M3 or M4 back in the day, in today's money, then compare. Anyone ?
Click to expand...

Don't digital stuff all tend to break easier than mechanical stuff? If you think that Leica shouldn't roll out the M9 with issues, what do you think they should do? Keep spending money on it to make the most impeccable product possible until they run out of cash?
 
True but considering their reliability, durability and lack of weather sealing, they shouldn't be considered top tier products in any other category other than price when their track record is taken into account.

Phil Forrest
 
Araakii said:
First of all, there's nothing wrong with luxury goods. Most luxury goods are designed well and are durable.
Click to expand...

There are some that are - but just being made from precious materials it is just one quite small and specific niche category among luxury products. Most have their status through being adorned with some excess of (perceived) value cheaper to manufacture than durability and exceptional quality - "status" being the most popular extra. And most luxury products are not marketed towards the rich either...
 
PKR said:
Nikon, Canon, Pentax.. and even the MFT cameras have a much better track record when it comes to failure rate than the M8 or M9. So, for a camera that is as, or more expensive than the full spectrum of other professional and semi pro digital offerings wouldn't you expect a similar rate of reliability. But Leica fails to match even the Nikon D7000 in reliability, a camera that cost $1,200 to Leica's $7,000 for an M9. This is sad for this once great camera company.
Click to expand...

I don't know if they can be compared side by side because the M8 was the first digital M while Canon, Nikon, whatever had been rolling out models after models for a long time. And on top of that, I don't know if it's as easy to make a digital M as it is to make a DSLR. A lot of people would rather take a chance to use a product that might fail (albeit with a slim possibility) than not having the option to use the product at all.

All this generalization of discounting buyers of M as toys is just some prejudice that the "poor" have on the rich. Even without the M, the rich would just buy the 5dm3, the D800 and the 1D. And there are equally many actual users of M who bought it because of the unique functionality.
 
PKR said:
...
There is a change in Leica. The cameras of earlier years, the mechanical ones that earned the "Leica reputation" are replaced by digital cameras ... now with troublesome cameras, we have a repair service (here in the US) that may keep a camera for many months before it is returned, sometimes only to go right back to the shop as it's electronic issues continue, unsolved.

When I see the "bling" ads promoting Leica as a symbol of wealth and status, I can only conclude, working in the ad world at times, that is the market Leica has chosen - where they spend their ad money.
Click to expand...

One of he reasons for which I did not buy an m9 was the poor tech.service of Leica in Italy. Cameras after the m6 are not serviced locally. It's ok to send the camera to Germany but it is not ok to wait 4-6 weeks to have it back. When I lost the rubber ring of the VF of my x1 I called the italian importer for a replacement (I wear spectacles) middle july and the answer was "now is holiday time please call back end of august"!
robert
PS: re-reading what I wrote to be fair I have to say that Solms calibrated the RF of my m7 free even if out of warranty. But anyway it took almost six weeks. And it took 5 weeks to have the x1 sensor cleaned from dust.
 
Araakii said:
Don't digital stuff all tend to break easier than mechanical stuff?
Click to expand...
No, not necessarily. I've used a Fuji dSLR for years and nothing has ever gone wrong with it. It's built like a brick and just keeps on working. Many times I've thought about selling it and the Nikkor 17-55/2.8 that I use on it but I can't bring myself to do it because I trust it completely like I trust my film Ms.

The unreliability of the digital Leicas was there from the beginning. What Phil and PKR are talking about is not new, and there was a poll on this forum a year or two ago with a fairly large sample size that showed a 25% defect rate. I'm just an amateur but I do want a camera that works and I don't want one that's unreliable. I've bought a fair amount of new Leica stuff both bodies and lenses and I have the funds set by to buy a digital Leica, but I'm not buying one until an M10, 11 or 12 proves to be reliable. It ticks me off because I'd much prefer to use a rangefinder than use an SLR.

I really don't care about the boutique aspect of Leica, if they want to go that route it's fine by me, but I do wish the company would design and build a digital M that works properly.
 
PKR said:
After reading that account, and that combined with all I read about the troubles with the M8, I would never buy a Leica digital camera.
Click to expand...

never had reliability issues with my M8, and M9 seems to be just as reliable based on whats others been commenting about it. so dont worry and buy digital M with confidence, finances permitting :)
 
Is the M9 considered or marketed as a Professional camera though? I didn't think it was so on that caveat perhaps Pro. togs need to reconsider using such on an important or indeed, any shoot where a client requires results.
 
Reliability, especially for professionals is a prime factor. Just to give you an idea, here's a professional with a couple of Nikon pro-bodies and the record of the last few years.
Her name is Marianne Oelund and recently received the new D4.

"
Since Oct. 2007:
D3 #1: 580,000 frames with one rebuild
D3 #2: 400,000 frames, no repairs (sold)
D3s #1: 770,000 frames with one rebuild
D3s #2: 550,000 frames, no repairs yet
Typically, mechanical wear starts to impact AF accuracy after 400K-500K frames, so #2 D3s is due for a rebuild."
 
PKR said:
But I won't put a client's business on the line with a camera that is known to be troublesome. I regularly use Nikon products. I also have some Fuji digital gear. The stuff is completely reliable. I've never had a Nikon go down - ever. The fuji products are well made and I've had no trouble with any Fuji product.
Click to expand...
I have had no trouble with my Leica M8, so far. (Unless you wish to count a broken baseplate from a collision involving about three meters of air time and some Bavarian pavement.) On the other hand, I have lost shots on every single of the Canon DSLR's I have owned or otherwise used a lot. While the M8 has proven to be a tough and reliable little camera, I am sure it can and will fail sooner or later. That is simply how things realistically are.
 
PKR said:
But I wouldn't buy a M digital or an S2 either.
Click to expand...

cant think other reason than double price because backup body is needed :confused: surely nobody really gives much weight on anonymous comments in the Net.

Leica Hermes and other bling-bling models are obvious toys for rich, but dont think M9 or S2 has any faults why they should be avoided.
 
redisburning said:
This whole conversation is a strangely Western phenomenon; because I think in the West, and especially America, most people desperately want to be rich but because they aren't end up resenting the rich. In my personal opinion, one should not aspire to wealth nor covet those who have it. But, it's a lot easier to have that perspective when you're as lucky as I am in regards to the "who did I get for parents" lottery.
Click to expand...

This is absolutely not true. Most people in America do not want to be rich. What the "common man" despises is the constant undercurrent of class war that runs within our society - *that* is why the rich are resented.

It's surely not because the majority of people want to be the same people who are rich or want their possessions and lifestyle. They just don't want to be forced in part to indirectly support this upper class of well-off people while at the same time suffering hardship or financial strain at their own expense. Most people who have had to work hard surely aren't going to place a lot of respect towards people who haven't - or who somehow gained things easier than others.

Additionally the rich and well-off are almost always protectionist in nature - and naturally protectionism yields resentment from those they're trying to protect themselves from. Especially coming from a group of people who care little about empathizing or reducing gaps with the non-rich.

I've found more than a few posters here who continually bounce against the validity of these concepts - and I believe it's because they come from upper-class families. Amusingly, I bet if one had a hypothetical graph of per capita income of RFF members there would be a noticeable upward swept curve starting somewhere around 2008.
 
I find it interesting that people still equate the Leica M with professional photography - they were a rare sight around the necks of pros 30 years ago.

Leica photographers may have invented photo journalism back in the '20s, but even then, a Leica cost as much as a car - and everyone knew it - and even then, Leica was happily flogging gold-plated, lizard-skinned cameras to those who wanted to be seen to be able to pay even more.

So Boutique Cameras have been a Leica tradition since almost day one, and in this day and age, that's what the Leica M7/8/9/P has become. The S2 is the Pro Leica - priced competitively with Hasselblad digitals.
 
PKR said:
One thing that kept me with Nikon over the years, was the problem Nikon had with early F2s and how they solved it. It seems the flexable circuit board in some cameras was pinched during assembly.
Click to expand...

The F2 did not have any circuit board, whether flexible or rigid - whatever electronics it could be optionally fit with resided exclusively in the interchangeable finder...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom