"It's not the camera, it's the photographer" - Nikon disagree

[Sonnar Brian]

I use a Nikon CS-9 case for my Leica M9. Put the half-case on the M9, fits perfectly with the 50/1.1 Nokton.

I have so many Nikons, can only be explained by being potty trained too early. But a pair of Nikon D1x 's are the last ones bought new, when they first came out. I did not upgrade to the D2x or D3.

 

[rogerzilla]

What works is what counts. Nikon probably mean they've chucked in a few more exposure modes, when a few weeks spent learning how to set exposure manually would guarantee more good exposures than a zillion AE modes.

In some ways Leica Ms are the ultimate anti-equipment statement. No AF, only basic AE (on three models, anyway) and a requirement that you vaguely know what you're doing. I'm not aware of anyone else that offers this simplicity on a new camera.

 

[Joe AC]

It may be true....or it may not be true. The fact of the matter is the if we didn't believe that gear makes a difference none of us (I personaly own 4) would be shooting Leicas. There are perfectly reliable cameras (film) that can be had for under $150 and there are some very good lenses that can be had for much less than that. Then why do we spend thousands more on Leicas? Because some of our favorite pictures were made with them?
Because some of our favorite photographers used them? Because they "work" (I'm sure we could find a less expensive camera to "work" for us) for us? Status? Because we have to much money? Or maybe because the Leica user is a bit insane? No. I don't think so. It because we feel that we want every possible advantage available (pocketbook permitting) to achieve taking a great picture. We need all the help that we can get. At least I do. If we didn't feel that it would make a difference to the end result, we would not foolishly/unnecessarily spend that kind of money. Nikon is agreeing with the voice inside our heads that we sometimes wish that we could turn off.

Thanks
Joe

 

[Roger Hicks]

It may be true....or it may not be true. The fact of the matter is the if we didn't believe that gear makes a difference none of us (I personaly own 4) would be shooting Leicas. There are perfectly reliable cameras (film) that can be had for under $150 and there are some very good lenses that can be had for much less than that. Then why do we spend thousands more on Leicas? Because some of our favorite pictures were made with them?
Because some of our favorite photographers used them? Because they "work" (I'm sure we could find a less expensive camera to "work" for us) for us? Status? Because we have to much money? Or maybe because the Leica user is a bit insane? No. I don't think so. It because we feel that we want every possible advantage available (pocketbook permitting) to achieve taking a great picture. We need all the help that we can get. At least I do. If we didn't feel that it would make a difference to the end result, we would not foolishly/unnecessarily spend that kind of money. Nikon is agreeing with the voice inside our heads that we sometimes wish that we could turn off.

Thanks
Joe

Dear Joe,

Actually, I would.

Leicas might conceivably make me a better photographer if I try harder and enjoy using the cameras.

But whether using a Leica makes me a better photographer or not -- and even if my pictures are no better than they would be with a 40-year-old Nikkormat or any other camera I own -- I'd still go for a Leica because I find it easier and more comfortable to use, i.e., I enjoy it more. The price is the only disadvantage, and as long as I can afford to pay it, why should I care?

Cheers,

R.

 

[DNG]

With the Manufactures claiming their gear takes the place of your creativity and talent.... this marketing will work form the neophyte to the experienced gear-head that hasn't figured it out yet.