Leica owners are just showing off!

micromontenegro said:
I must live in a different world than most here, because I find that the Leica brand is very recognizable, even between the non-photogs. Hollywood filmmakers and such seem to agree, as they often try to portay "artsy", "classy" or even "adventurous" roles as Leica users. Big Fish, Blood Diamonds and the Chanel No. 5 add come to mind. They producers of such didn't pick Leicas because they were incospicious- quite the opposite, they picked them to make a statement about the characters. And I do think there are some Leica users out there that do the same. I woulnd't call it showing off, but "making a statement".

On a personal note, I find it almost impossible to use any rangefinder during a whole day without someone asking "Is that a Leica?" Which nowadays is not, as I don't own Leicas anymore for the time being.
Click to expand...

So so right. I dunno where all this 'Icould never recognise a Leica stuff comes from. Although I have a pretty good 'idea':- The makers of DSLRs for a start. It seems you can fool all the people all the time if you bombard them with incessant advertising. " The sheep remain inside their pen until the shepherd leads them all away".... Genesis-'Suppers ready' Foxtrot 1972. Bye heaven aren't we all a flock of sheep.( Well most of us)

Anyway post Armageddon and the mass of EMP all the current digicameras will be just a heap of useless plastic and those of us that still have analogue cameras and made it to the shelters will become the 99.99 % who will still be photographers.

Nothing like being positive.. hehe.

BTW saw Eric Clapton the other day, what an affront he actually had an MP round his neck and a few cassettes of film in his pocket (and he had paid for it himself) .
 
For years I cared less about what camera I had as long as I had one that worked: my mother's Brownie and Instamatic, the Voigtlander my sister sat on, a Mamiya Sekor, Nikon, Rolleiflex, Pentax. I developed my own black & white or shot color slides. Eventually, when I could no longer afford the time and space for a darkroom, I ended up with a Canon EOS 10D. Digital cameras and Photoshop rescued my passion for photography. Now I use a Canon EOS 5D Mark II when I need to produce JPGs quickly (my daugher's softball games or school plays for the Parent Teachers Association), otherwise I use old folding or rangefinder cameras including a Bessa R2C and a M6. Recently I obtained a M8 to see if I would like shooting digital with a Leica, with the thought of selling most of my collection of old cameras in order to afford a M9! (I'll keep the M6!) Ultimately, I know it's not the camera, what counts are the photographs. -George
 
Doug said:
John, I too worked in a serious camera shop, in my case part-time in the mid-1960's. I'm put in mind of one youngish man who benefitted from a sizable inheritance, so he drove various fancy cars, dressed well, and fancied himself a photographer. With the best equipment of course, and I could sympathize with that, as then one is talent-limited rather than gear-limited.

He was perceptive enough to see his results were not up to expectations with the current kit, so he would trade the whole thing in on, say, a Hasselblad kit with the right selection of lenses and accessories, all in a nice fitted case. He would shoot with it, get guidance from the store owners who were both pro-level photogs, but ultimately the kit didn't suit him and he'd trade it all in on, say, a complete Leica M kit. And so it went, and the store made a pile of money from him. He liked the best, and swaggered a bit over it, but sadly the gear never brought the joy he was after.

He was a pretty decent guy; the most annoying were the USAF aircrews from the airbase who came in to "shop" and get expert suggestions on what gear would suit them best, and get to handle it at leisure. Then a few weeks later they'd stop in and tell us what a great price they'd gotten that very gear for on the latest trip to Taiwan or Tokyo.
Click to expand...


Right, or got it through an ad in Pop Photo, but wanted you to show them how to use it? ;-)

One of those types actually worked at the shop, bald guy who hated anyone under 50, and on Saturday's when a wedding party motored by with horns blowing, would say "Nother woman's got it easy". I did hear he talked a different story around the house.

Lots of characters. Owner of the shop always had the best, did some good work, but he swapped cameras and cars like baseball caps, which is OK, he knew and knows the "score".

His son is still a very good friend and recommended dealer, not too many serious shops left. Best ones had terrific "junk" drawers of stuff you were looking for.

Enjoyed your post.

Regards, John
 
micromontenegro said:
I must live in a different world than most here, because I find that the Leica brand is very recognizable, even between the non-photogs. Hollywood filmmakers and such seem to agree, as they often try to portay "artsy", "classy" or even "adventurous" roles as Leica users. Big Fish, Blood Diamonds and the Chanel No. 5 add come to mind. They producers of such didn't pick Leicas because they were incospicious- quite the opposite, they picked them to make a statement about the characters. And I do think there are some Leica users out there that do the same. I woulnd't call it showing off, but "making a statement".

On a personal note, I find it almost impossible to use any rangefinder during a whole day without someone asking "Is that a Leica?" Which nowadays is not, as I don't own Leicas anymore for the time being.
Click to expand...

I think they are chosen for films because some camera tech advisor (Roger, are you heading to apply in Hollywood?, sound like a well paid gig) tells them to use that camera, and few folks at the theater recognize the camera so it draws their attention.

Those dubbed in motor wind sound effects from the 70's kind of spoil it though. ;-)

Regards, John
 
Leica is just a sweet camera to use, that is perfect for me. I came a long way to realize this. As for "showing of" I do not think this is the reason, the more likely one is that one thinks that if he/she will buy a Leica M9 and Nocti one will become a better photographer(I cannot deny, I feel partially driven by that too).
I actually hate when people notice my leica and make awkward comments. On the other hand, I do feel superior to all DSLR, Bessa, Contax users heheee :) being in possession of the best camera in the world!!!
 
I had my black M8 on my shoulder at an opening reception of work from the local Newspaper photographers, nice stuff.

One of the exhibitors walked up to me and asked if it was an M3, so they do attract attention. ;-) Really nice guy, but those youngsters need educating. ;-)

Regards, John
 
I spent a lazy afternoon with some painter friends and sat in confusion hearing all of their "gear talk" various paints or materials. I even heard one or two gasp when talking about a particular paint brush, don't remember the name. No one seemed to give a damn when I took a picture of them with my Leica, but I'm sure if I started sketching them with the "Leica" of pencils I would turn some heads.
 
Roger I haven't seen any snobbery around here! There are several that think Leica is the best & that's it. I kind of feel you are a member of this catagory, but I wouldn't consider any of you as snobs, just proud owners! & heck you might be right for all I know because I never owned a Leica. The few really snobbery folks I've run across were Nikon DSLR users & belonged to strobist groups.
 
Of all the Leica owners i have ever known, not one has been even close to being "rich." Not sure what even constitutes 'rich' anymore. One can be "very comfortable" making USD$100,000/year, if you live in West Virginia. Or Costa Rica. Especially if you're single. But, that same amount of money in Manhattan doesn't go nearly as far. And, if you have a mortgage and two kids, it's a pittance.

The people i've known who have owned Leicas, myself included, have done so because they've been obsessed either with 1) ultimate image quality [the lenses]; 2) the heritage/history of images and they appreciate a particular 'aesthetic' attributed to Leica glass; 3) the 'portability' aspect; or 4) the 'gadget'/gear fetish aspect.

Yes, a Leica is a prestige object. But, that's as much of a negative to some people as it is an attribute to others. If one wants to 'show off,' you don't choose something both inconspicuous (valued for 'stealth') and so uncommon that the target won't recognize it. The only people who know it's not "just an old camera" are other photographers who are likely to already have some experience with them. The ones who haven't had the experience probably haven't because they have no interest in them. I actually don't remember ever seeing one in the wild (in New York City) until i had decided to buy one. I just didn't pay attention before. And, now when i see them, half are owned by 30-ish year old hipsters and half by 60-year old EuroTourists.
 
i was at the Discovery Museum with my kids a couple of weeks ago. i had my M8 and MP around my back, the baby was in the baby bjorn in front.
i saw a hipster type guy with a CL shooting his kid and said something like 'hey, that's cool. is that a CL?' he very snottily responded 'yeah. it's a leica, ever heard of it?'
i just turned and walked away. kind of a bummer, it was the first time i have ever seen another person with a film camera at the Discovery Museum.

bob
 
I have never met a Leica photographer actually shooting. Once a gentleman of about 65 or so came to an exhibition of mine with a mint Leica M7 around his neck but he was dressed to suit the Leica and I very much doubt if he was trying to show off.

I have met a number of PJs who have told me that they wished they were still shooting their Ms instead of the huge SLRs they now use. Nothing pretentious, just commenting on the state of their backs!

I think all the snobbery is largely on forums, but I have hear stories from cameras clubs... which I have never been to.

Just finding a Leica user actually in public is hard enough. As for the snobs, I think they are private creatures....
 
I also own "the other Leica glass" - 8x42 and 10x25 binoculars (fantastic binos BTW) and I'm now wondering if this type of comparison occurs on the birding forums :p not being a birder myself :cool:
 
The only person that you need to impress with a Leica is yourself, otherwise why use it?

I'm impressed by the Viewfinder of the M3, it's like they used an exacto knife to place the RF patch. No RF patch flare, ever. I wish my M8 had the M3 finder in it.
 
On the occasions where I have used a Leica III (a, c, or f) for an extended period of time in public places I have frequently encountered unsolicited interest and knowledge in the camera coming from total strangers (I was not trying to "show off" - these are still damned effective and reliable 35mm cameras, which is why I favor them). Leica maintains it's widespread allure for a large variety of reasons, for me it's the performance and quality aspect.
 
Last edited:
I once owned a pair of Leica 7x50 Mareseptits, a brand that went out of production in about 1960 or so. They were the finest 50mm binoculars I've every used, better than recent Zeiss or Nikon production. Leica quality is not hype - it's the real deal.


raydm6 said:
I also own "the other Leica glass" - 8x42 and 10x25 binoculars (fantastic binos BTW) and I'm now wondering if this type of comparison occurs on the birding forums :p not being a birder myself :cool:
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom