Leicaphile ?

[ruben]

There's two issues here...firstly, there's the Leica haters who have a point, although if you're a true RF lover you'd sell your soul to have an MP (admit it). Secondly, there's the anti-elitist/cheapskate coalition....who'd object if there was ANY recognition of contributing. I love my virtual MP, but really don't give a crap if you have one or not.....although people who use this forum extensively have a bit of a moral obligation to contribute, no?
The interesting threads, the general politeness and goodwill, and the members willing to share their knowledge are the real strengths of this forum. It's getting pretty whiney lately.....
Mike

Time to clean and put order in the garage.
Besides friendship, fun, and more knowledge, one of the nicest things this forum has given me is a more precise definition of my gear identity. I am a vintage photographer (and virtual wowser!).

Leica owners are my friendly neighbours within the ranch I do belong to. Should I be so dummie as to label them by the camera they are using ? It seems they themselves do not want to label themselves this way.

Should I hate what I cannot reach ? First of all, technically I can reach an entry level Leica setup of two bodies and some four-five lenses. But I won't, thanks to this very forum. I do not need it after better understanding what I am and what I am looking for.

As I have already said, the Leica message is rather contradictory from my view point. High quality, High class, Upper social class, not my banner. Thus, everybody knows many masters of photography, have indeed been and are Leica-owners. It would be as stupid to label their images by their camera as labeling their cameras by their images.

As stupid as labeling rich people by this sole aspect of their life.

Still, Leica is not my end dream. I am wise enough to fight my grounds for matching the images rather than the gear. This is the ranch I belong to, not for having already matched the images, but for free choosing the grounds.

I can sleep good by night, I made my choice with the help of this very forum.
By looking to my camera closet two conclusions I can make, none of them including the like of "new is nice":

a) When you buy a system body you are starting a long travel journey. The Leica wagon is too expensive a ticket for me to buy, with a more expensive following tour, despite many of my friends can. I trust them they respect me not for my gear cost, but rather for the grounds we all stand.

b) Rather be the King of Junk than slave at the Plenty-of Kingdom. Obviously there are in-between choices, but better we know the poles. Looking at my closet, I am gear rich, and not so junky. An all rejoicing collection of different system and formats, and single body cameras with, lenses and accessories to the fine grain.
Now comes the digital revo telling me sell it out quickly! Ok mommy, but in exchange of what exactly ? The same with Leica.

This is what I call being a slave, for my class.

Thanks, mom, I already smoke. I don't need to sniff.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[ywenz]

wgat the hell was this thread about?

so confused... no time to read the ramblings above..

 

[Goodyear]

I have two Leica bodies
and 10+ lenses, and only one Leitz lens among them (which will be
sold soon). Once I get my J-9 back from Kim I will love to use it on my M3.

I have taken to enjoying a GBP0.50 J8 on my M2.

The lens gives me images I love, the camera fits my hand just right and I can work it without thinking.

It can't be elitist if I'm enthusiastic about such bargain-basement FSU glass. It's just the combination of two things I work well and enjoy to work with.

/edit to add:

Which isn't to say it would be elitist if I only used Leitz glass (I do have a nice Elmar) - just as long as I used it because it worked for me, rather than just becasue it was Leitz glass.

 

[ruben]

Hi Ruben,
....Best,

Roland.

You are haunting me since a month ago at the G-2 thread or whatever it was. I have to reckognize your persistency and patience. That's a good example for me!
Cheers,
Ruben

 

[Oldprof]

The whole Leica discussion is a rather arcane topic of interest only to photographic hobbyists and perhaps some artists and professionals. Hobbyists tend to be gearheads who love to debate the relative merits of equipment. And I suspect they often spend more time discussing equipment than actually using it. This is true whether the passion is golf, skiing, audio equipment, guns, canoes, or cameras. Meanwhile, the most prolific picture takers of the world could not care less as they use disposable and digital cameras for their travels and family snapshots.

For me, the most important fact is that a person looking at a photograph cannot tell which brand of camera or lens was used to make it (there might be rare exceptions to this, such as a Polaroid print, or a type of panoramic image that can be made with only one type of camera). When I look through books on the history of photography I am amazed at the quality of some of the portraits and landscapes produced in the 19th century. Almost certainly, all of these pictures were made with lenses that were more primitive than the ones currently available, regardless of brand. Leicas are nice, but they aren't required for doing fine photography. The factors that determine which photographs are considered "great" are usually such things as subject matter, composition, and historical significance. And photographers who establish a significant body of work and style will be looked at more seriously than most hobbyists, even though recognition may come posthumously.

 

[ruben]

The whole Leica discussion is a rather arcane topic of interest only to photographic hobbyists and perhaps some artists and professionals. Hobbyists tend to be gearheads who love to debate the relative merits of equipment. And I suspect they often spend more time discussing equipment than actually using it. This is true whether the passion is golf, skiing, audio equipment, guns, canoes, or cameras. Meanwhile, the most prolific picture takers of the world could care less as they use disposable and digital cameras for their travels and family snapshots.

.....

As far as I know, who is counted within "the most prolific picture takers of the world", is an issue of bitter fight among the candidates. I know it first hand from the time my darkroom was open to the public. Being located in Jerusalem, no wonder a few of the abovementioned asked me for service. What ridiculous petty minded people ! Besides a natural visual skill, only a single illuminated exception deserved my admiration as a human minded artist !

I do not know who are among the most prolific exceteras in your view, and how they behave regarding equipment. But as far as I know, and that is not too much, true photographic artists are not those most advertized, but many of them quite concealed, hardly surviving, thoroughly dedicated to their art. And, Horror ! they do have a keen interest in equipment ! ! !

Besides, between the hobbyst and the most prolific etc, there are the amateurs (lovers of), the most beautiful land for me to be buried at. I think HCB had some parallel thought.

As I cannot quote HCB, I hope BYUPHOTO will pardon me for introducing here one of the best statements I have ever read or heard about Photography:

"Photos 5 cents. They are not worth that much but I need the money"

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[Jocko]

Ruben, I hope you don't think that I'm haunting you - It's just that you start very interesting threads! Until I joined this forum I was unaware that there was such a thing as an RF community. I was subsequently surprised by the antagonism sometimes shown towards Leica users.

There is surely no doubt that occasionally this reflects pure jealousy, a singularly futile emotion, as it is nothing but wrongly-directed self-hate. Yet to some extent contempt has a faint justification. Whilst new Leicas cost proportionately less than in the grand old days of the 1930s, goods such as cameras are in general unimaginably cheaper. Leicas are thus sometimes used by people with more money than sense - but so are BMWs or Mercedes-Benz.

As every theology student knows, the word translated as "sin" in the English versions of the Bible is the Hebrew "hata", whose original meaning is roughly "to miss the point". Error lies not in things but in inappropriate use. A Leica used as jewellery is is the sign of an idiot. Yet a Leica used because it provides a particular photographer with his perfect means of expression is a triumph and a joy.

Having bought many cameras over the years, I find my favourites are my good old FED 1s. They do the job for me. I wish nothing but the best to those who find that Leicas do the same.

Cheers, Ian

 

[rpsawin]

Here is an idea: Don't worry about the gear anyone used/uses/loves/hates/desires/owns. Turn off your computer, pick up one of your cameras and some lenses and go out shoot. Maybe doing so periodically will put some perspective into discussions about "gear". At the very least walking around for a day may clear your head(s).

Bob

 

[ruben]

Didn't mean to, Ruben. Take it easy,

Roland.

You are my friend.

 

[ruben]

Here is an idea: Don't worry about the gear anyone used/uses/loves/hates/desires/owns. Turn off your computer, pick up one of your cameras and some lenses and go out shoot. Maybe doing so periodically will put some perspective into discussions about "gear". At the very least walking around for a day may clear your head(s).

Bob

I would like to, but you keep me wondering why among so many threads you send the above quoted kind invitation exclusively to me...

Cheers,

Ruben

 

[ruben]

wgat the hell was this thread about?

so confused... no time to read the ramblings above..

I will tell you right on. Much of the camera selling bussiness, like in any other trade, rests on the neerthentalian false assumption that by owning the goods you own the virtues.

Cheers,
Ruben

PS: for more info you'll have to follow the thread.

 

[JimG]

"Can't we just all get along together?" Rodney King

 

[Gid]

Happiness is wanting what you've got (apparently).

If you have aspirations to be a "photographer" then go out and take photographs with whatever you have. Master the technical aspects so that you can repeat, at will, with a high degree of confidence. Master your equipment so that you can get the very best out of it. Don't worry about what the label is on the gear that you own - there is as much reverse snobbery about shooting with something that cost nothing as there is snobbery about shooting with the "best" whatever that is. Compare and discuss your images not your gear.

On the other hand, if it gives you pleasure to own certain types of photographic equipment, then own it - finances permitting. If camera fondling is your bag, then that's fine too.

Ultimately, do whatever makes YOU happy and don't judge others by your standards unless they explicitly ask for that judgement.

Life is too short for anything other than maximising the pleasure we can get from it.

 

[Ergo]

¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤º°Hope this helpsº¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø

 

[Gid]

😎 😎 😎 😎 😎 😎 😉

 

[ray_g]

Ruben, just out of curiosity, what leica equipment did you try that left you with such a dislike for it?

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

"Dime con quien andas, y te dire quien eres". What lively discussions would Socrates and Freud have?

I didn't know I was part of the "upper social class". It must be my Jupiter-8? No, the cheap napkins I bought last week? No, maybe the fact that I was starving last week? No. Stereotypes. Stereotypes! That's it.

 

[Bertram2]

I was subsequently surprised by the antagonism sometimes shown towards Leica users.
There is surely no doubt that occasionally this reflects pure jealousy, a singularly futile emotion, as it is nothing but wrongly-directed self-hate. Yet to some extent contempt has a faint justification.

I have some very nice friends (superb photogs all) who used and still use Leicas, and IMO this statement needs a bit more differentiation:
Tho one cannot exclude the sort of motivation you mentioned above I don't think it is the the real basic prob behind that stoneold controverse.
I even do not think that there is a anti - Leica attitude nor a anti- Leica-user attitude in general, neither here nor in other forums.

But there is undoubtedly a hostile feeling indeed against a certain group of Leica users among the hobby photogs . And this is neither directed to those who use their expensive tools to produce beautiful photos , nor against those who have cupboards full of collectors stuff and are so busy with blowing off dust and with fondling the gadgets that there is no time left for photographing.

No, hostile feelings are directed solely to those who have obviously bought a
( 50yo moldy) Leica only to TALK publicly about the their camera and who do not miss any opportunity to mention that they own the best of all cameras, which makes the best pics at all, and that all other cameras are simply second class. The truth is that all this so called anti Leica attitude is provoked by these binary structured wannabees themselves. And of course , when they are crizised they fire back with this idiotic "sour grape " argument, which reveals so perfectly their miserable motivation for owning such a camera.

If anybody could convince this sort of social bedwetters to forget all cameras and switch over to a moldy old Porsche or Ferrari , or to deal with mechanical watches or rare erotica, the so called Leica bashing problem would be solved. For all non-Leica users but also for the rest of the Leica users , who are happy take brilliant and intersting photos with their cameras and who must feel compromised by the behaviour of that talkative crowd who speaks constantly about the greatness of their cameras hoping its reflection brightens up their own poor personality, a bit at least.

Regards,
Bertram

 

[Sonnar Brian]

So you're pretty sure that there is no hostility toward Nikon RF users?

 

[Bertram2]

So you're pretty sure that there is no hostility toward Nikon RF users?

If this is adressed to me I must admit i cannot recognize how this question could relate to my post.
Best ask one of those parvenus of the never sleeping Leica praise-andlf-defense committee ?
I am on no other "side" in this idiotic brand controverses than on my own side, which is the side of those who use whatever is technically sufficient and aesthetically adaequate for the photographical purpose and the intended result and which has a reasonable price-performance ratio.

If one does have a brand preference, from what reason ever, one should at least not use it for a public self-portrayal. Best one sticks it where the sun don't shine and leave it there, no public issue. " Hi, I'm a Leicaphile, a Nikonian, a Zeiss nuts"
and so on. WTF cares ? It is absolutely meaningless related to any photographical discussion. And of course it will provoke contradiction in a minute from others of the same kind.
"A Nikonian ? Oh oh, this guy has no clue what Leica really is , I will save his soul NOW!!"

And please notice that I say "brand" , it is not about single items and their technical abilities. That is a TECHNICAL discussion, not a brand controverse.
To say I prefer the xy lens for portraits is different from saying "nothing achieves the footprint and performance of the XY brand lenses ( and I own them !) " . This is a proof of plain incompetence and poor experience and exactly the point where it's more about self - portrayal than about photos..

bertram