money burning a hole in your pocket? here's a solution. M9 + Noctilux

Yes Keith, Redbacks are a mighty fine pair of work boots (I prefer Rossi's myself) but for stepping out it's got to be R.M. Williams, $350 for sure but they'll last a lifetime.
 
newsgrunt said:
right on Keith. after years of Blundstones, I'm now a Redback booter. Got my last few pairs at Rays Camping in Melbourne, a fine place for those with camping GAS.
Click to expand...


Blunnies used to be OK then I found that they were falling apart after a year or so of hard wear ... apparently manufacturing went off shore or so I heard which probably expains it ... they used to be made in Tasmania!

I'm so proud and happy to meet another dedicated Redback wearer! :D

I love the page on the 'Redback' site with the little spider chasing your cursor around the page when you move it! http://www.redback.net.au/index.html it's brilliant! :p
 
Last edited:
Roger Hicks said:
Dear Keith,

And?

First, a lot depends on what fits. I had a marvellous pair of shoes I bought in a German cheapo-market for 12€ or so. I bought them as a laugh: they were red suède. I wore them until they fell to pieces, and they were sublimely comfortable. Most shoes I buy aren't, so it's cheaper to buy one pair of well-fitting, long-lasting boots than lots of cheaper pairs.

Second, this still doesn't address the question of luxuries. What have you against luxury goods? For that matter, how do you define luxury goods? And why shouldn't a camera manufacturer make a luxury camera?

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...


What defines luxury goods?

Well that's an easy question Roger ... anything I can't afford but would own if I got the chance! :D
 
Roger Hicks said:
A fraction of the price of a Ferrari, and half the price of even a modest boat. Why do so many people have so much of a problem with Leicas? Because they're smaller than Ferraris or boats? Offer me a Ferrari, a boat and a Leica, to use not to sell, and it's a dead easy choice for me.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Good point Roger. Yachts and Ferraris are also unnecessarily ostentatious.

I don't think the problem is with Leica. It's with certain products Leica offers. In fact, it's not a 'problem' at all. It's just that some people, many of them Leica users, think it's kind of funny to spend $18,000 on a camera and a lens.

I'm sure there are many fishermen that bristle when a yacht steers through their waters...
 
I'm thinking about getting into space travel as a hobby. Kinda pricey though. Or maybe dirt collecting. I'll get some really expensive rare dirt and keep it in a jar on my mantel.
 
All of the above said, I do think the M9 and the Noctilux are amazing tools and I applaud the engineers who make such incredible stuff and I'm thankful for the people who have the money to buy it all now so that it keeps getting made and can one day trickle down to me at an affordable price.
 
snausages said:
Good point Roger. Yachts and Ferraris are also unnecessarily ostentatious.

I don't think the problem is with Leica. It's with certain products Leica offers. In fact, it's not a 'problem' at all. It's just that some people, many of them Leica users, think it's kind of funny to spend $18,000 on a camera and a lens.

I'm sure there are many fishermen that bristle when a yacht steers through their waters...
Click to expand...

Not funny. Not even ostentatious: how many people are going to notice? I just wish I could afford to do it.

There's an old Soviet-era joke about a genie that offers a wish each to an Englishman, a Frenchman and a Russian. Change the nationalities if you think it's unnecessarily stereotypical or racist.

The Englishman says, "My boss has a brand-new Rolls Royce. I want a brand new Rolls Royce." The genie snaps his fingers, and there it is.

The Frenchman says, "My boss has a beautiful teenage mistress. I want a beautiful teenage mistress." The genie snaps his fingers, and there she is.

The Russian says, "My neighbour has a goat. Kill my neighbour's goat...."

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
But, Roger, I don't think it can be reduced to sour grapes. Even if I could afford an M9 + Noctilux, I wouldn't buy it at this price. The thought makes me a bit sick. There are many people who can afford luxury items who do not buy luxury items. And not because they're cheap people.

(That's a solid joke. And my grandparents were all Russians.)
 
snausages said:
But, Roger, I don't think it can be reduced to sour grapes. Even if I could afford an M9 + Noctilux, I wouldn't buy it at this price. The thought makes me a bit sick. There are many people who can afford luxury items who do not buy luxury items. And not because they're cheap people.

(That's a solid joke. And my grandparents were all Russians.)
Click to expand...

Dunno. I can't afford a Rolls Royce, so I don't know if they're worth the money. But I've had a few friends who've bought them.

I could buy a bottle of vintage Bollinger tomorrow, but it would be a big chunk of a week's groceries (for a modest vintage) and I'm not devoted enough to vintage Bollinger to spend the money.

Leicas are in between: expensive, bit not unimaginable. If I had 10x as much money in the bank, $18K would be not that much of a problem, but I'd still think twice. If I had 100x as much, I wouldn't need to think twice.

None of us can judge another's priorities. To me, an $18,000 motor car (and a $3000 camera) is more of an extravagance than an $18,000 camera + lens (and a $3000 motor car).

Glad you liked the joke.

Cheers,

R.
 
I'm not damning the camera , if I could afford it I would buy it without thinking about it. All I can say is one day maybe I can afford one . I should finish college first and get a non-retail crappy paycheck to crappy paycheck gig. Ive got a few more years , and maybe the M9 will drop in price if something like the M10 comes out. Until then I can only hope I can afford one while continuing to use my M3 and IIIf and whatever film I happen to enjoy as time wears on.

It's easy to complain something is overpriced when one cannot afford it , its even easier to just use whats available until something better can be attained.

Still , Id take two if money were no object , one in each color.
 
I'd rather shoot an M3 with a 50mm 'cron on it. Seriously. Thank god the idiots priced the M9+50mm/0.95 to be more expensive. Maybe people will begin dumping their collection of film M's into the used market to afford an M9, making the M3 a better deal for me.
 
Last edited:
We're at the universal discrepancy between those who may be the best users of an object not necessarily being the ones who can afford it.

There are plenty of great drivers driving modest cars when they have the ability to use a Ferrari for what it is capable of but can't because they happen to be, say, teachers or nurses rather than merchant bankers or property tycoons.

Likewise many very able photographers who use this site and produce magnificent work do truly understand what a combination of M9 + Noctilux is capable of yet will never have an opportunity to use them. When it is perceived that some of the people who may purchase these objects buy them as a trophy object then that does frustrate.

It's a human condition to both desire the best and to be unable to reach it.

However, I do think cameras are relatively inexpensive, even Leicas. My main pasttime is sailing and I know people who will happily spend a lot on a set of racing sails only to throw them away after a couple of years use. The cost of mooring even a modest boat on the south coast of the UK, say a 36fter, is many thousands of pounds a year - so a one-off cost to buy a top-quality item with no running costs to speak of, plus a substantial retained value on the second-hand market, makes cameras relatively small beer, providing of course one has the spare cash up front to purchase them. I know all too well many of us do not.
 
Last edited:
Austerby said:
We're at the universal discrepancy between those who may be the best users of an object not necessarily being the ones who can afford it.

There are plenty of great drivers driving modest cars when they have the ability to use a Ferrari for what it is capable of but can't because they happen to be, say, teachers or nurses rather than merchant bankers or property tycoons.

Likewise many very able photographers who use this site and produce magnificent work do truly understand what a combination of M9 + Noctilux is capable of yet will never have an opportunity to use them. When it is perceived that some of the people who may purchase these objects buy them as a trophy object then that does frustrate.

It's a human condition to both desire the best and to be unable to reach it.

However, I do think cameras are relatively inexpensive, even Leicas. My main pasttime is sailing and I know people who will happily spend a lot on a set of racing sails only to throw them away after a couple of years use. The cost of mooring even a modest boat on the south coast of the UK, say a 36fter, is many thousands of pounds a year - so a one-off cost to buy a top-quality item with no running costs to speak of, plus a substantial retained value on the second-hand market, makes cameras relatively small beer, providing of course one has the spare cash up front to purchase them. I know all too well many of us do not.
Click to expand...

Perfectly expressed.

Many people think I'm richer than I am because I live well.

But I'm typing this in an unheated (and essentially unheatable) room. I have a blanket around my shoulders to keep warm. I'm wearing patched jeans (501s, admittedly) and a 3-year-old supermarket sweatshirt over a T-shirt I bought 15 years ago. I have lots of old T-shirts, and I don't stop wearing them until they go into the rag-bag. I'm just about to go upstairs to an (unheated) attic converted to a studio and take pictures with my M9 and Visoflex III.

On the other hand, the kitchen (next door to this) has an Italian tile floor with $1000 worth of tiles on it (admittedly laid by Frances), two ovens, five gas rings, Dualit toaster, etc., and electric heating, and the séjour (next door on the other side) has a log fire.

Compared with most hobbies, photography is cheap, and compared with many hobbies, the equipment is cheap too -- even the expensive equipment, like Leicas. The great thing is that if you can't afford a Leica, you can still produce excellent pictures with cheaper cameras. Technically, they may even be better: I'd back my KowaSix against my MP any day. But I like the MP better.

Frighteningly many people have an 'eat the rich' mentality, where anyone who can afford more than they can is automatically demonized. Worse still, they do not reflect that even if you're not rich, you make choices. Fitted kitchens, new clothes, eating out -- or a Leica.

Of course there are many who can afford no such luxuries. I know. I was one of them for decades. But by a combination of luck and judgement -- and I wouldn't discount the importance of either -- I now live quite well, on less than the national average wage in the UK.

"Take what you want, and pay for it, saieth the Lord."

Cheers,

R.
 
The 50/0.95 Noctilux is bordering on the very-low production, specialty items that you deal with in the scientific/technical market. For home use, it would be out of the question. For technical use, I would not hesitate to order one if I needed it. I've used a $200 Canon 50/0.95 lens on a $25,000 sensor. I could get a C-Mount adapter for it. It is center-sharp, enough for the resolution of the sensor. First thing the engineer for the project asked was "Do you have two of these?" A $10K lens on a $25K sensor would not be a problem.

I guess some people buy these things for fun, and that is using expendable income. Others use it to meet requirements, and then it is cost of doing business. That lens is much cheaper than having one custom made, which runs at least $40,000. I have some of those.

If I were rich, I'd buy Roger an M9.
 
I'd have the new Noct 0.95 in a heartbeat if I was rolling in money. Why not?

Would have been quite handy on a few occasions actually... Still, I soldier on without one :D

I am actually seriously tempted by the 24 lux asph after being driven mad by low shutter speeds and dingy interiors. It'd be worth selling up some of my other kit to help finance, because it would do more for me that that other kit has done in the last few years.

I bet plenty of people have $10K+ of misc kit they do not really use, or money spend on digital cameras that have been outdated and sold on for nought or put on a shelf... or given to the kid. All a person need have done is to stay out of the digital recolution for the last 6-7 years and they would not be far off being able to get a new Noct assuming they otherwise would have messed with A3 printers, DXX cameras, new digi ready fast lenses, new Apple computer, PS editions etc.
 
Turtle said:
I'd have the new Noct 0.95 in a heartbeat if I was rolling in money. Why not?
Click to expand...

Oh, maybe because the 1.1 Nokton is a better lens at a small fraction of the price? It's certainly a better lens by my standards. The last thing I want in a lens is "character."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom