Rikard
Established
Not saying that you are wrong. But which are the types of paid assignments where a leica is the obvious choice?
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
From my professional point of view, I'm not a photog, but technician in broadcast (video) industry.
I think, Apple and Leica are common in "showing your social status" as tools.
They are also common by their limited functionalities.
Where is no Apple in broadcast equipment racks. Post production is different, but AVID and APPLE have splitted not so long time ago. I guess, because AVID is more and more preferable on PC, not Apple.
I have iPhones and iPads for me and family. The reason, it looks nice, it is fancy and it is dead simple to use. But Apple gadgets are nowhere near to others if you need something more advanced to run on it.
Fuji has nothing to do with rangefinders. Then x100 was introduced, many went after it, because it was faking classic RF camera style. Before it was nothing sexy like this.
Most of those who are using Fuji RF-like cameras never used RF before.
The rumor about Zeiss is dopiest rumor I ever seen in photoindustry. But even if it will become true as it is described, to me rangefinder focusing is optical alignment of two images and even if they do it electronically in EVF to display it is common trend to make it cheaper. EVF is cheap to make. One of the reasons why classic Leica camera, analog or digital isn't cheap.
I think, Apple and Leica are common in "showing your social status" as tools.
They are also common by their limited functionalities.
Where is no Apple in broadcast equipment racks. Post production is different, but AVID and APPLE have splitted not so long time ago. I guess, because AVID is more and more preferable on PC, not Apple.
I have iPhones and iPads for me and family. The reason, it looks nice, it is fancy and it is dead simple to use. But Apple gadgets are nowhere near to others if you need something more advanced to run on it.
Fuji has nothing to do with rangefinders. Then x100 was introduced, many went after it, because it was faking classic RF camera style. Before it was nothing sexy like this.
Most of those who are using Fuji RF-like cameras never used RF before.
The rumor about Zeiss is dopiest rumor I ever seen in photoindustry. But even if it will become true as it is described, to me rangefinder focusing is optical alignment of two images and even if they do it electronically in EVF to display it is common trend to make it cheaper. EVF is cheap to make. One of the reasons why classic Leica camera, analog or digital isn't cheap.
Apple stuff is ubiquitous... not very cool for the "social status" clique I would think...
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Above all, some kinds of reportage. One of my friends has numerous press awards, mostly won with Leicas.
Also, "paid assignment" and "professional" are not synonymous. Long term projects (resulting in books, exhibitions, etc.) are not quite the same as "paid assignments".
Cheers,
R.
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
Leica's modern-day incarnation seems to be banking on the continued existence of the 1%...I'd say that's a safe bet.
The situation with China's labour market is pretty complex and nuanced. Not sure I'd wade into that pool without a lot more knowledge than can be had from Western headlines.
The situation with China's labour market is pretty complex and nuanced. Not sure I'd wade into that pool without a lot more knowledge than can be had from Western headlines.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Sorry, but not all Leica owners, even new Leica owners, are in the "1%" club. I'm certainly not, but I value what Leica makes such that I save up and buy their equipment when I feel it is appropriate for my use.
No Leica*camera has let me down yet, and I've owned a modest number of them since 1969.
G
willie_901
Veteran
I think you are co-mingling decades of Leica film camera M bodies with Leica's less than a decade-long track record with digital M bodies.
I did a slightly similar thing in a very different arena last month.
Vintage Porsche 911 prices are in a spectacular bubble right now. My 1971 911 was worth as much as very recent Porcshe Boxter models. I sold my 911 because it's absurdly high price could not last. Then I researched what Boxster model year to buy for a weekend sports car. I was appalled to find most of Porsche's water-cooled engines have one or more significant design flaws that result in extremely expensive repairs or catastrophic failure. This stopped me in my tracks.
The new owner of my 911 invited me to see the car stripped down just before it was to be repainted. You could see the hand-work that went into the body construction. The contemporary Porsches I was considering are built by robots. Porches is now primarily a luxury brand.
I realized in order to survive Porsche had to completely disappear and reinvent itself. The cars had to be built by robots and costs had to be contained (hence the engine defects). Compromises Porsche would never make ~ 50 years ago had to be made. I decided there was no point for me to own a newer Porchse. I do not regret selling my car one bit. But I also discovered I can not replace it.
Of course this weak analogy is only relevant to M digital bodies. Today's Leica M lenses don't seem to be affected by contemporary business demands.
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
I'm certainly not either, unless 1% refers to the portion of the average salary that I actually make!
I value what Leica does, too but I'm not kidding myself about crap like this:
http://blog.viewbug.com/10-luxury-leica-limited-edition-cameras/
You shouldn't either.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I dunno ... I don't consider real 'special editions' like that to be "crap." They're kits designed for bucks-up collectors. Every manufacturer produces a few things like that now and then. Hasselblad, Leica, Nikon, Canon, Rollei ... whomever. Leica has a long tradition of making these special editions, more than the others (much like Alfa Romeo and a couple other automakers used to), and offering them from time to time alongside the regular lineup as collectibles.
I owned a few of these over the years: Rollei 35S Silber Anniversary, Minox CLX 90th Year Special Edition, Rollei 35 Classic Platinum, and a couple others. They all worked just fine, I took a few rolls of photos with them, and then enjoyed the special-ness for a bit, then handed them off to the next marque enthusiast. That's what collecting and enjoying the cameras for what they are is all about.
It's when they are the ONLY products that I feel the line has failed. When there isn't a standard model alongside them that photographers who just want the cameras to take photos with, then the company has run out of ideas.
G
Lss
Well-known
It's a very limited viewpoint for the amateur photographer as well. Selling and buying versatility is mostly a viewpoint of a marketer or a beginner.
leicapixie
Well-known
I would jump at a special edition MP with my name engraved,
on top deck with "Leica" in script..
I am simply too old, to mean and don't have the funds.
TG for luxury brands and marketing.
Leica seems unique at this time in making profits..:angel:
when Canon-Nikon-Pentax-Sony are all recording loss..
I used to service very high end timepieces(watches),
the more expensive were looked after better,
were more serviced and thus lasted longer.
on top deck with "Leica" in script..
I am simply too old, to mean and don't have the funds.
TG for luxury brands and marketing.
Leica seems unique at this time in making profits..:angel:
when Canon-Nikon-Pentax-Sony are all recording loss..
I used to service very high end timepieces(watches),
the more expensive were looked after better,
were more serviced and thus lasted longer.
paulfish4570
Veteran
as usual, a thread involving leica has become a battle between leica lovers and not-leica lovers.
silly, really ...
silly, really ...
NJH
Member
Agreed but all of the preconceptions driving the original points and comparisons are largely nonsense. As pointed at earlier many Professionals used Leica's over the years if they didn't it would never have got the reputation that it now trades on. Also professional grade Nikon/Canon DSLRS cost about the same as the digital Leica bodies, some of the medium format options make the S look cheap. Making comparison with consumer plastic cameras is another nonsense.
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
Hey I love Leicas -- I own one and literally own a T-shirt saying "I Love Leica".
I just don't find any meaning in the (seemingly) endless procession of shelf-queen luxury editions. Leica's overall pricing (high) is its place in the market, that's fine -- I'd suggest it was a successful shift to digital that saved the company from extinction...having a photographic equivalent of a handbag costing as much as a small house is simply product placement, not something that would turn a company's fortunes around, I'd say.
I just don't find any meaning in the (seemingly) endless procession of shelf-queen luxury editions. Leica's overall pricing (high) is its place in the market, that's fine -- I'd suggest it was a successful shift to digital that saved the company from extinction...having a photographic equivalent of a handbag costing as much as a small house is simply product placement, not something that would turn a company's fortunes around, I'd say.
Sparrow
Veteran
... yes but keeps them out of the sensible threads ... so it isn't all bad eh?
Chuck Albertson
Well-known
Who's Seth Godin?
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
I agree with just about all of this. Except, with time, the well-possessing audience that reveres the Leica marque will age and pass, and who will be left to value Leica? The company is now still leveraging 75 years of its film photography heritage. When today's kids only know Leica for its digital cameras and the 'oddity' of optical rangefinder viewing, will the future monied crowd still see value? At some point, the 'optical superiority' of Leica glass just isn't worth the cost. Most photography is now viewed on an iPad or laptop. Puts and the leicaphiles can crow about an ASPH's resolution, but that 'advantage' is kinda Yeti-ish. Of course it exists, but no one will ever see it.
Still, we're talking about 10-20 years down the road.... I can only imagine that, as the race for more megapixels ends, cameras will become less and less expensive for the same quality, and Leica will be left still trying to charge idiot prices for the privilege of elitism, but still clinging to a viewing system that won't make sense to the next generation.
Kwesi
Well-known
Wow! That's quite the crystal ball you've got there. If I were you I'd buy a lottery ticket.
Pioneer
Veteran
Finally, something we can all agree with.
Twenty years ago Kodak and Fuji were in a head to head battle, digital was way out on the horizon, I had just bought a computer with an 80386 Intel chip (Dell I think) and cell phones were big bricks built mostly by Motorola. A couple years before that I had bought a Canon EOS Rebel KISS and was thrilled with it.
Scrambler
Well-known
Word of mouth/ permission marketing guru. Good value IMHO.
Apple bashing? Seth's audience is small to medium business owners/ managers. The message he wants them to get is "Am I a great toolmaker or a luxury marque ... Really?" Clearly the more common answer is toolmaker, so get your act together!
Does this apply to Leica? Of course. And they still produce some of the best 1950s technology available ;-) Leica have made their decision: it was forced on them in the 1970s when their modern cameras (better tools) nearly bankrupted them.