DouglasLHagerman
Newbie
I saw a guy with an M9 in the Apple store in London today, and said "Nice camera!" Hopefully he wasn't offended.
I also say a guy in the Getty museum in L.A. a year ago with an M9 (Monochrom I think, were they out then?). He complimented me on my IIIG which I thought was pretty fun.
Compared to lots of other hobbies, photography is pretty cheap. Car racers spend thousands on tires in a single weekend. Not to mention boats, airplanes...
I also say a guy in the Getty museum in L.A. a year ago with an M9 (Monochrom I think, were they out then?). He complimented me on my IIIG which I thought was pretty fun.
Compared to lots of other hobbies, photography is pretty cheap. Car racers spend thousands on tires in a single weekend. Not to mention boats, airplanes...
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Eminently true. On the other hand, this is a "first world" debate. One of my very poor friends (in India) wrote one brilliant piece on whether a poor man can justify owning a dog and another on the dilemma of owning three instead of two pairs of trousers.
Cheers,
R.
rivercityrocker
Well-known
For some car racers that's a cheap hobby too. I spent almost a decade at racetracks across the USA shooting SCCA events and many of those guys are millionaires.
Cheap is relative to the person. What's cheap to the prince is expensive to the pauper.
hepcat
Former PH, USN
Photography is, on the whole, a "first world" pursuit. Practitioners of the craft have disposable income, and the ability to spend time in pursuit of "fulfillment;" the block on the top of Maslow's Hierarchy of Need.
rivercityrocker
Well-known
I don't like when the whole "first world problems" debate comes up. It's like a trap that gets set to make people that live in more affluent countries "feel bad".
Being born into a different world sets you up with different life problems and that's the reality.
hepcat
Former PH, USN
Interesting... I don't see it so much as a "first world problems" debate as it is an explanation of the reality of who has enough wealth to be able to make images. Since the invention of photography, it has been used to bring the daily realities of the poor to the attention of those who are in a position to help them.
Snowbuzz
Well-known
Excuse me please, but I'm from the Third World and they're definitely people down here with very expensive gear. It just takes a bit longer to save up to acquire things for the most part. No need to feel badly. 
Capturing memories by some photographic means is something that transcends poverty. Not that everyone is interested in buying expensive cameras to do so, but it's amazing how people afford $1000 mobile phones to do the job we do with a Leica.
Capturing memories by some photographic means is something that transcends poverty. Not that everyone is interested in buying expensive cameras to do so, but it's amazing how people afford $1000 mobile phones to do the job we do with a Leica.
rivercityrocker
Well-known
I wasn't speaking about this conversation in particular as a "debate" nor in relation to photography specifically. But this point (usually displayed in the form of an internet meme) is often used by liberals, especially famous ones, to shame people because they happen to have been born into a better situation.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Some life problems are less important than others. It's hard not to feel bad when I think of Tibetan refugee friends dying in exile, never seeing again the house they owned and lived in.
I completely agree that it's of very limited value to dismiss something as a "first world problem", but I'd also suggest that we should all remember just how lucky we are to have access to something like RFF. And not to be refugees.
And indeed, as Snowbuzz points out, it's not so much "third world" as "rich".
Cheers (if that's the right word),
R.
rivercityrocker
Well-known
I didn't mean to imply that I don't feel bad for people that are in bad situations or that they don't need or deserve help. That's not it at all.
And just because a person lives in the "first world" (antiquated term as it is), doesn't mean that every problem is frivolous. I have problems in my life that are very important. I obviously am not going to share them on the interwebs but they are real.
Richard G
Veteran
I agree. I read recently, on Mike Johnston's The Online Photographer site, his quote of the day from, of all people, Gloria Vanderbilt:
"Be kind, because everyone you meet is fighting a great battle."
—Gloria Vanderbilt, quoted by her son Anderson Cooper on Late Night with David Letterman, Nov. 19th, 2013
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
@ Roger,
You have either entirely missed or intentionally ignored the point of my comments.
Unless a person has mastered the art and science of defecating gold ingots, it seems pretty obvious that a Leica M camera or lens is not an impulse buy item - that's pretty much a given.
My point was that a person does not have to explain/justify/rationalize/account for/ whatever the cost of their camera to the first douche who runs up to them, demanding, "how much did that thang cost??" because it is quite simply none of their freaking business. Only an intrusive putz would ask such a question.
Why not ask how much money they have in savings? Or what their hourly pay rate is? Or how much money they spent on lunch today? Or what their net worth is? Or how much their underwear cost? Or how much money their wife makes? Or how much her underwear costs?? There are some questions that only an idiot asks another person.
In the end, the things a person spends their money on is their business and theirs alone. Provided that a person is paying their bills, meeting their obligations and commitments, taking care of their loved ones in a responsible manner, making their own way in this world and trying to leave it a better place for others, if the want to buy a Leica M camera or a motorcycle or a fly rod or a sailboat, no one has any business judging them - but apparently holding that opinion makes me "simple and impulsive."
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Missed. I seldom deliberately ignore things. Perhaps I missed it because you overstated (and continue to overstate) your case. Or perhaps I missed it because I have indeed encountered surprising numbers of people who are "simple and impulsive". Ask any camera store owner and they'll tell you the same thing. And among those who have lots of money, there are those who do buy Leicas and other expensive toys on impulse, or at least, with the bare minimum of reflection.
Perhaps I missed it too because of your persistently angry tone: "...the first douche..." Why call 'em douche? (Actually I thought the expression was "douche bag" but never mind.) As you say, it's a question that only an "intrusive putz" would ask. So feel sorry for them, rather than getting angry.
As for its being no-one's business how anyone else spends their money, are you familiar with the phrase "mindless consumerism"? Endless consumer-fuelled growth and personal greed is an unsustainable model, so in that sense, it's everyone's concern how other people spend their money. This is, I think, what kennylovrin and I were agreeing about.
Cheers,
R.
rivercityrocker
Well-known
I don't think that people necessarily mean to be "douches" or "intrusive putzes" when they ask how much it costs. From my experience most people who have an inkling about photography always hear how expensive Leica cameras are. They probably are trying to gauge the reality of the price from the hype.
When price comes up and people ask me why Leica stuff is so expensive I explain to them that a lot of the production aspects are done by hand. Small details such as each top plate for the M9-P being physically placed in a jig by a human being who operates the CNC engraving machine as well as the fact that the engravings are painted in by hand is where the cost comes in.
Hell, take a look at this video on how they make lenses. http://vimeo.com/26251829
Leica has a lot of hands physically working on these lenses. By comparison the lenses that Canikon/Fuji have rolling off of mass assembly lines should probably be cheaper given the radical difference in labor costs.
When price comes up and people ask me why Leica stuff is so expensive I explain to them that a lot of the production aspects are done by hand. Small details such as each top plate for the M9-P being physically placed in a jig by a human being who operates the CNC engraving machine as well as the fact that the engravings are painted in by hand is where the cost comes in.
Hell, take a look at this video on how they make lenses. http://vimeo.com/26251829
Leica has a lot of hands physically working on these lenses. By comparison the lenses that Canikon/Fuji have rolling off of mass assembly lines should probably be cheaper given the radical difference in labor costs.
kennylovrin
Well-known
Rangefinderfreak
Well-known
The only people recognizing my leicas are the japanese and Chinese tourists on the streets of helsinki,some of them actually carrying a leica.. It`s then just a small nod and thumbs up. no silly comments...
Richard G
Veteran
Citroen XM Jukka? Enjoyed your site.
escargo 2k
Newbie
With the exception of a now ex work colleague, all the comments I have had with the M9 have been positive. I have even had the thumbs up from people in the street in Vietnam where its cost probably represents several years earnings. Until recently all my lenses were from the 70's which triggers many an interesting conversation.