What is special about Leica?

[hepcat]

Roger, I agree with your analogy wholeheartedly when comparing the "feel" of both products. As you know from earlier threads, I rode an '82 R100RT 60,000 miles in three years too. I used to joke to my Harley-riding friends that the only time I've ever used the tool kit that came with my BMW was to work on my buddies' Harleys. I am always amazed that when the weather turns bad, the only riders you still see out on the roads are on BMWs.

The original analogy of the thread, though, wasn't so much comparing the nuances of the products as it was about the companies themselves rising from the ashes like a Phoenix, and their marketing divisions' upscale marketing of their products to upscale groups of consumers who, just a few years earlier, would never have even considered owning one. They both managed to turn their products into "boutique brands" through clever and successful marketing.

From that perspective, the companies of Leica camera and H-D motorcycles have been very similar in their success.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger, I agree with your analogy wholeheartedly when comparing the "feel" of both products. As you know from earlier threads, I rode an R100RT 60,000 miles in three years too. I used to joke to my Harley-riding friends that the only time I've ever used the tool kit that came with my BMW was to work on my buddies' Harleys. I am always amazed that when the weather turns bad, the only riders you still see out on the roads are on BMWs.

The original analogy of the thread, though, wasn't so much comparing the nuances of the products as it was about the companies themselves rising from the ashes like a Phoenix, and their marketing divisions' upscale marketing of their products to upscale groups of consumers who, just a few years earlier, would never have even considered owning one. They both managed to turn their products into "boutique brands" through clever and successful marketing.

From that perspective, the companies of Leica camera and H-D have been very similar in their success.

Fair enough! Can't argue.

Cheers,

R.

 

[back alley]

what is special about leica?

* they were the first to use this size of film that eventually turned in what we know today as 35mm.

* they were miniature compared to medium/large format cameras in use at the time.

* they eventually became great lens makers.

* they were simple to begin with and remained simple (until recently)

* they were well made, lasted a long time and appealed to the male side of photographers

* today, they have a history that many would like to be a a part of...so they buy them and make themselves believe that they ARE a part of the history.

what else...they are a small light tight box that holds film on one end and a lens on the other...like so many other cameras.

 

[Roger Hicks]

what is special about leica?

* they were the first to use this size of film that eventually turned in what we know today as 35mm.

* they were miniature compared to medium/large format cameras in use at the time.

* they eventually became great lens makers.

* they were simple to begin with and remained simple (until recently)

* they were well made, lasted a long time and appealed to the male side of photographers

* today, they have a history that many would like to be a a part of...so they buy them and make themselves believe that they ARE a part of the history.

what else...they are a small light tight box that holds film on one end and a lens on the other...like so many other cameras.

Not really. There were quite a lot of others from about 1912 onwards. They were the first to sell more than a few hundred (or at most a couple of thousand) 35mm cameras. See A History of the 35mm Still Camera, Focal Press 1985, which now sells for rather more than it did new: http://www.amazon.co.uk/A-History-35mm-Still-Camera/dp/0240512332

Cheersd,

R.

 

[AlwaysOnAuto]

what is special about leica?

* they were the first to use this size of film that eventually turned in what we know today as 35mm.

* they were miniature compared to medium/large format cameras in use at the time.

* they eventually became great lens makers.

* they were simple to begin with and remained simple (until recently)

* they were well made, lasted a long time and appealed to the male side of photographers

* today, they have a history that many would like to be a a part of...so they buy them and make themselves believe that they ARE a part of the history.

what else...they are a small light tight box that holds film on one end and a lens on the other...like so many other cameras.

I thought I'd read they were already known for microscope lens making when they went into cameras, but I could be wrong.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I thought I'd read they were already known for microscope lens making when they went into cameras, but I could be wrong.

You aren't.

Cheers,

R.

 

[akptc]

Using a Leica is like shooting with a perfectly formed brick of gold 🙂

I like them for their form factor and just the right heft for my grip.

 

[icebear]

This is an impressive thread!
Cogent and evocative arguments, both for, against, and sideways! ...

On the other hand, I feel ill at ease with today's pricing of leica products....

So yes, I am violently irritated by Leica' marketing and pricing. Selling millionaire playboy toys under the aura of HCB and Robert Capa is an insult to what Leica was in that era. Yes it was expensive, but it was a high-grade tool.... I find it depressing, to see this tradition reduced to bling. (Just as I find the descent of watchmaking into bling disgusting).
my 2cents....

As Leica is the only full frame rangefinder camera in todays market place, it might be not as easy and cheap to do so.
Otherwise there would already be other manufacturers (Epson, Zeiss, CV?) doing the same.
As for the price level : unfortunately Leica has a little disadvantage over the big ones, they are lacking economy of scale and require a lot of manual work on a precision level that is just not necessary for other camera systems.

I don't see too much bling on the MM 😀. And apart from being digital, the MM is the closest to the 1960's M3 of any camera in production.
How close is a D800 to a F3 or D1sMk whatever to an F1?

PS: I'm not a dentist, lawyer or Playboy (I think🙄) and definately not a millionaire.

For getting very similar results -or worse in terms of low light situation- Leica wants me to fork out six or seven times more.
With the difference that with the Fuji, if I want and I am ready to invest enough time to learn how to use all bell and whistles, I can explore new grounds and take advantage of a technology that Leica is just not giving me.

Leica gives me the chance to meet Paris Hilton at a Hermes event in Paris? Possibly, together with the status of owning something reserved to real -and possibly wealthy- photographers.
The problem is -for me- that I want to buy a camera, not a status. ...🙂

I am always amazed how passionate people try to convince themselves (?) that Leica is not up to par with other offerings in today's marketplace but camplain about the high prices.

If you really believe all this, then just turn your back on Leica and be happy with the Fuji. You decide where to spent your money, so just don't buy a Leica🙄.

 

[Bill Clark]

My son works for a large company. While on the job in New York, his boss called him for a meeting and when he arrived, he was worried, maybe this is it. His boss said something like we like your performance but please do me a favor. Go to Brooks Brothers with your CC and buy some decent clothes!

For me, when I worked as a full time pro, my clothes that got noticed, at first blush was equipment. Most everyone understands this about Leica, expensive and only quality pros use them. Of course others do use them but to the average person Leica is the Lexus of cameras. And there is a lot more to this than the cameras!

It was a calling card, especially my last few years, to the upper crust as many of them had digital SLR stuff sometimes better than mine. But I never ran into someone at an event toating a Leica.

Others mention attributes that I agree with. I have to knock on wood/my head because I have Canon digital SLR's that work just fine and have never failed me. And they make the same quality of photographs as my Leicas. Does that tell you something about how the person making the photographs is pretty important?

 

[David Hughes]

My son works for a large company. While on the job in New York, his boss called him for a meeting and when he arrived, he was worried, maybe this is it. His boss said something like we like your performance but please do me a favor. Go to Brooks Brothers with your CC and buy some decent clothes! ... Snip!

Hi,

This sounds all too true. The worst part is that people who dress and look the part get the job despite their performance being mediocre or them being a sandwich short of a picnic...

Regards, David

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hi,

This sounds all too true. The worst part is that people who dress and look the part get the job despite their performance being mediocre or them being a sandwich short of a picnic...

Regards, David

Dear David,

I've always like the phrase "empty suit".

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . If you really believe all this, then just turn your back on Leica and be happy with the Fuji. You decide where to spent your money, so just don't buy a Leica🙄.

Dear Klaus,

Yes, I love this one too: people who appear to be trying to persuade themselves that really, they don't want a Leica because [insert reason of choice here].

Cheers,

r.

 

[Mcary]

PS: I'm not a dentist, lawyer or Playboy (I think🙄) and definately not a millionaire.

.

+ 100
Yes its hard to believe that we're not all dentists, lawyers or Playboys and definately not a millionaires, but rather regular people that decided owning a digital Leica is worth what it cost even if it means having to give up other things.

 

[semi-ambivalent]

Using a Leica is like shooting with a perfectly formed brick of gold 🙂

I like them for their form factor and just the right heft for my grip.

And if one could then wrap it with a very thin slice of lemon...

s-a

 

[Rodchenko]

+ 100
Yes its hard to believe that we're not all dentists, lawyers or Playboys and definately not a millionaires, but rather regular people that decided owning a digital Leica is worth what it cost even if it means having to give up other things.

I could afford one if I gave up paying the rent.

Not sure what I'd do with the rest of my stuff after it had been thrown out onto the street. 😀

 

[AJS Lamb]

I love my M3 but own other cameras that I prefer. I have a tatty Super-Ikonta that I absolutely love.

However, there is one thing that makes Leica special and that is its history. No other camera comes remotely close to being revered in the same way. Whether the camera deserves it or not is another matter but the history, the mythology of the Leica cannot be matched.

 

[L Collins]

the analogy is less to HD than it is to Ducati. Both boast vestigial technology (V Twin engine/mf rangefinder) updated to modern specs. Both place a premium on "handcraft". Both consciously place a price premium on their products to maintain a certain perception as being elite while still being affordable enough to tempt those wanting to move up from the universal japanese motorcycle/camera. Both operate out of boutique stores. Both sell the brand as much as the object.

HD is a dinosaur made for dinosaurs. It is the Exacta Varex of motorcycles - beautiful aesthetically but highly impractical and technologically archaic. Its performance is an afterthought, if that. Ducati, meanwhile, much like Leica, retains the traditional technology yet aspires to current relevance.

 

[helen.HH]

Plain & Simple, to the 'Eyes' of many it just is...😱 🙄 🙂

frankly I Adore Leica glass from the 1960's and the summar/elmar from the 1930's...something mighty 'Special'
and finally an M body in the hand just feels so right

 

[jsrockit]

...
and finally an M body in the hand just feels so right

I think it comes down to this a lot.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . HD is a dinosaur made for dinosaurs. It is the Exacta Varex of motorcycles - beautiful aesthetically but highly impractical and technologically archaic. Its performance is an afterthought, if that. Ducati, meanwhile, much like Leica, retains the traditional technology yet aspires to current relevance.

A superb analogy! Though I'd still back BMW...

My own favourite 'modern vintage' (currently available) motorcycle is the Enfield Bullet.

Cheers,

R.