Why all the Leica bashing lately?

[Sonnar Brian]

Which innovations were you thinking of?

Cheers,

R.

Not sure how to take this question, with regard to its context. So, this is what I was thinking.

The M3 was a break-through camera.

The Fuji viewfinder shows true innovation.

My disappointment is that Leica did not introduce it, even if it was an a $26K luxury item. Using an LED for the frameline illumination "pales by comparison".

Fuji showed true innovation on digital photography 20 years ago with the first cameras using solid-state memory cards for storing images. That idea caught on. They also partnered with Nikon for the introduction of the first Japanese DSLR's. I would like to see a partnership between Leica and Fuji for the M10.

 

[bigeye]

I think Leica is very much like Ferrari, in that for every good thing produced (M9, S2, 458 Italia, 599 GTO), depends very much on the bad stuff to do well to finance their products (Ferrari theme world, M9Ti). If that turns you off the brand, then so be it, but I'd rather the M9Ti to exist, rather than have no M9 at all.

No, the Fujiblad is the Ferrari....

 

[Roger Hicks]

Not sure how to take this question, with regard to its context. So, this is what I was thinking.

The M3 was a break-through camera.

The Fuji viewfinder shows true innovation.

My disappointment is that Leica did not introduce it, even if it was an a $26K luxury item. Using an LED for the frameline illumination "pales by comparison".

Fuji showed true innovation on digital photography 20 years ago with the first cameras using solid-state memory cards for storing images. That idea caught on. They also partnered with Nikon for the introduction of the first Japanese DSLR's. I would like to see a partnership between Leica and Fuji for the M10.

Dear Brian,

In what ways? Which features had not already appeared on earlier cameras? Auto-selected frames are the only ones I can immediately think of. Most of the rest (multiple frames, bayonet mounts, brightline finders, lever wind...) had already appeared on other cameras.

Cheers,
R.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

With regard to the M3: which cameras had parallax corrected, projected framelines before the M3? Plus the eye-relief on the 0.92x finder when most of the competition had squinty-little peepholes for viewfinders. Which pre-1954 cameras had a viewfinder approaching the M3?

Not from Nikon, Zeiss, Retina, Canon, Nicca, etc.

Contax, Nikon, and others had bayonet mounts- but they were not as simple and practical as the M-Mount due to the built in helical.

 

[Keith]

My question is why all the threads lately that seem to have bugger all to do with actual photography but they still dominate the main page ... what gives?

This forum seems to be in one of the worse 'gear' phases I can ever remember! 🙁

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Keith- Photokina and new products were just announced.

And we are following up with Leica M3 discussions.

 

[Keith]

Keith- Photokina and new products were just announced.

And we are following up with Leica M3 discussions.

I like my gear as much as anyone but it just seems excessive to me at the moment ... even allowing for fotokeener! 😛

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Well, an interesting read on the evolution of the viewfinder, on Rick Oleson's site.

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/looking_forward.htm

Rick Oleson states: "The first viewfinder to combine automatic parallax compensation, projected framelines, and a rangefinder into a single optical system proved to be the high water mark in viewfinder development. Even now, 33 years after its introduction (note: this article was originally written in 1987), no optical viewfinder has surpassed in complexity of design, in versatility, in precision, or in ease of use, the system which appeared on the Leica M3 in 1954."

I hope Rick adds the X100 finder to his article.

But- the M3 will still remain the BEST viewfinder made for an off-the-shelf camera, in terms of an all-optical finder, even after the X100.

 

[illumiquest]

Complaining about a $26,000 camera is like complaining about a Bugatti Veyron. You're never going to own either because you spend to much time on photo forums 😉

 

[Bobonli]

My question is why all the threads lately that seem to have bugger all to do with actual photography but they still dominate the main page ... what gives?

This forum seems to be in one of the worse 'gear' phases I can ever remember! 🙁

I concur. There are "people" on other forums who lament that this site is populated by users more interested in yammering on about gear than using it.

The current Leica offerings are, as a previous poster put it, luxury offerings. There's no way the MP is "worth" $4700 in terms of technology when you can purchase a new Nikon F6 for $2300 and it has a truckload more features. I put worth in quotes because for some people $4700 is not a big nut to pay for the Leica badge and heritage etc. But from a pure technological standpoint, there's nothing mind-blowing innovative about that camera. It's a luxury version of a film based rangefinder.

And that's the backlash, I think. That Leica camera is clearly catering to the very well- off who are buying trophy items that will likely never be used. I couldn't give a rodent's butt about a $26000 rangefinder, but people see me toting around a 23 year old M6 and assume that I waste my discretionary income on over-priced, over-hyped camera gear when, in fact, it's quite used and in need of lots of upkeep. Balance that against the fact that almost no one uses the film based Ms for photojournalism anymore (by that I mean they aren't marketing these cameras as professional tools vis a vis Nikon or Camera because there is no market for that) and it certainly makes us look like luddites. Guilt by association can bring out a lot of emotion.

I've been reading a lot of marketing theory in the past year and it is amazing that Leica is able to stay in the camera business when you consider that only a small percentage of its offerings are truly cutting-edge. I think if the luxury market went away, they'd be in dire straits.

Does anyone know what percentage of camera sales Leica accounts for?

 

[ferider]

Guilt by association can bring out a lot of emotion.

And that's really what the bashing is about, IMO.

Lot's of RFF Leica users justify their expensive but old fashioned equipment via photography, and often ridicule "collectors", not recognizing that looking for weeks for the cheapest, BP pre-asph Summilux, E46 of course with 0.7m min. focus, in great shape, with mint glass, but the barrel can be a user, frequenting the RFF classifieds, KEH, ebay, and the other typical sites regularly, and finally buying it to then proceed having it cleaned by an elite group of CLA people, etc., is just that - collecting.

With the M9TI Leica makes a very clear statement about their target clientele. And holds up a mirror, that some are not too happy to look into.

Personally I think Leica is a private entity and can do whatever they want (within legal and ethical limits of course). If or not I use their products is my choice. And 25k for a toy is actually not that much money, for the average upper middle class person. Why is the price-tag of a loaded BMW, Mercedes or Lexus more justified ?

Roland.

 

[Roger Hicks]

With regard to the M3: which cameras had parallax corrected, projected framelines before the M3? Plus the eye-relief on the 0.92x finder when most of the competition had squinty-little peepholes for viewfinders. Which pre-1954 cameras had a viewfinder approaching the M3?

Not from Nikon, Zeiss, Retina, Canon, Nicca, etc.

Contax, Nikon, and others had bayonet mounts- but they were not as simple and practical as the M-Mount due to the built in helical.

Dear Brian,

You are of course quite right about parallax correction, but multiple projected brightlines first appeared on the Casca in 1949. And Exaktas didn't have built-in helicals.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I concur. There are "people" on other forums who lament that this site is populated by users more interested in yammering on about gear than using it.

The current Leica offerings are, as a previous poster put it, luxury offerings. There's no way the MP is "worth" $4700 in terms of technology when you can purchase a new Nikon F6 for $2300 and it has a truckload more features. I put worth in quotes because for some people $4700 is not a big nut to pay for the Leica badge and heritage etc. But from a pure technological standpoint, there's nothing mind-blowing innovative about that camera. It's a luxury version of a film based rangefinder.

And that's the backlash, I think. That Leica camera is clearly catering to the very well- off who are buying trophy items that will likely never be used. I couldn't give a rodent's butt about a $26000 rangefinder, but people see me toting around a 23 year old M6 and assume that I waste my discretionary income on over-priced, over-hyped camera gear when, in fact, it's quite used and in need of lots of upkeep. Balance that against the fact that almost no one uses the film based Ms for photojournalism anymore (by that I mean they aren't marketing these cameras as professional tools vis a vis Nikon or Camera because there is no market for that) and it certainly makes us look like luddites. Guilt by association can bring out a lot of emotion.

I've been reading a lot of marketing theory in the past year and it is amazing that Leica is able to stay in the camera business when you consider that only a small percentage of its offerings are truly cutting-edge. I think if the luxury market went away, they'd be in dire straits.

Does anyone know what percentage of camera sales Leica accounts for?

And there's no way caviar is 'worth' $200 a pot when you can buy a 99 cent hamburger...

Cheers,

R.

 

[ferider]

You caught that, didn't you ? 🙂

Unfortunately, with current American politics, upcoming tax laws, etc., class distinction is very much accepted (again). Heck, in a couple of months, we'll even know the exact yearly income that separates the "upper middle class" from the wealthy. At the moment it's US 250k. 10 times the price of the M9TI .... 😀

There is an ironic and sad correlation between these new values, and an ongoing heavy recession, IMO.

Bashing reason nr. 2.

 

[antiquark]

Why is the price-tag of a loaded BMW, Mercedes or Lexus more justified ?.

If Leica released a car, it would look nothing like a BMW... it would be more like a model T Ford!

 

[dave lackey]

A Model T has much more character IMO...😱

Geez, if one doesn't like Leica, don't buy it!

If you can't afford one, don't sweat it, I don't and love buying them when they have depreciated to a point that I can afford it... only took about 40 years for me to afford the M3...😛

Go Leica!😎

 

[dave lackey]

Damn, what is the X100 going to give you that Leica does not already offer? No one has answered that yet.

What is the X100 going to do to make your photography better? Answer that, please.

Quit bashing Leica and get on with the really important things in life. If you have forgotten what they are, PM me and I will graphically remind you.

Again, Leica knows what is best for Leica.

 

[bwcolor]

People read into the X100 what they hope will be production reality. Leica digital leaves much to be desired. Of course, this doesn't apply to you, but it does apply to me.

I see better low light capability (in a small form factor) and faster autofocus than the X1 and a much better value. I'm guessing that for your shooting style that none of these make any difference. I love my Leica film cameras, but I prefer the Zeiss Ikons large bright viewfinder. I'm expecting the Fuji viewfinder to be brighter and larger. Now, perhaps none of these things will manifest.

 

[Ezzie]

Its quite interesting to read some of these threads. I agree there's been an increase in these bouts lately. If I may, I would like to make an opinionated (my) summary of the pro- and antagonists in these discussions. There seems to be four main different groupings of contributors mixing it up whenever Leica releases anything new. I'm not saying these categories encompass all contributors, and please read this in the spirit it was written, tongue in cheek.

1. The marginally interested bystander (Millicent Bystander)
2. The opinionated bystander (Oafs)
3. The defensive Leicaphile (The Entrenched)
4. The disappointed Leicaphile (Otto a.k.a Kevin Kline)

I'm a Millicent Bystander, borderline Oaf. As a kid I was in awe of Leica. Questionably the most famous manufacturer of all time, still perceived as being innovative, the best optics in the business and exceptionally well built. Last a lifetime. Who wouldn't be impressed? I wanted one then, I don't particularly want one now. Others may have different reasons for not being overly interested in things Leica. Common to them all is that they feel the need to put a word in sideways, however inconsequential.

Oafs, being the second group, consists of those either jealous of Leica owners, or jealous of the attention Leica's products are still attaining, regardless if merited or not. Any good excuse to stick it to Leica. I suspect you can pick out who these are, and if you let yourself be antagonized by them, well then...

The Entrenched being the third group. So in love with Leica, Leica can do nothing wrong. Any criticism, well founded, well meant, or not will be refuted. If facts can be used to substantiate the rebuttal, all the better.

The fourth group being those who are dis-ap-point-ed with Leica, each time the safe is opened to reveal yet another product they perceive as lacking of real development from a company they very well may hold in as much awe as the Entrenched. Beware however of Oafs flying under the colours of an Otto, should be pounced upon by both the Entrenched and the Ottos.

It does make for an interesting environment for debate doesn't it?


And if you are wondering (I suspect you are not), the moment I lost any interest I had in Leica was when they started branding Panasonic stuff as their own. Good for Panasonic, but in my mind bad for Leica. So maybe I'm an Oaf after all?

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

They are very simply 'just a company.' They don't deserve "loyalty." I react to what they do at any given moment. There's no 'stored-up positive sentiment' from previous acts that balance out the present.

It doesn't matter to me that they've treated SOME Leica owners well. They didn't treat ME well at all. And, whether or not one can replace any part of an "-M" camera isn't such an issue for me. They DON'T service the Leica CM, which they used to call the "compact M." So, i guess there's a line of unfortunate demarcation there, and it affected me negatively.

My "bashing," though, at this point, is specific to the M9Ti. I do find it ridiculous. Leica used to be a company that produced the most solid, well-engineered PHOTOGRAPHIC TOOLS. Now, they're interested in frivolous, exorbitantly priced toys for people who aren't photographers. One minute they say they're working on an -R solution, and the next minute that's not true. Meanwhile, they're concentrating on a collector's edition that will never make a worthwhile photograph.

Folks say they need this 'sultan money' to keep things going. And, that the technology will trickle down to the real user base. But, 1) if they operated differently, this wouldn't be necessary; and 2) the company should be innovating just as a matter of course, not as some sort of incidental reward.

I disagree with the assertion that this is like Chevy drivers looking at RangeRover drivers with jealousy. No one's complaining about the S2's price. It seems expensive, but it fits it's niche. It's a completely new design, and borderline revolutionary. The M9Ti is like taking a RangeRover, making its chassis out of a more precious metal, adding a HU display and charging 3x the price. Except, the new chassis might actually save weight/fuel and be stronger in case of impact. Actual value. This is more like taking a Canon 5D, making it out of titanium, and adding a projected level display. Designing a beyond dweebish holster for it, and then charging 3x the price. Could you see ANY other camera company doing this? Perhaps Contax had precious special editions. But, where are they now?

Still, what is the point in complaining about how some people feel about a company? What makes them so sensitive and dear that they require your defense? This isn't like PC users taking potshots at Apple products, simply because they've chosen the other team. This is primarily about Leica users feeling abandoned — disappointed that the company too often seems too interested in serving a group that has never represented the company in return. We're not talking about M9 users. The M9Ti buyer is a different category entirely. I don't know who speculated on his/her intelligence in some other post, but yeah - if i saw someone using one, the quip "more money than brains" would spring to mind. Absolutely. And, if it were in the holster, i'd have to keep myself from laughing out loud. But, as there will only be 500 pieces, there's not much likelihood of that ever happening.

500! That number alone is incredible. I wish Leica were less interested in elitism than in making photographic products for photographers.

And, yes the promotional material is a bit insulting. I love how they have design sketches strewn about. Carefully annotated to show how their dimensions and curves are so optimally specified. The resulting product is one-size-fits-all, but somehow that size and shape is perfect for everyone....