Wise words .... or horse s**t?

Keith

Keith

The best camera is one that still works!
Local time
12:39 PM
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
19,242
I was looking for something specific at KR's site and stumbled over this statement:

Only use LEICA lenses. Only a fool uses discount lenses like Voigtländer on an M 240. Like any other work of fine art, LEICA lenses only go up in value over time, while other brands of lenses as well as the M 240 itself only go down in value over time.
Click to expand...

This seems like a fair bit of hot air and a slap in the face for Cosina from the well known internet wind bag ... who I generally don't mind incidentally!
 
I would have no problem with his statement if it was preceded with "In my opinion"....a subjective statement such as the one about non-Leica lenses are just an opinion and should be identified as such.
 
I guess you can take his advice. Leica lenses are certainly very nice. But if you do you will miss out on some truly stunning glass made by other people.

Personally I would not trade my ZM Planar 50/2 or ZM Sonnar 50/1.5 for anything that Leica makes. And the CV Color Skopar 35/2.5 ranks very, very high on my list as just about the best bang for your buck in a M mount 35mm lens.

But, each of us has his preferences and Ken would have you believe that his is Leica lenses.
 
I wonder which Leica lenses he was talking about using with a M240?

I like a lot of things about old Ken...he is alright...but you are right that is weird...

Leica lenses do hold their value right? So the third market M mount and the new Leica bodies are bunk? Wonder if he feels the same way about other 3rd markets and marquis camera companies eg Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Tokina, etc? Is that what he is trying to get across? :)
 
I just thought the slur aimed at Voigtlander lenses was a little unnecessary ... especially considering their partnership with Zeiss which are some of the finest lenses out there ... and made by Cosina of course!
 
In some respects he's right. On another forum a member succinctly stated "Leica glass is akin to money in the bank earning interest and you're using it daily". But of course that's purely the financial aspect. It also begs the question of why buy a Leica if you're not going to use their lenses.
 
having read a few of his CV reviews, he has some good things to say about them. On the 35 1.4: "It handles very well and is small and light. If you stop it down to f/5.6 or smaller and/or don't need the best sharpness or worry about distortion, you can make lifetime of great images with it."

The thing with his reviews: I think he writes with more sarcasm and facetiousness than wit, and you really need to know his style to get it. When writing RF reviews, he definitely writes from the LEICAMAN persona.
Generally I like reading them. Not the most cleverly written, but he knows his stuff and presents it in a "here's all the tech specs, and here's why you shouldn't really worry about it" sort of way. Contradicts himself a lot, but I think that's less incompetence and more of changing opinions. 10 years ago, he hated RFs because lack of automation and direct view gets in the way of taking pictures (which, I'll admit, is probably sound advice for a lot of beginners); now he loves them for the simplicity of it.
I guess you have to have been reading him for 10 years to calibrate your BS meter.

As for why one would shoot Leica cameras and not their lenses? I like my M5 a lot better than my Bessa, there aren't a lot of options for digital RFs, and there's lots of cool vintage glass out there. Spending $6k on a body and $300 on a lens for the sake of saving cash is another story...
 
CV is a perfectly decent lensmaker. Leica does not have a 35mm F1.2 or a 12mm F5.6, and Voigtlander manages to make both with decent performance.

With regard to value, KR might be right, but some people may not want to pay for Leica glass but want the RF experience - I would be in the exact opposite camp, though, since I happily pay for Leica optics but don't care about RFs enough to buy a digital M. My film body is actually a Bessa, and I really like it.

And of course, I know a few people who buy an M9 and put a skopar on it just because they want to be seen using something with the Leica logo, and don't care about a $4,000 lens without a big "Leica" stamped on it :D
 
Just in case, horse s**t is very attractive to fish as chum and some dogs considered it as their candies. Speaking in real world terms.
Have no problem with CV glass. As photographer. Real Voigtlander glass is on pair with Leitz glass. If you know, what I mean.
 
KR is hilarious. I think a lot of people are too foolish to see he's trolling them. A lot of his reviews are pretty spot on the money for a user's perspective, with anything having to do with Leica duly inflated to suit most Leica users level of perceived self-importance.

Funny guy with a good sense of humor that is lost on too many people who are too up-tight to see he's just screwing around with them.
 
Keith said:
I was looking for something specific at KR's site and stumbled over this statement:



This seems like a fair bit of hot air and a slap in the face for Cosina form the well known internet wind bag ... who I generally don't mind incidentally!
Click to expand...

I sold my 35mm Asph Summicron to buy a 35mm skopar and 50mm F2 Heliar to use on my old M9. Didn't regret it one bit.
 
Next day he states "Why use Leica when iphone5 gives better colors".

He would make up great politician.
 
Spicy said:
KR is hilarious. I think a lot of people are too foolish to see he's trolling them. A lot of his reviews are pretty spot on the money for a user's perspective, with anything having to do with Leica duly inflated to suit most Leica users level of perceived self-importance. Funny guy with a good sense of humor that is lost on too many people who are too up-tight to see he's just screwing around with them.
Click to expand...
This is a great summary of what KR is about! Very knowledgable guy but making controversial statements all the time to drive the traffic to his site.
 
ReeRay said:
In some respects he's right. On another forum a member succinctly stated "Leica glass is akin to money in the bank earning interest and you're using it daily". But of course that's purely the financial aspect. It also begs the question of why buy a Leica if you're not going to use their lenses.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... first Voigtlander glass is the equal of any Japanese glass manufacturer's best. My Nokton 50 f/1.1 cost me $800 used. A Noctilux is $6,000 used. If I throw my Nokton away when I'm done with it, I'll still have $5200 to be used for other pursuits... like bicycles, travel, or whatever.

On top of that, I like the way they render images on my M9-P.

There's nothing wrong with Leica glass... it's just too expensive for my taste.
 
Yes, it's horsesh*t, but that's the point, he says things to rile people up and get them going to his site.

I kind of admire it though, he freely admits he talks a load of BS, and generally I find Rockwell fairly entertaining.
 
Cosina have done a great service for the rangefinder user and if it hadn't have been for them making great lenses then I for one probably wouldn't have bought a Leica body.
I think a lot of Leica's success now is due to the readily available optics from other manufacturers.
 
Wait, what? Was there a pronouncement by an internet hobbyist about the only way to do something? I am shocked, shocked to find that there is gambling going on in here. Excuse me, I must go take some pictures. . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom