People complain Nikon D3x, but no one complain the M9 price

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by chuck_t, Apr 13, 2010.

  1. I felt something is fishy going on the Internet, you see even Ken Rockwell doesn't complain about the expensive Leica M9. But when Nikon D3x started out a little more expensive with higher pixel count, people are in rage. I remember there was no waiting list or shortage for the Nikon D3x when it came out. However, lots of people still waiting for the Leica M9, that is, a manual focus camera without AF focus, no Matrix metering, no zoom lenses available and no 5fps, no liveview and list could go on and on.
    One thing Leica is good at are the lenses. They are the BEST, but could easily break your saving, marriage and wallet.
     
  2. You got it very wrong I am afraid. It is not about the best lenses, it is not about technology, it is the very tiny little red dot that people are paying for. It is called "status". People feel superior when they wear a Rolex, driving a Ferrari, or having relationship with a dozen Hollywood stars. The same goes for owning a Leica. Any mumbo jumbo made the press releases were just excuses for them to shell out the plastic. The poor will argue the price-performance ratio, but the rich will just buy them like the average people buying a cup of coffee.
     
  3. I can see where Alan is coming from with his very generalized statement. No doubt there are some owners who prize their Leicas for exactly the reasons he states but I doubt they read many posts on these forums.
    Leicas are limited production. Supply/demand. That's it. Nikon cranks out as many D3X cameras as it's factories can make, Leica produces as many M9s as it's can make. Leica isn't set up in terms of production facilities or staff to mass produce a camera. Nor do they want to. They wisely recognize the cachet of owning a product which is limited in production, uses old-world production techniques and has a long and proud history. And they charge for it. That should be OK, Alan. Nikon likewise charges for all the technical wizardry. And that's OK too.
    Isn't it great that both types of photographers still have companies producing "their" types of cameras? Let's be happy about the fact we have such wonderful options and tools available to us and stop making divisive comments.
     
  4. There's no mystery about this as Leicas have always been expensive so everyone expects it. But for Canon and Nikon to have an $8,000 camera that, perhaps, is more of a surprise.
    Although the status may have something to do with it, I am not so sure, as Canon and Nikon users are equally passionate about their brand. However, there is a mystique about Leica partly due to their longevity: the M9 is the latest of a line of cameras reaching back to 1954 which can still use all the lenses from that period (and further back if you mount screw mount lenses). Their optical performance is also legendary which helps too.
     
  5. Leicas were always more expensive - so there was no surprise with the M9 (I actually expected it to be priced even higher). Also, the customer base is much smaller for Leica, as is Leica's production capacity. For Nikon, a price of $8000 was a first - and though the camera was priced the same as the Canon 1Ds when it came out - by the time the D3X appeared, that price had already dropped and everyone was expecting Nikon to price it accordingly.
     
  6. Alan Chan, if that's the case, then why do I cover up the red Leica dot and the white 'M9' lettering on my rangefinder so that people don't notice me when I shoot?
    I sold all my Canon dSLR gear and switched to the exorbitantly-priced Leica (at least 2x overpriced) because it's the only serious digital rangefinder around. Believe me, if Kyocera came out with a digital Contax G3 with autofocus that actually worked, I'd sell all my Leica gear and switch to that system in a heartbeat.
    Until that happy day arrives, the overpriced Leica is my only choice, and it allows even a novice like me to produce acceptable images from time to time, as I can understand its controls and worry about the actual art of photography rather than dorking around with an oversized, attention-getting, poorly-designed computer the size of my head with a lens and sensor attached, which is what dSLRs have become.
    So, perhaps next time you'll think twice about presuming to speak for others whom you don't know and whose motives haven't been revealed to you by divine insight.
     
  7. I can see where Alan is coming from with his very generalized statement.​
    I'd be surprised if Alan can see where he's coming from. Most people I know that use Leicas do so because of the type of photography they do - it's the right tool for the job. For an example, look here - Miguel uses Leicas because they are small, unobtrusive, and have an unintimidating presence. People who believe what Alan does don't have the faintest idea about who uses the equipment or why.
     
  8. Lots of people complain about the price of the M9. You have to be very rich or very dedicated to buy the M9 at current prices. Low availability probably tends to keep complaining to a minimum since not very many are seriously considering buying them because there are not that many available.
    The advent of the M9 was my golden opportunity to buy a used M8 at a semi-reasonable price and I'm enjoying it a lot, especially since the M8 works very well as an IR camera.
     
  9. SCL

    SCL

    And complaining achieves what? I always say "if you gotta ask, then you probably can't afford it".
     
  10. I don't know if more people feels the same as me about M9.
    Considering its price, I know M9 lacks many things other cameras have. Nevertheless I find M9 a very simple camera to use.That's why I use one, and it performs just as I need. Wonderful lenses and camera package. Just a simple camera without any odds and sods. That's it.
     
  11. Well, the complaining makes me feel better! Maybe it encourages Leica to work on a lower cost option -- I have some hope of an M mount X1 like camera someday. I think it would be a good idea for Leica to work on the equivalent of a Canon 5D, something a bit less pro at about half the price or less. May never happen granted, probably won't.
    At my age I'm not sure how many more cameras I'm going to buy. In a few years when the M10 comes out, maybe I can get a bit of a deal on a used M9.
     
  12. Leica has to amortize their research and development costs over such a small number of units sold that they can't afford to do market segmentation they way Nikon and Canon do. They can only afford to develop the "top of the line" option.
    Leica have insanely higher labor costs than Nikon and Canon do. Nikon and Canon can't even compete making equipment in Japan, I presume most models are made in Thailand, China, etc.
    Leica is barely profitable at the moment. Nikon and Canon are typcially profitable, although they may be bleeding in the current recession. (Nikon's primary product line of semiconductor fabrication equipment is deeply cyclical, and must have terrible sales at the moment. Canon is more of a pure consumer products play.)
    Ken Rockwell is tweaking Nikon about the D3X because he thinks it's a cynical market segmentation ploy, and that they are taking a much higher markup on it than their lower models. Just like Intel charging $999 for the unlocked "gamer" processor chips. But, in both cases, we don't know the real chip yields!
     
  13. You got it very wrong I am afraid. It is not about the best lenses, it is not about technology, it is the very tiny little red dot that people are paying for. It is called "status".​
    I'd like to had that the M9 is the ONLY compact full frame digital camera with interchangeable lens and simple user controls rangefinder on the market. The perfect tool for many of us "status" hungry monsters.
    Anything with a logo written all over it is STATUS mumbo jumbo.
     
  14. Last winter I was shooting in Japan for two month, with a Nikon DSLR. Even though the Japanese are extremely polite, forgiving and patient, you are really pushing it.
    It dawns on you when you see other folks loaded with their D700 and MarkII's. For street photography the full frame, 8 frames per second, auto-everything DSLRs are quite obnoxious, frankly. We look and act like guerillas with Bazookas. Even a medium format Rolleiflex is more appropriate (below).
    Next week I am flying back to Japan, this time bringing only two film rangefinders. (I wish I could afford the M9).
     
  15. I saw this thread at the P.net home page and had to read it. As much as I'd enjoy owning and using an M9, it isn't in the cards for me. I don't think it ever will. But a hang-up I find hard to get over with all the big brands is the fact that these "computers with lenses" aren't likely to last 30, 40, 50 years or more like the old mechanical camera easily do. I shoot Pentax. I own two, a nearly 40 year old fully manual K1000 and a modern K20D dslr. Which one is still going to be making pictures in 15 or 20 years? The K1000 will. (Assuming 35mm film is still made.) Will the electronics in the modern dslr last that long? I'm doubtful. So to drop many thousands of dollars on electronic cameras without also earning a good living with it to me is a difficult thing to convince me of.
     
  16. OP Chuck T writes:
    "when Nikon D3x started out a little more expensive with higher pixel count, people are in rage."​
    Kind of like this? (by the same OP)
    http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00ReqV
    Three comments:
    1) One's perception depends on where one hangs out. Those who spend time on the Nikon forums -- like the OP -- are going to hear (and put forth; see link above) more complaining about the D3x price, while those who spend time at the rangefinder forums (like rangefinderforum) are going to hear more complaining about the M9 price. I personally think the D3x may be slightly overpriced (but it will come down) while the M9 is not. I say this about the M9 because...
    2) With the D3x, Nikon essentially produced what Canon had already done for the same price (and what Sony has since done for about one-third the price): a rugged, high-megapixel, full-frame DSLR. But with the M9, Leica did what no one else had done before (and no one has promised to do yet): make a full-frame sensor camera that accommodates even wide-angle lenses with an extremely short flange focal distance. (Leica = 27.5mm from the sensor; Nikon = 46.5mm. That's a huge difference.)
    3) Over the past few decades, Leica products have generally been priced significantly higher than Nikon equivalents (e.g., Leica 50/1.4 vs. Nikon 50/1.4; note which one is backordered, by the way!). Regardless of other considerations, many people don't expect Nikon to cost more than Leica, and that probably explains the reaction to the pricing of the two companies' respective top-of-the-line models.
     
  17. Fascinating thread, people.
     
  18. I think the general assumption is wrong for this thread in that, when it was first announced many people on this forum complained about the price, to deaf ears at Lecia. As it turns out, Leica can't seem to make enough of them at the extravagant price they charge, so in that sense, they aren't overpriced. Just that most of us can't really afford it. But looks like it's been a good move for Lecia.
     
  19. People do complain about the price of the M9, just like the Nikon D3x. They just don't get as much sympathy. ;-)
     
  20. read HERE about when I first mentioned that an M9 was coming (funny looking back at that thread now). Yes, it was expected to come in more expensive than it is, but it's still about $8000 too much for a digicam.
     
  21. It really is all about supply and demand. When demand dries up cost goes down. Nikon prices (especially lenses) have risen dramatically since former professional Canon shooters started abandoning the brand in droves because of problems with autofocus and started purchasing Nikon gear. The M9 is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. If I thought it even remotely had a chance of having the longevity of an M film camera I would consider one myself. But since it probably will be outdated within a year or two, no thanks.
     
  22. The "unobtrusiveness" thing is fluff. All anyone has to do is watch James Nachtwey in "War Photographer" to see that you can be perfectly unobtrusive with a motor-driven pro SLR and an f/2.8 zoom. It's all about your presence and how you project yourself to people. Leica can basically charge whatever they want for the M9 because it's the only digital solution that will allow people to use Leica M lenses with the FOV they were designed for. Every other available solution throws away a larger part of the image circle. And I also think that Leica M lenses are among the very best available in 35mm format.
    But for my money? I'm looking at the Pentax 645D. Not much more than what a D3X + pro zoom or an M9 + Leica prime costs new, and will likely blow them both away in imaging quality.
     
  23. To Jose Amado:
    Can't find anything in your very nice portfolio of interesting images that was taken with an M9. Mostly Fuji f30 and Canon G5. One with a D-Lux4, which is a rebadged Panasonic.
     
  24. Both dSLR's and Leica M's serve their purpose well. Carl Follstad's original post couldn't have put it any clearer and wiser. Yet, to fully appreciate the feeling of a Leica M, digital or analog, one has to use it for years under various photographic situations. It may be the lenses, it may also be the red dot--can't tell for sure. But, would you believe that some of us have also gone so far as to propose a digital MP without screen, menus and the like--just a mere CCD as a replacement for the vanishing film? That may mean something in how we see our Leica's.
     
  25. Well, I guess that my style of photographing would not depend critically on a Leica or a Nikon (I mostly use primes, and then a great part of them is manual focus). Truly I could get a better photograph from the Leica 35mm/f1.4 at 1.4 (if it exists...) than from Nikon's equivalent lens. However, with the D700 I can double the ISO value and take the photo at f2, with only a little more noise. So, when shooting raw and using, e.g. lightroom for conversion (i.e., the same software), then I guess that any difference in quality would get smaller. In short, digital Leica has more high ISO noise but better lenses, and d700 has worse lenses but better high iso performance. In the end, it boils down to individual preferences, given that you do not have to count your money. (A little off topic, though).
     
  26. Hi all. Just adding my two centavos here. Is there a lot of pros working with Leicas for lets say, portrait, commercial, architectural or even fashion that people like me can see the quality of the Leica versus Cannon or Nikon. Is there anyone selling large archival prints using Leicas? I read lots of articles online and they all point to medium format digital or FF cannon or Nikon and even large format equipment but not Leicas. I'm not an expert but I think there has got to be pros out there using this great camera system and all this talk can't be just smoke and mirrors right. I mean, the Leica system is world known for it's lens quality and all but where is the overwhelming proof? I see lots of my counterparts using Hasselblad DSLR for all sorts of applications and even Cannons and Nikons but not one is using a Leica.
    Any help with this would be informative.
    Thanks and please don't bash me, I'm just making an observation here. I don't own a Leica so I can't speak from direct experience just wondering.
    Ed
     
  27. "Is there a lot of pros working with Leicas for lets say, portrait, commercial, architectural or even fashion that people like me can see the quality of the Leica versus Canon or Nikon?"​

    I don't know of any working pros shooting those subjects with a Leica. Lots of pros shoot Leica on their own time, and many advanced photographers who don't photograph for a living shoot Leica, but when there are clients and budgets and assistants involved that usually means SLRs. That doesn't make Leicas unworthy; it just means that rangefinder cameras are not usually considered ideal tools for the tasks you list.
    There are many, many samples of full-frame digital camera files from Canons, Nikons, Leicas, and other cameras that can be downloaded should you want to make your own prints and compare the output from the various cameras. But I doubt you'll see much difference either way as other factors play a bigger role in the result than which camera was used. Most high-megapixel 24x36mm cameras have fairly similar output up to 400ISO or so and rare is the viewer who can point to a print from a full-frame camera and identify the brand of camera used to make the photograph.
    One might choose a Canon or Nikon or Leica or Sony for reasons related to its handling or working style or the lenses one can use with it, but few owners of these cameras would claim that their camera produces "overwhelmingly" superior files to other cameras in that format class.
     
  28. People don't complain about Leica prices? That is an utterly absurd statement
     
  29. Eddy Mendoza wrote: "... Is there a lot of pros working with Leicas for lets say, portrait, commercial, architectural or even fashion that people like me can see the quality of the Leica versus Cannon or Nikon. Is there anyone selling large archival prints using Leicas? I read lots of articles online and they all point to medium format digital or FF cannon or Nikon and even large format equipment but not Leicas. I'm not an expert but I think there has got to be pros out there using this great camera system and all this talk can't be just smoke and mirrors right. I mean, the Leica system is world known for it's lens quality and all but where is the overwhelming proof? I see lots of my counterparts using Hasselblad DSLR for all sorts of applications and even Cannons and Nikons but not one is using a Leica."
    I don't know about overwhelming proof, but when I take prints of my wildlife photos to gallery owners I get a curious reaction.
    The vast majority of wildlife photos are made with Nikon or Canon equipment. I've used some Nikon and Canon equipment but I'm now using Leica-R. The prints I show gallery owners were make with a mix of Nikon and Leica equipment and none of the prints have any notes attached that would suggest what equipment was used. The prints made with the Leica equipment get the most attention: at first, the viewer is speechless (sometimes they visibly jump back when they see the first print); next, they comment on the color quality and detail; and finally, they ask what camera I'm using. Happens every time. In one case the gallery also represents a Canon Explorer of Light photographer, in another case the owner told me before he saw any prints that he's had his fill of wildlife photos and he doubted he'd be interested. Typically the photos selected for display in the gallery were all made with the DMR and Leica-R lenses. YMMV.
     
  30. Hi Ralph, thanks for the response. I do understand all of your point but I still don't know why anyone would buy a camera system that good just to shoot everyday images. My left side of the brain says if it's that good someone out there must be taking advantage of it. One can't simply pay thousands of dollars to shoot images and not make money from them. Maybe I'm looking at this from the wrong perspective. I own several cameras and some (the most expensive) are used for work and others (cheapest) are used for pleasure. I'm looking at buying a Leica (S2) now but the only one that catches my attention is way too high in price ($40K) and I don't know if it's even available yet. I'm waiting for my local pro-camera place to get it so I can rent it and decide if it's worth more than the one I use now (H3D 31) which is a beast and only $18K. Maybe i should start with an older model?
    Ed
     
  31. M8- See Rinze Van brug work.
     
  32. I use Nikon. If I ever get to spend $8k on a camera, it would be on a Leica.
     
  33. I do understand all of your point but I still don't know why anyone would buy a camera system that good just to shoot everyday images. My left side of the brain says if it's that good someone out there must be taking advantage of it. One can't simply pay thousands of dollars to shoot images and not make money from them.​
    Those people are called Dentists.
     
  34. I use an M8 because as I've gotten older, my heavier cameras make my back hurt after a while, and the Leica is a bit lighter and less bulky and awkward. If I could justify that much money, I might well buy an M9. So I guess I'm saying weight and bulk might be an issue.
     
  35. To Les Berkley: Yes, You are right. I'm sorry, no much time to post or to put some photos on PN. Just coming from NY. You can see now some M9 taken on Travel theme I just add to my portfolio after your kind comments. Also one on Landscape I think. Hope you like them.
     
  36. Doug Herr is one of the few people who's images I've seen made with Leica and the DMR or the old slides he shot scream Lecia as opposed to some other system. I'm not usually one to really buy into Leica uber alles, but Doug's images certainly support that little seperation and color rendition. I don't see it in my own M photos or really anybody else that comes to mind. Don't blush Doug... just calling it likes I seez it..
     
  37. As Dieter and Carl note, it's about business model. With simple cost/volume/profit analysis, Leicas MUST cost more because there are far fewer people who want a more specialized tool, so R&D, manufacturing, and all other costs must be allocated in the price of far fewer units sold.
    But, yes, there are always those who buy objects purely for status and snobbery. But why complain? They are helping reduce manufacturing cost per unit. Continued sales keep the product viable and on market. Since snobs never actually use the equipment, they preserve these gems for future generations.
     
  38. It's apples and oranges. On body weight alone, the Nikon 3x is two and a half times as heavy as the Leica M9. (52.6 ounces versus 20.9 ounces, size also matters.) That is because the Nikon 3x is a general purpose workhorse camera for pros, while the Leica M9 is a more specialized, lean, mean, street shooting machine. In the sky, it would be a Blenheim bomber versus a Japanese Zero.
    Ask Bjorn Borg if he wants his tennis racket to weigh two and a half times more. The Leica does a lot less than does the Nikon, but what it does, it does better. Some folks will pay for that.
     
  39. I have to agree with Barry, for while I do buy the superiority of Leica optics taken as a whole (although other companies make great lenses too), I suspect that the reception Doug gets from his shots is mainly due to the fact that he is a photographer with very high standards and therefore presents only excellent work. He might be as successful if he used Canon or Nikon, but since he does not it is rather difficult to tell. Then you would have to know the reaction of the gallery owner to his non-Leica shots to see if this was a real effect. Having shown myself now to be a little sceptical though, I am a great admirer of the Leica R optics and wish I felt I could have carried on using them myself. I am one of many who was disappointed to see the system die.
     
  40. What's so funny about this discussion is that the $7,000 Leica M9 does not come with a kit lens included. No one complained about that. I recommend the $10,000 Leica 50mm f0.95 lens. Then no one would have to complain about the cost of the camera! Seriously (if lens prices are not serious enough), it's not that the production is limited. It's that the cameras are hand made in Germany and that limits production. They'd make more if they could. That's what we want, a hand made Leica camera that takes all of Leica lenses. But the sensor has to do justice to the high quality lenses. Than means a custom designed Kodak sensor. Surely a lot of the $ 7,000 is for Kodak. Keep in mind, Kodak also cannot mass produce the sensor they provide either. So, they have to make more profit per unit to justify the development and production costs. Do you really expect that Contax or anyone else could produce a RF camera that would take Leica lenses that also has the same high quality sensor? What sensor and for what price? Do you really want a lower quality (I don' just mean pixel count) sensor after spending that much money on a Leica lens? The prices of the camera and lens match. I cannot see why Nikon users would complain at all: they have alternative Nikon cameras--including the D700--that takes the same Nikon lenses. They have a choice, so what's to complain about. I don't think a cheaper RF camera with a different sensor would be as viable a choice as the D700 is for Nikon users. Meanwhile, we still get responses like the one above: "The prints made with the Leica equipment get the most attention: at first, the viewer is speechless (sometimes they visibly jump back when they see the first print); next, they comment on the color quality and detail; and finally, they ask what camera I'm using. Happens every time." I suspect that this may bother non-Leica users more than the prices. This resonse has happened to me many times, first with my M6 and then again with my M8. More importantly, I can see the difference for myself and I am the one paying for it (okay, so's my wife!).
     
  41. Maybe if the D3X looked much like a Photomic FTn with an LCD on back it would attract Nikon cult fans for who earning $8000 takes a few hours work in their medical or dental office. And, it wouldn't need most of the D3X features, including it's lack of high-ISO noise. They might even believe it's a good investment that will hold it's value, like they were saying about the M8 a couple years back.
     
  42. For a few it maybe about the status but I'd buy an M9 if i could afford one. It's about the lenses, size, quietness and to die for build quality. I don't often print big so any old film Leica loaded with Tri'x will give me what I'm looking for. Folks who shoot candids with D3-1D bodies and 70-200's look like total geeks.
     
  43. Digital leicas are in their own category. You'd notice that most people who own leicas aren't all about the images these wonderful cameras produce, it is also about the experience. Leicas are small, handmade, built to a standard where it feels solid and gives the user a simple interface unlike most cameras out there. I use leicas exactly for these reasons. it is true that leicas can't be used for shooting sports and other things but it is built for a certain type of photographer that likes it the way it is so why knock it? I'd compare it to a hand-built british roadster like a caterham. These roadsters are expensive and barely have any features and for sure, you can't take them off-roading as they're built for a specific purpose and people buy them for the experience of using them as well as the fast speeds they're able to achieve. Both a chevy and the roadster would get you to your destination but the experience and the result would be a bit different. It's the same with nikons and leicas. They both take pics but the user experience and results are a bit different. If one prefers the leica, why criticize them? If one prefers nikons? What's wrong with that? If they both cost the same, then at least you got 2 choices now.
     
  44. Richard, I'm begining to understand why certain people buy Leica cameras even though they're limited to what they can
    do. It's just like the business man who buys a Harley and rides on the weekends. It doesn't mean they are bikers but it
    also doesn't mean they shouldn't.
    I personally think if you are going to spend $8000 or more on a camera system it either has to be able to pay for itself or
    produce such an insanely better image than the competition and frankly everyone who I've contacted in this forum who
    even vaguely supports the Leica system has not been able to prove by example. I've gotten either 1 image or a bunch of
    substandard images that if I produce this kind of work to my clidnts I would of bedn out of business a long time ago.

    I am now requesting everyone to show me their best images produced by any Leica film or digital. Don't be shy! Just show
    me. I get a lot of talk but no action.

    Here's my email. Go ahead and flood my email with your Leica images.

    Let's put this nonsense to rest once and for all.



    emendoz1@gmail.com
     
  45. Eddy Mendoza wrote: "I am now requesting everyone to show me their best images produced by any Leica film or digital. Don't be shy! Just show me."
    Here are a few made with the R8 & DMR
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/accipitridae/feha02.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/mammals/lagomorphs/bthare04.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/corvidae/ybma01.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/corvidae/stja03.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/ardeidae/greg03.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/picidae/acwo02.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/anatidae/cago03.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/strigidae/leow01.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/troglodytidae/mawr02.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/trochilidae/ruhu01.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/anatidae/trsw01.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/strigidae/buow04.html
    http://wildlightphoto.com/birds/anatidae/mall04.html
    Whether these would be "better" or not if they had been made with a D3x or other camera might be a question of personal taste but unless the two cameras are used side-by-side with lenses that produced an identical field of view and exposed at the same instant we won't "know" which system can produce a "better" photo - and if a difference is seen this would answer only the technical side of the question: left brain stuff.
    There's also differences in how the subject responds to the camera, and differences in personal habits and preferences that would make one camera more effective and productive for a particular photographer: right brain stuff. What matters to me is not whether one camera is better than another, what matters to me is how productive I am with the camera.
     
  46. Hi Douglas, I've seen your work and I think it's awsome. I'm curious to see what the other 90% has to show. I was
    reffering to the numerous posters without galleries. As I said before, I am looking to buy a new system and Leica is one of
    them but most of the folks out there that are using these cameras are either shy about showing their work or fibing. I hope
    it's not the latter.

    Ed
     
  47. Eddy, what really mattters is how the Leica works for you, not how it works for anyone else. Might be best to rent one & see what happens.
     
  48. That's my main problem! I live in Los Angeles and rent all my equipment from Calumet but they don't carry any Leica stuff, not even lens. I wanted to rent a Leica system for a wekkend and see what all the hoopla was about but can't. don't get me wrong, I think it's a fine camera and if I had the money to spend I would have gotten one a long time ago just to see what a lot of people are talking about. I buy cameras inspite of reviews. Case in point, I bought a Kodak DCS 14n a few years ago after I read horrible things about it. everything bad that could happen to a camera seemed to happen to this one from bad color casts to terrible images in sun light. I got it and after a few months of practice I am now able to create some of the most beautiful, perfect exposure and perfect color images I could ever get from a camera. Since then I bought other camera systems for specific jobs and find myself going back to the Kodak and shooting the same shot just to compare, and it always just looks better.
    I think I'll start with an older film Leica so as to not break my bank and try it out. Here is another problem, none of the older Leicas on ebay come with lens. They are mostly being sold without a lens. I suspect the lens fetch more money by themselves huh.
    Anyways, good to talk to you and I'll contact you as soon as I have some new Leica images to show. You are truly and inspiration and someone to admire and use as a point of refference.
    Ed
     
  49. Michael Ferron [​IMG][​IMG], Apr 20, 2010; 12:39 a.m.
    For a few it maybe about the status but I'd buy an M9 if i could afford one. It's about the lenses, size, quietness and to die for build quality. I don't often print big so any old film Leica loaded with Tri'x will give me what I'm looking for. Folks who shoot candids with D3-1D bodies and 70-200's look like total geeks.​
    Maybe for some it's important "to die for build quality" even it is obsolete in a few years, but what is more important to me is that it will work reliably right now and next week, and if not, that the company will make quick repairs or swap me a refurberished one. This experience I found with Nikon and Canon, however Leica made me wait some months to sort my M6, which is not even complicated like an M8/M9.
    And I agree on your last sentence, however is it not a straw man argument? Who will own Nikon or Canon has possibilities of smaller but still full-frame bodies (D700 and 5DII) as well very tiny bodies although cropped sensors. And for lenses why would someone choose 70-200 when it is available many single focal lenses within the same narrow range as Leica. Yes I think it is a straw man argument.
     
  50. Douglas Herr , Apr 20, 2010; 02:21 p.m.
    Eddy, what really mattters is how the Leica works for you, not how it works for anyone else. Might be best to rent one & see what happens.​
    Absolutely agree! It is like I would ask Usain Bolt what brand of running shoes I should buy. True he is the champ, maybe the best runner in the world, but how can I think what shoes is confortable for his feet will be confortable for mine? Let alone think that if I wear his brand I can run in the Olympics! Yet people make simmilar assumptions about cameras all over the forums.
     
  51. Bon gia L DaSousa, you assume I'm trying to be a better photographer if I shoot with a Leica, you couldn't be more wrong. It is precisely why I am asking everyone who claims the Leica system is the best to show me what they have created with their system, because I don't believe the hype. So far I have gotten a response from Doug who is using a Leica for his work and has a gallery and a web site with all of his work for the world to see but other than that no one else has sent me galleries of their magnificent work created on their amazing Leica's, just comments.
    Please people, if you're going to comment positively on the Leica system at least show me what you're talking about. Enough with words! Where's the beef!
    Ciao!
     
  52. Renting an M camera & lenses: http://www.lensrentals.com/category/leica-m/for-leica
    Not local but they ship all over.
     
  53. Eddy Mendoza , Apr 20, 2010; 06:53 p.m.
    Bon gia L DaSousa, you assume I'm trying to be a better photographer if I shoot with a Leica, you couldn't be more wrong.​
    If you do not try to be a better photographer, why do you come to a forum and issue a challenge?
    It is precisely why I am asking everyone who claims the Leica system is the best to show me what they have created with their system, because I don't believe the hype. no one else has sent me galleries of their magnificent work created on their amazing Leica's​
    And when you set the tone of your challenge with such sarcasm it feels you are trying to ensure few or no people will bother to respond. Doug has made a reasonable suggestion, to rent and judge for yourself. I guarantee you, nobody here will be angry if you decide Leica is not so good and do not buy it. In fact I don't think anyone will be at all surprised of that outcome.
     
  54. In short, you don't own a Leica or you are a lousy photographer. My tone is not as you say sarcastic nor am I trying to
    insult anyone. Perhaps you don't understand my humor. Doug responded correctly by providing examples of his work with
    a Leica, others like yourself decide to hide behind words. I'm sorry you feel this way but it was not my intention to upset
    anyone just to create some stir out of those who offer praise of one system but offer no proof at all.

    When someone says they are extremely pleased with their camera and asked if they can show an example of what their
    camera can produce I would think that person would be more than happy to show off their images.

    Is this clear enough for you Mr. Delasousa?

    It's hard to type on an iPhone.
     
  55. In short, you don't own a Leica or you are a lousy photographer. My tone is not as you say sarcastic nor am I trying to insult anyone.​
    Anyone else finds those two expressions contradictory?
    Perhaps you don't understand my humor.​
    I understand humour. Yours is not .
    Doug responded correctly by providing examples of his work with a Leica, others like yourself decide to hide behind words.​
    Doug responded correctly, yes, I agree, by saying you should rent a Leica and judge for yourself. What words do I hide behind, please show me to them. Have I said any time that Leica is the best? I defy you to find such saying on my part. I own more than only Leica, and I absolutely do not ever believe that Leica is better than the best of other modern brands.
    When someone says they are extremely pleased with their camera and asked if they can show an example of what their camera can produce I would think that person would be more than happy to show off their images.​
    Not to someone who obviously have a chip on their shoulder and has obviously predecided against Leica and those who use him. Who wants to hear you say to them "A hah, I see your photos and they are junk, therefore so Leica is junk too, just as I thought!"? And I may add, to someone who has himself only one photo to show, if it is yours in fact.
    Is this clear enough for you Mr. Delasousa?​
    Is clear I have been feeding a troll and will not do so anymore.
     
  56. I don't know what a troll is so no offense taken there. All I ever wanted was to fish out the real Leica users by asking to provide some samples of their work, instead I got you! Lots of words and not one single photograph. I only have 1 photo up, true but that's more than you. I'm too lazy to put anymore up. This is exactly why I contacted you via email but never got a response. Instead you bashed me in public. Is it too late to ask nicely? Perhaps it was the way I asked. Here, I'll try it again. "could you please show me some of your work with your Leica camera?" Is that better? I don't expect a positive response but I thought I should try anyways. I'm sorry if I offend you Mr. Delasousa but you keep coming back with words and no proof.
    I won't respond to anymore of your comments, as one poster previously said "what a waste of bandwidth!" I agree, what a waste.
    Bon gia!
     
  57. how do you expect someone to send you images made with a Leica? On the internet! The Leica lenses strengths have always been in thier black and white. I'm happy to send you some proper images if you pay for the return postage.
     
  58. Hi Ty, no need to sell me any images, i can see your flickr gallery with all 300+ Leica M images.
    Thanks
    Ed
     
  59. Ed, since you like the image quality from the 14n I suspect you'd like the M9's image quality too because it also has a Kodak CCD without AA filter, with the additional advantage of more bits per pixel.
     
  60. Good point Doug. I always wondered why Kodak makes such great sensors for other camera makers but yet removed
    themselves from the game.

    Talk soon.

    Eddy
     
  61. D3x is just a camera, another one.
    M9 is history.
     
  62. Hello Rui, saw your gallery on flickr, very nice! Are those taken with a leica? What kind? I agree about the d3x, just a
    newer better camera today. Tomorrow the d4x will take it's place.
     
  63. I am retired, I pull SS-my only income apart from some film editing and a few snaps I have sold, chump change :) I spent two years exploring the American West 2004-2005, with a Digilux 2. I loved the simplicity and the images. Returned to NZ fell in a river with the Digi2, sent it to leica, it was out of warranty, they totally fixed it and it works a treat today. Brand loyalty.
    I cannot afford a Leica M9 however, I own an M9. I don't give a flying fotograph for red dots and the leik I simply love working with my Leica. My creativity comes first. I buy brands I trust. Land Rover, Sony, Apple, Leica, Leki, Garmont, Epson, et al. Simple really.
    2006 bought a whole Nikon kit at Samy's with all the new lenses from the 10.5 up, sold the lot and bought an M8.
    M8 not a great experience but the first digital M. The M9 is awesome. I have no need to splatter my snaps all over the web, they will get there when I am satisfied, a long way to go :)
    00WIvF-238561584.jpg
     
  64. and another thing, I love that I can basically set my camera menu to replicate film, ie, kodachrome, ekta, b/w, etc. I can see this as a future trend where we simply load pre-formated codecs, very cool.
    oh yes, here's a link to some of my snaps . . . http://www.flickr.com/photos/kiwicafe/collections/
     
  65. Images on the internet, because of severe compression, cannot bring out the quality of the Leica.
    To post an original file would usually eat up too much band width. Besides, people usually say that it's the brilliance of the photographer that is responsible, and that he/she could have taken that shot with whatever equipment they have.
    Only the photographer him/herself knows how much the shot is due to the camera. That is why most people don't post their Leica images.
     
  66. Richard, you have done exactly what I have been planning on doing for the last few years. I envy you! My wife thinks i'm crazy because I want to buy an RV and travel the US photographing things and people. She says she will not live in an RV and I'll have to do this on my own, fine with me. I am this close to buying my Fleetwood Bounder and packing it with all my film and digital gear and hitting the open road. I hope you do post your images, it will definately be a great inspiration to me and others contemplating the same idea.
    I'll keep an eye on your blog.
    Ed
     
  67. :) I have to smile . . . the back story is that my wife came home 5 days after hosting my 60th at Hal's in Venice Beach and announced she had found an apartment and was moving out the following week. So, as you can see, I was sort of thrust into doing what I wanted to do. There are no mistakes in life, none at all. So off I went and as you will see from my flickr snaps you will see i invested in a kick arse rig. That is what I am doing with the M9. I owe myself the best, no one else is going to do it for me so if I buy a huge Canon 5 whatever that can shoot moving images and it comes to editing and I wonder why it's such a bitch, then I simply smile. For Video i shoot Sony HDV, for stills . . . Leica. Period. The price is totally immaterial! Seriously, why spend all this chat when you could be shooting . . . that's it, I am off out the door with my Filson bag full of lenses and my M9 and 1.4 50mm attached! Cheers. ps, my new partner is a canon owner with a new 28mm prime lens, she lust after my . . . camera they way I lust after her. Who said life ends at 60, get on with it . . . .
     
  68. Richard Clark [​IMG],
    I am retired, I pull SS-my only income apart from some film editing and a few snaps I have sold, chump change :)
    I cannot afford a Leica M9 however, I own an M9. My creativity comes first. I buy brands I trust. Land Rover, Sony, Apple, Leica, Leki, Garmont, Epson, et al. Simple really.
    2006 bought a whole Nikon kit at Samy's with all the new lenses from the 10.5 up, sold the lot and bought an M8........For Video i shoot Sony HDV, for stills . . . Leica. Period. The price is totally immaterial! . . . that's it, I am off out the door with my Filson bag full of lenses and my M9 and 1.4 50mm attached!​
    You buy all that cameras and lenses with only SS as your main income??!! That reminds me of the Pink Panter movie when Clouseau is in the witness chair and prosecuter ask him how his wife manage to buy furs and diamonds on his policeman's salary and he responds "Well she is very frugal with the house money." Surely you should write a book on how you can buy so many expensive things with SS income, it will be surely a best seller (maybe even nonfiction, but who knows?)
    I have no need to splatter my snaps all over the web, they will get there when I am satisfied, a long way to go :)
    Ah, yes, I agree with you my friend. I see also no need to put my snaps until I work much harder and they improve, even if somebody will not listen to my opinions until I have splattered the web also.
     
  69. When I bought my Leica M9 w/35mm 1.4 lens a few months ago, it was my first Leica. Also, my first range-finder in about 40 years. I have several DSLR's (I mostly use the Nikon D700), and have been using SLR's since I was a teenager. Occasionally I have used MF's, but sold them all to move to digital.
    Last night I was taking night shots in Stuttgart, and I realized I had not really done that in many years. I came home and was just amazed at how these images were like nothing I had shot in years. I was taking images (handheld) at speeds of 1/15-1/30 that were perfect. Not much shutter noise, though not a silent shutter. Small and light. I doubt a single person would have noticed I was using a Leica (or cared). Reminded me of the 1960s when I had to carry a light meter, and focused on aperature, speed, and composition (BW film in those days), instead of a hundred variable settings. Just a really great feeling, and a more direct connection to the essence of why I have been attached to photography almost my entire life.
    I understand that the camera/lens is a bit expensive, and not for most folks. It is, however, all the things that the dedicated Leica M user praises. Hard to explain my inner feelings about last night's impromptu walk, taking shots of nothing in particular. I can't explain how I have let all my other cameras gather dust the past few months---I only want to shoot with the M9. It comes closest to my old Olympus OM-2 (still on the shelf w/1.2 50mm). I have gone completely to digital these days, but this camera makes me feel closer to my earliest days of photography, when I read issues of Popular Photography (hardcopy) every month, and studied the great photographers. I'm rambling, but I am convinced that I have taken a step back in someways, and have never enjoyed photography more than I do now with the neat little Leica M9. I'm beginning to wonder if I have abandoned SLR/DSLR, as well as film. I hope Leica comes out with the M10, and the market is flooded with old M9's, so more people will take the opportunity to buy one of these cameras. A real thrill.
    I'm not a professional, so I don't have to do the hard work that requires the workhorse DSLR's. That makes a difference I know. As for the cost--if someone else will start making Leica-like digital range-finders with the MP/full frame, and good quality low-light lens, I will certainly take a look.
     
  70. Hi James, my sister lives in Stuttgard! I feel the same about my Yashica Electro 35 Rangefinder. I was in San Fransisco over the Easter holidays and shot exclusively with that camera and loved the ease of shooting without all the hassels of my bulky DSLR. I also loved the fact that I could shoot handheld at speeds of 1/15 and even lower and still got perfect non blurry shots mainly due to the lack of mirror slap. If it were only digital so I didn't have to spend all that money on development and scanning. Don't get me wrong, I love the scans and prints but digital is so much faster and cheaper. I'm going to send you an image that I took just as I was driving by this marina and decided to stop the car and get out and capture. It was real quick and no thought was given to anything, i was even surprised the shot came out that's how quick it was. I think the shot came out great but I'll leave it up to you to tell me what you think. Can you send me a link to some of your images made with the M9?
    Cheers
    Eddy
     
  71. Time for OP to drink the cool-aid. The price is a major complaint for non-Leica and Leica purists alike. I recently came back to photography after a long break. As a hobby, I found it very expensive. I had Nikon then and sold it after it was just collecting dust and losing touch with my photography buddies. I started editing pictures from the past and reminded me how fun it was. So, I tried the Leica M8. I got a used one and my joy for photography came back again. The joy would have been the same if I had purchased Nikon again? Most likely. But, I wanted to learn rangerfinders and plunged for the digital Leica M. The M8 has/had many problems. Right now, the M8 is priced decently in the used market. One should also be vigilant when buying one because of the many reported problems that plagued the M8. One should not pay more than $2000 for the rangefinder. Coupled that with a Zeiss ZM lens and try it for yourself. You may love it or hate it. One can always sell it back because there are lots of curious people out there especially in Asia where Leica seems to be targeting. Interesting enough, the M8 was listed for sale. A father and son (Asian) contacted me about my listing and came to my place to look at the camera. I asked what interested them on Leica. The boy flat out said "Leica is the best". I then, gave him the camera to play with. The boy did not know what he was doing. He just said that he heard it is the best therefore he had to have it. I do believe it has become more for status because of my experience with the buyer. In addition, what upsets me are the prices for used lens. I am talking about lens made in the 1960s and they are priced substantially high because of the digital Leica revolution. It is April now, and awaiting for the M9 to be available ubiquitously. Do I find it worth it? Maybe. Do I enjoy/love it? Yes. Do I find it expensive? Very much so! The keyword is love/enjoy, therefore I've already made up my mind on saving for one. When I have the funds, I may change my mind about it. If I do, at least I am $7000 richer. =)
     
  72. Hi Eddy,
    Thanks on your comment. Well, most of them are from nikon d50, also some from Contax G2 and still nothing from my M6, which I have only a few weeks now ;)
    Rui
     

Share This Page