The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

The new M in action--you never looked so good

Shashin

Well-known member
But she looks like she is using live view. Don't tell me there is not truth in advertising! The truthiness seems to be there.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
I'm curious to see what pictures did she take with her finger in front of the lens.
She is dodging in-camera. The latest technique to control contrast--better than HDR. But regardless of the quality of the pictures, she is looking good!
 

NB23

New member
Now I understand better why the other dude didn't want to buy the monokrum because of an invisible mark on the release button.

And look at that lady taking care of her face so much that she doesn't even let the camera touch her.

You know, guys, If I was saying to y'all that leica has become a poseur camera catering the rich and the fashion victims, I'd be witch-hunted by you all. I'd be the troll par excellence. You'd all be insulted.
But when leica deliberately places itself in a revlon ad, depicting exactly what I'm talking about, it's ok?

I understand the marketing game very well. But guys, this is almost insulting the real photographer in me.
 

Maggie O

Active member
Olivia looks awful in that ad, that's what bothers me. She's gorgeous and her hair and makeup are all wrong for her.
 

edwardkaraa

New member
Olivia looks awful in that ad, that's what bothers me. She's gorgeous and her hair and makeup are all wrong for her.
It's funny that I was thinking the same thing. Even the skin color (or whatever fond de teint they used on her) doesn't look right.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Now I understand better why the other dude didn't want to buy the monokrum because of an invisible mark on the release button.

And look at that lady taking care of her face so much that she doesn't even let the camera touch her.

You know, guys, If I was saying to y'all that leica has become a poseur camera catering the rich and the fashion victims, I'd be witch-hunted by you all. I'd be the troll par excellence. You'd all be insulted.
But when leica deliberately places itself in a revlon ad, depicting exactly what I'm talking about, it's ok?

I understand the marketing game very well. But guys, this is almost insulting the real photographer in me.
I am not sure Leica paid a cosmetic company to be visible. The commercial makers used to have Yashica TLR and such as props before. I guess a TLR can't be show with the lipstick to be prominent. So a camera. With the kind of snapping she is doing, a Sony RX-1 without the dumb finder would have been perfect.
 

NB23

New member
If they haven't paid then they should sue.

But yes, they paid. They are after that market. The Victoria Beckhams of the world. The woman photographer's blog featuring her M9 purchase is a part of this movement.

The new breed: the Leicats! Photographettes in akshon!
 

fotografz

Well-known member
If they haven't paid then they should sue.

But yes, they paid. They are after that market. The Victoria Beckhams of the world. The woman photographer's blog featuring her M9 purchase is a part of this movement.

The new breed: the Leicats! Photographettes in akshon!
Get a clue. Trust me, no one pays for product placement and allows the branding to be crudely blacked out.

A nice red dot would have gone nicely with that lipstick ;)
 

NB23

New member
There are different level$ of vi$ibility. Pay more and have the camera smudge her face. Pay even more abd there you have a vague starbucks in the bokeh. Pay a lot more and there you can see it clearly.
Pay yet even more and there she is inside the starbucks.

If you can recognize the Leica and not mistake it for a fuji X100 or a смена-8 or a Kијев, you can be sure it's been paid for. Or someone should be fired.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
It's advertising and what I gather about the advertising industry (along with the limited knowledge of the fashion marketing industry) I'd gather it was an "honest" ad of combining modern classic beauty. Olivia Wilde is somewhat of a throwback to understated attractiveness in high fashion of yesteryear where it was as much about the strongest iconic features of the model and not globs of makeup to make an average woman beautiful. Leica M kinda of defines classic beauty in craftsmanship as well as retro functionality.

I'd say it's a natural match for this kind of ad and not yet another conspiracy theory. Even if they did pay for product placement amongst celebrities then who cares. Why would you not market your luxury item to the affluent - everyone markets to a target audience. Just doesn't make much sense to market a luxury pro level to the average young middle class family. A high level camera for that market costs in the $500-2000 range not a $10,000+ system. It's kind of how Canon/Nikon doesn't market the 1Dx/D4 in the big box stores - people go there for the APS-C cameras and IF they're informed or have the means they may get a 7D, 5D, D7000, or D800. That's rare though as the stocks on hand remain low on those level of cameras.

I promise Leica is not any more "evil" than the next company and if it's a status item for SOME then that's great. Some people actually just enjoy the camera in spite of the costs. I personally would've bought mine a lot sooner if it was less expensive.
 

NB23

New member
Thank God someone acknowledges! Geez, I was expecting another wave of attacks from uninformed people defending a concept they don't quite understand. I guess this is where my modest degrees on the subject come into play.

It is not a conspiracy. But Leica is now due to cater the real pros. I've got a good idea of what should be done, how to market it, and how the M had to be. In short: trash the cheap shutter for a more serious and robust one. But all the Victoria B€ckham$ of this world wouldn't care.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I think you misunderstand me. I think the M is a highly capable camera pro level camera or I could've spend my money elsewhere than on the two M9's I've purchased.

Now if you're after a marketing job with Leica then I don't think this is the right location on the internet to express your grand ideas really.

I will say the "attacks" you're referencing have more to do with your perceived condescending tone towards EVERYONE who uses a Leica M. Yes there are SOME collectors of cameras like there are collector's of most any exotic man made product but there are far more photographers be it professional, hobbyist, or amateurs with cash to spend. Maybe I'm wrong in my perception but your apparent grouping of all Leica M owners as snooty collectors has about as much validity as grouping anyone with a Canon or Nikon as a qualified professional. Neither is true and most Leica owners I've dealt with here tend to be very approachable, helpful, and here's a kicker - most own other systems as well. Again sometimes perception is "truth" and maybe you should clarify your entire point of view and MAYBE most people won't dismiss it as negative Leica bashing. I like to believe most people have good intentions but miscommunication can muddy intentions very quickly. I don't think most people here have a problem understanding marketing or product placement but I have to say any attack you feel you receive is kinda brought on when you make the unilateral blanket statements (or question people level of intelligence v. your level of "higher" intelligence) that you have made here and in the past.
 
Top