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

[Godfrey]

That's ugly.
I doubt Leica had anything to do with it. The Revlon folks should answer for this.



G

 

[Shashin]

I am sure most of you have seen this, but just in case:

Fotoshop by Adobé - YouTube

It has a nice fashion theme.

 

[NB23]

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.

Yes you acknowledged the marketing part. Was refreshing and unexpected!
Around these parts, one is quickly made a mega troll just for expressing a valid opinion.
And how is my opinion any different then yours? My "higher intelligence"...
What makes you right and me wrong?
What about what I said is really worth censoring? Nothing.

 

[D&A]

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.

Maybe it's the fault of sensor in the video camera that shot the commercial that resulted in that uncomplementry look to her skin tone. Darn, I knew they shouldn't have made the switch from CCD to CMOS! :ROTFL:

Dave (D&A)

 

[Sharokin]

I would love to see this camera in the hands of Alex Webb or David Alan Harvey.

 

[Double Negative]

Look at all the Apple merch on every TV show these days. It used to be an oddity. Now it's odd if it's NOT Apple. You usually see the telltale logo on the back of laptops, etc. - other times it's covered with a sticker. But you can just TELL what it is if you're familiar with the brand.

 

[ramosa]

That's ugly.
I doubt Leica had anything to do with it. The Revlon folks should answer for this.



G

She had to use live view because she smudged the viewfinder with lipstick. And all on an M9 nonetheless

 

[charlesphoto]

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.

Yes, this is an a-hole comment. What if the art director had picked another retro looking camera (because really, that's all they were after) such as a Fuji, etc would you say the same thing? Because props are usually all about the art director and stylist, and often just what is available. Sometimes it's even who has what on set - I know a lot of dp's that use Leica's as their personal cameras. Or the AD goes to the rental house and says let me look at some cameras and picks the best for the shoot. It's so obviously not of Leica's doing. Really, Leica doesn't have that sort of marketing/clout (they probably should).

My baby daughter's name is Leica, and I would say 7 out of 10 people just think it's a pretty name (or the Russian dog in space). I'm sure that 9 out of 10 people who buy Revlon could give a rat's *** what kind of camera is in the ad.

Why don't you go hate somewhere else....

 

[charlesphoto]

And yes, it's a shitty looking ad (esp the John Boehner skin tone!).

 

[NB23]

Yes, this is an a-hole comment. What if the art director had picked another retro looking camera (because really, that's all they were after) such as a Fuji, etc would you say the same thing?

Of course!!

You just showed that you don't quite get it. They aren't after an retro looking camera. They're after showing a lifestyle. What they're selling the girls is a lifestyle. But I feel I'd have to put too much time and effort to make you understand how and why it all works.
There's no hating from me, but then again, I'm somehow absolutely not surprised that you saw otherwise.

You named your daughter Leica?