Why the leica Hate?

[Jim Radcliffe]

I have been a fan of Leica since the 1960s when I began my love affair with photography. I couldn't afford a Leica then and can't afford their latest offering now. This is may be part of the reason that some "hate" Leica. They want one but can't afford one and therefore they "act out" as a hater.

A year or so ago I was able to buy a used M8 and a couple of lenses. I used the M8 for a year and it finally dawned on me that the M system was really not for me and because of the amount of money I had tied up in the camera and lenses I sold it. Do I wish I still owned it? Of course but a camera that is not being used is a camera not worth keeping unless you are a collector.

My first 35mm film camera was a rangefinder (Argus C3) bought in a pawn shop for about $20 or $30 dollars back in 1965 I believe. So when I bought the M8 I knew what to expect as far as the "adjustments" to shooting (coming from a Canon 5D) would be.

If I were a rich man I would own and M9 and some of those wonderful Leica lenses but that is not the case and I doubt if I will ever own another M. The M8 worked very well for a lot of what I shoot but not for everything... and as so many have said in so many different forums, "The M is not for everybody."

Does Leica snobbery exist? Yes, it does. I think we have all run into a Leica owner who projects that snobbish persona at one time or another.. they are a very small minority of Leica owners but they do taint Leica ownership... and thus there are "haters" who will classify ALL Leica owners as such.

There are also the totally uninformed. They simply don't know what goes into the making of an M body or the glass. They are not aware that Leica is not a mega-company like Canon or Nikon and to them the prices seem totally outrageous... and so, they hate.

Most Leica owners I know simply enjoy the Leica for its simplicity and the great images it is capable of producing. I don't know anyone who bought the M system as a display of wealth or social standing.

As I mentioned, I've been a fan of Leica for most of my life but I have also been a critic of Leica... I could never understand why one would have to remove the entire baseplate to replace a memory card or battery.. it just did not make sense to me. I have never been able to equate the price Leica charges for the M bodies with the photos produced by the M... maybe they are selling something more than a body that is lost of me. I know they must charge what they do in order to survive and I can't really hold that against them... but some do.

Leica's heart and soul, at least for me, will always be their glass. Most of it is simply amazing in quality, design and construction. I only wish those beautiful lenses were more affordable. So.. haters are gonna hate those prices as well and make the quick jump to the concluson that Leica is only for the wealthy and collectors. They are wrong, of course.

I suppose I could say I have a love/hate relationship with Leica. I love the M system but I hate the prices, especially in these digital times when the technology is moving so fast and there is no option to upgrade other than buying a new M body.

I remain a fan of Leica and have never wished them any ill will... and I will continue to play the lottery in hopes of one day having enough disposable income to buy the latest from Leica without worrying about my wife putting me out on the street.

Haters come in all forms: Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Panasonic, Samsung, Pentax.. and Leica. No one should ever let a hater cause them a moment of worry. it's your gear, your choice, and the only thing that matters is that you are satisfied with what you use for your photography.

 

[monza]

Does Leica snobbery exist? Yes, it does. I think we have all run into a Leica owner who projects that snobbish persona at one time or another.. they are a very small minority of Leica owners but they do taint Leica ownership...

These must be the ones wearing the UV/IR colored glasses...they know who they are!

 

[charlesphoto]

Well, I hope Leica remain relevant for a while longer as my daughter who is about to be born any day now will be named Leica! My wife came up with that actually - I was against it at first but it's a pretty name and speaks to my love of photography (and Leica cameras) and to my wife's heritage (she is German). Plus I have the Leica logo tattooed on my forearm already.

Anyway, I think the whole gear thing has gotten pretty out of control. I found it fascinating to see all the changes going on and discussing them but I have a feeling that I'm probably going to have to take a big break from it and just not come to sites such as this, etc. Like since when did sharper become better? Pretty soon everything is going to be so detail rich as to be boring. Personally I'm trying to shoot looser - more shutter blur, not so worried about focus, one or two focal lengths only, etc etc and more about capturing a unique moment and composition. If one looks at the masters of reportage rarely was there so much concern about technicalities as one sees today. But that might just be an amateur thing. Too much money and too many toys to even get a grip on what they actually have besides being in constant testing mode. Kinda sad.

Best,

CP

 

[fotografz]

That was a reply to my friend, Rayyan. Wrong characterization. Plain and simple.

Then maybe try reading what you write before hitting the send key:

" ... and everyone else who own them."

 

[dude163]

Pretty soon everything is going to be so detail rich as to be boring. Personally I'm trying to shoot looser - more shutter blur, not so worried about focus, one or two focal lengths only, etc etc and more about capturing a unique moment and composition. If one looks at the masters of reportage rarely was there so much concern about technicalities as one sees today.
CP

well said , Im finding that too, I was all about sharpness and clarity, now Im trying to be less technical and more objective .

Less collecting and more shooting !

 

[Knorp]

To Marc and Vivek: quote of the day by Lee (Sapphie): "... It is the only forum I know where people are civil, courteous, encouraging and (usually) rational."

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/fuji/36574-thanks-goodness-getdpi.html

:angel:

 

[4season]

IMO Leica does both - they emphasize the emotional appeal but on the other side they still produce technical/optical excellence.

But excellence is a moving target isn't it: Developments such as aspherical and ED glass lens elements, OLED displays and large-sensor camera bodies that fit into a jacket pocket have become commonplace. And if you want to know what a really quiet camera is, try a Fuji X10. Granted that not every tech-heavy product is designed for absolute performance, but I hear that Samyang makes a good 35/1.4 lens (approx 450 USD)

Nothing wrong with wanting nice things for their own sake, of course. I like Leica's exquisite metal work as much as anyone else: The M9 strap lugs alone are miniature works of art. And if such details inspire a person to pick the camera up and use it more often, so much the better. But for me personally, the premium has become too high.

 

[4season]

Many M users long for the days when one could buy a body and keep it most of their life. In a manner of speaking, I viewed the M9P Chrome in that fashion. The M9 reached the level of image quality that suffices for my use of a rangefinder, so I sold both my M9 black paint bodies and hedged my longevity bet with chrome rather than paint, and a tougher LCD.

I considered that angle too. In fact, part of my Leica rationale was that I'd buy fewer but higher-quality items, so I'd actually save money in the long run. Yeah I know, pretty silly in retrospect isn't it.

 

[Paratom]

But excellence is a moving target isn't it: Developments such as aspherical and ED glass lens elements, OLED displays and large-sensor camera bodies that fit into a jacket pocket have become commonplace. And if you want to know what a really quiet camera is, try a Fuji X10. Granted that not every tech-heavy product is designed for absolute performance, but I hear that Samyang makes a good 35/1.4 lens (approx 450 USD)

Nothing wrong with wanting nice things for their own sake, of course. I like Leica's exquisite metal work as much as anyone else: The M9 strap lugs alone are miniature works of art. And if such details inspire a person to pick the camera up and use it more often, so much the better. But for me personally, the premium has become too high.

I skipped the x10 but have used the x100 and like it.

Today I think many camera brands focus too much on new features. I know there are some advantages of an EVF, but still a good OVF is soo much nicer to see the subject. (one of the reasons I like the x100).
Many features are good but a simple, intuitive user interface is maybe more important sometimes (because you can focus on taking images and not on searching features in menues).

 

[Bob]

To Marc and Vivek: quote of the day by Lee (Sapphie): "... It is the only forum I know where people are civil, courteous, encouraging and (usually) rational."

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/fuji/36574-thanks-goodness-getdpi.html

:angel:

and we aim to keep it that way
:wtf: where is that smily of the yellow guy aiming a gun?

 

[jonoslack]

and we aim to keep it that way
:wtf: where is that smily of the yellow guy aiming a gun?

Do You Mean This One oke:
I'm not sure it's a gun . . . maybe just a pointy finger!

 

[MCTuomey]

Leica hate? For me it's leica resignation. I think the digi M's are buggy and unreliable. I put up with them, patiently. Great in hand, good results, a lot of fun to use. As Charles said, it's a simple proposition, adventuring with a plain camera and one or two lenses. That's it.

 

[zombii]

The first forum I was on in a serious way was the FM Alt Gear forum. When I started to get interested in Leica R lenses, I was amazed at how many Leica flamers there were. The vast majority on that forum think that if it's not Zeiss, it doesn't matter. There are some supposedly intelligent people (by their own claim) that couldn't see what Leica lenses could do and in my opinion, it was because they had come to dislike Leica either because they couldn't afford it or because they thought Leica users were all rich players who weren't real photographers. Some of the opinions expressed had nothing to do with objectively looking at the posted images. After I got into it with a couple of people, I finally decided there was too much posturing and not enough objective evaluation. I'm happy to say that I haven't found that attitude for the most part on GetDPI, LUF, or RFF.

 

[bensonga]

Let's not forget that this brand anti-snobbery (ie hate) is not limited to Leica haters....I've encountered a fair share of Canon haters and Nikon haters over the past few years. Not sure if I've ever come across a Pentax, Panasonic or Sony hater.....maybe those cameras just don't rate high enough on the "anti-scale". There were probably quite a few Hasselblad haters back in the day.....perhaps less so now?

Personally....I've never met a camera I couldn't find a reason to like in one way or another.

Gary

 

[dhsimmonds]

I get approached while working all the time, some big DSLR toting fellow steps up, whips down his virtual zipper and wants to compare cameras. I have taken to telling them what a fantastic machine they have, and how I wished I could afford one, and so on, then get back to work.
Marc

Marc I am surprised that you didn't carefully unbutton (no zips for Leica types, BTW thinking Billingham here , and show him your whopping great Sony A900 complete with Zeiss ZA 135/1.8! :ROTFL:

My tongue is wedged firmly in my cheek of course as I am a fanatical Leica nut supporting both the LUF and the Leica Fellowship and myself an ex Leica R9/DMR owner. I always hope that Leica will one day produce a decent modern digital camera of their own design, that can keep up with the Sony Nex's and Fuji X Pro 1's, but in the meantime I just might not have enough life left in me so I can't wait! :deadhorse:

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Just a note to the original poster:
It may be a bit defeatist, but I found that it was better not to note what kind of equipment one uses when showing photography. If the intent is to show the quality of the photograph, rather than the equipment, then it is usually irrelevant. While there is nothing wrong with being interested in the equipment (I know I am!), it's probably better to do that kind of thing in forums like this, rather than on wherever you display your photos. This becomes even more true the more serious your work becomes. Associating a brand to your own work becomes a dangerous game, as people will take their preconceptions about that brand and apply them to your work. This can work for you (for example, sponsorship or promotion by the brand itself or people who love it), or against, as you saw. Frankly, I would rather people not know what I am shooting, unless they specifically ask. That way they are thinking about the work, rather than about what I used to make it, and in turn how they can use that to preemptively categorize it. I don't usually mind telling people, but sometimes it can derail interest in the photo. Now that I shoot an S2, this is much more of an issue. People will like a photo and be impressed with the quality. Then they might ask what camera I used. I will say a Leica S2, and if they know anything about it, they will start asking how I could afford it, why I chose that and not Phase One etc etc. I don't mind that discussion if it comes from the right place, but it is not really one I want to get into in most situations. Better just to answer "a camera" when asked how you took it!

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Why we even have this thread. It's a brand. Big deal
Just sayin. LOL

 

[chrism]

"Relevance' is a bit of a weasel word, so I'd propose we consider 'satisfaction' instead. I suspect a far greater percentage of Leica owners would describe themselves as 'satisfied' with their camera than owners of other makes. Sure, we wish for some changes or features, but those who get that it is the basic simplicity and solid construction that make a Leica what it is will surely feel satisfaction.
There's one drawback though, they do spoil you when it comes to using other cameras. Case in point - in the '70's I loved the OM series, and still find them beautiful cameras. I couldn't afford one then, though my brother misspent his student grant on one. A couple of years ago I bought an OM-1 and an OM-2 as they are now cheap, but by then I was used to Leicas. It spoilt me for them, and I gave them to my brother who had moved on to Olympus digitals. This week I acquired an OM-D, but it doesn't even begin to feel like a camera after using my M's. I'll probably give it to my brother as well.
So I'm with Kipling when he wrote 'The Betrothed' - an Olympus is just an Olympus, but a Leica is a camera. Obviously, this is a personal judgement and I am very happy to think that others will enjoy the OM-D as much as I love my M's. I see no reason why I should ever make mean-spirited posts about their choice on Olympus forums, and I would expect them to extend the same courtesy to me.

Chris

 

[dude163]

I know its a brand only, but like I stated in my original post I was just wondering why Leica was so polarizing.

I guess the same must be true of Porsche or BMW M owners , they are quite passionate about their cars, and others have a pre-conceived notion of what they are like

 

[stephengilbert]

"I guess the same must be true of Porsche or BMW M owners , they are quite passionate about their cars, and others have a pre-conceived notion of what they are like."

Now we're getting somewhere: think it might be some Leica owners, as opposed to Leica cameras, that cause the alleged hate?