Re: [Leica] JB, filters, flames, and technique

[Eric Welch <ewelch@ponyexpress.net>]

>I'm going to make an assertion that MOST working photographers
>DO NOT use Leica M for it's optical quality.  They assume and 
>accept that the quality is extremely high, an overkill, BUT 
>they use the camera for OTHER reasons.  Light/small/accuracy 
>of focus in dark/with W.A. lenses/hand-holdability at slower 
>speeds/inconspicuousness/etc --These are the reasons I hear 
>for using the M-s (and are my reasons) We accept that the 
>optics are "among" the finest in the world (depending on the 
>lens/f-stop/etc)  BUT we USE the camera for >OTHER< reasons!!

They are fools, then. Because the majority of the people who still cling to
Nikon do it for two reasons. 

1: They are more durable than Canon. Seems like it's true. My digital
photographer, who has used Nikons for years and got used to how tough they
are, has beaten his 70-200 2.8L to pieces already in just over half a year.
Of course, part of his job description from now on will be "go easier on
the equipment." Sad, but true. Nikon still makes their pro stuff tougher
than Canon. That is, 80-200 2.8, 300 2.8 etc. The normal and wide stuff,
for the most part is pretty weak. Though the 20-35 2.8 is pretty tough.

2: They are so heavily invested in it, they don't want to switch to any
other brand.

Face it, Nikon is falling behind the game. If one isn't to get Leica for
the superior optics, and many photojournalist friends of mine say they
would love to have the Leica optical advantage, they stick with what they
know. So they compromise with Canon and Nikon, the only two viable pro
camera lines, besides Leica, of course. Why pro viable? Because they are
responsive to pros. Minolta is sputtering about getting pro-oriented right
now. We shall see. The rest? Given up, or never tried.

But don't tell me pros don't care about optical quality. They do. They just
don't know what Leica can do for them, or they don't see how they can
afford it, or they need specialty lenses that Leica doesn't make. (200mm
macros, tilt/shift lenses, etc).

If Leica made an AF camera, and a 21-35 2.8, there would be a whole lot
more pros buying it, because they can get by on three or four lenses.
They're not like collectors. They work with their cameras. If they see them
as good investments, they'll pay the dough. They don't buy every lens out
there just to have them. But we won't know until Leica makes a pro-oriented
set of AF lenses and bodies if I'm right or wrong. As the other lines
deteriorate in quality, you can bet Leica could increase its market share
with keeping the quality angle.

- -- 

Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO
http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch

"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by
incompetence," said Napoleon Bonapart