Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/11/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Lens cleaning
From: Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 08:13:15 -0600 (CST)

Hello, Greg

I enjoy your posts and Marc's and Ted's a lot....I've read the group 
long enough to get a "feel" for some of the people.  

One of the things I've noticed about people who talk about "abuse" 
of the gear is that they usually haven't shot daily for a living.
This includes manufacturer's personnel, repair folks, and most 
amateurs, including "serious" ones.....

Now that I don't shoot much, I can coddle and obsess over my gear 
like an amateur.  Clean the engraving, make sure my strap doesn't 
scratch the body, clean lenses with proper technique, etc.  That's 
not the case with you folks who are shooting "for food" -- Most 
amateurs won't shoot in the rain, or in blowing sand/dust.  I NEVER 
used caps on lenses when working.... drop 'em in the bag (padded)
mount-down, with UV on the front.  Who can fumble with rear caps,
worry about the front element hitting a flash adaptor, etc. WHILE
WORKING!!!  That's also why shooters use the bags they do....ever
try to "work" out of the boutique "luggage"???  The repairmen who 
chastise you have never run for a spot or away from god-knows-what
with a bag of goodies swinging from their shoulder....

The respect I have for Leica M and top line Nikon stuff (mostly from 
the past) is based on the way they held up to this kind of use.
While they shouldn't be intentionally abused, they ARE tool for 
some of you, and not an end in themselves.....

For the others, including "serious" amateurs, you make fools of 
yourselves with this endless "camera care" babble --  listen to these 
fine folks on the group who actually "WORK" with the cameras -- that
means they feed their family with them, to those unfamiliar with the 
word......BTW I'm NOT included in this group -- although I have 
been in the past...I "copped" out for an easier life. (tho sometimes 
I wonder....)

As for Leica (the company) -- The only ad they need to run is
something like:

"wanted -- seasoned photojournalists/editorial photographers wanted 
for help with product development and representation in the U.S."...

They don't have a clue.  Their repair people need to spend a couple 
years with Marty Forscher (retired) so he can whack them in the 
head with an M-6 when they try to adjust the damn rangefinder.....
straight out of the factory!

Listen to Greg, Marc, and Ted -- maybe even Nigel --- and the many
other shooters I have left out due to lack of knowledge.  
Ya'll need to look less at the latest lenses and more at what 
these fine folks DO with them.......ALL the lenses are fine..
(I assume you're not using the selected dogs from the 30s, 40s, and 
50s)

Rave on,
Walt

On
Thu, 26 Nov 1998, Greg Locke wrote:

> At 10:15 PM 25/11/98 -0800, you wrote:
> >>They may know but may not care.  There is a difference.
> >>
> >>Tom Shea>>>>
> >
> >Tom, I take offense at that remark and it's completely uncalled for!
> >
> >These guys care about your equipment just as much as you do!  Maybe even
> >more so, as their livelyhood depends on how well they look after you and
> >your gear.
> 
>         Actually, more so in some cases.  I have gotten nasty notes back
> with some of my repairs chastising me for abusing "his" cameras.
> 
>         With one repair I got back a plastic envelope with a fish scale in
> it and an indignant note asking what it was and how it got in my shutter.
> 
>         They had a pool on what the "mystery object" was and were eagerly
> awaiting my reply.
> 
>         You should talk to these guys, they have some REALLY funny stories.
> 
> regards,
> Greg Locke <locke@straylight.ca>                               
> St. John's, Newfoundland.        
> <http://www.straylight.ca/locke/>
> ----------------------------------
> "I've finally figured out what's wrong with photography. 
> It's a one-eyed man looking through a little 'ole. 
> Now, how much reality can there be in that?" -- David Hockney 
>