[Leica] Magazines and 'reassurance'

[Leopold Green <ldg@dmu.ac.uk>]

Nathan and Norm,

I quite understand the 'reassurance complex' and no doubt, despite my best
efforts suffer from it. My reason for the original email on AP and the R8
test, was not because I sought reassurance, I don't own an R8 but an M6...I
do think that people will read these tests before purchasing, even a
Leica...after all there isn't an obvious groundswell that says a Leica is a
safe buy in the way a Nikon or Canon might be [those Mac users out there
should understand this, especially if they have to justify their purchase to
a corporate IT department!]. My main criticism is that AP reviews camera
bodies and their 'functions' and ignores the lens line up available for that
body, I know why they do this, camera bodies have many functions [some new
like Canon's increasingly complex eye control system] which are easy to
generate text upon. A lens is a lens and unless one is a specialist like Mr.
Puts, it is difficult to fill column inches on them BUT THE LENS IS THE
REASON FOR BUYING THE CAMERA BODY!

Incidentally the reason that 700 of us subscribe to this list, not the
Minolta APS list, or the Charlie Manson list, is a shared opinion - Leica is
worth discussing/using - this can be describe as an exercise in reassurance,
indeed, at times in the past it has. Sometimes reassurance isn't a bad
thing, especially, if like myself the only other Leica users I know are the
700 of you out there.

Leopold

P.S. Is single malt the only 'approved Leica companion', will no one else
out there join me in a virtual glass of fine vintage port?


- -----Original Message-----
From: Nathan Wajsman [mailto:nathan.wajsman@euronet.be]
Sent: 23 July 1999 07:05
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] RE: Amatuer Photography review of the R8& etc.


This is quite a universal phenomenon and by no means confined to the photo
world. Marketers talk about cognitive dissonance and the need to reassure
the customer AFTER purchase that s/he has made the right choice. I used to
subscribe to several motorcycle magazines. The majority of letters to the
editor are complaints about someone's bike having received a poor review.

Nathan

Aubin wrote:

> One point though that I have observed in most magazines, or
> rather in readers looking at articles about their favorite pastimes.
>
> It would seem that most are looking to see their own conclusions
> vindicated, and when they're not, we find fault with the reasoning
> of the authors.  Yet, if the author says what we already believed,
> we look to memorize his 'facts' to further justify our already
> reached conclusions.  It is only after we have found someone who
> agrees with us about things we already 'know', so we then feel that
> this person or magazine is of sufficient quality, that we then look to
> see what they say about things we don't yet know.
>
> Is this a normal human nature thing, or is the single malt making
> me cynical??
>
> later -
>
> Norm
>