[Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.

[tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant)]

R. Clayton McKee offered:

 > If I may....
>
> As a full time freelance PJ I DO have the odd idea (okay, maybe
> several odd ideas) on the topic.
>
> Why is the R series DOA for me?  Several reasons:
>
> 1.  I own six EOS bodies and lenses covering the range from 14-400mm,
> plus flashes, cords, other mount and camera specific accessories. Off
> the top of my head we're talking about a cash investment on the close
> order of, say, 25 grand? 30?   Cost to switch to R?  double, maybe?
> If I WANTED to, I couldn't.  The economics aren't there. (Same thing
> applies to staff:  Those few staff jobs that still supply pool gear
> supply N or C; never seen one supplying R.)<<<<<<

True and not in my 50 plus years have I ever encountered a news organization
supplying Leica gear of any kind. Although many of the staffers carry their
own M's.

 > 2.  Finding someone who can repair R's,  in the Western Hemisphere at
> least, is problematic.  Yeah, I can ship them off, if I want to trust
> somebody and have my cameras out of my hands for 2 weeks or more.
> This ain't gonna happen either.<<<

Well if you are a recognized Leica Pro user and registered with Leica NJ and
you send in a "crash & burned" camera they'll turn it around as quick as
possible or arrange for a loaner of some kind immediately.

> 3.  I've never yet seen an R in the hands of a professional PJ at an
> event.  This matters not from a lemming reflex but because there's an
> element of "cover me" here -- if in the middle of something a cable
> croaks or a flash dies, I can frequently bum one from the guy beside
> me (or cover his butt if needed).  Obviously this only works if the
> gear's compatible.  (yes, I carry spares, and no, sometimes that's
> not enough.)<<<<<

Well I suppose you and I haven't covered the same events. ;-) If you see a
guy working a major event with 3 R8 motor driven cameras and 3 M7
Rapidwinder cameras that's me. Please say hello. :-)

> 4.  Every workshop/pj convention/course I've ever been to was
> sponsored heavily by, among others, Canon or Nikon or both.  This
> tells me these guys WANT my business, and they want it SERIOUSLY.
> The top end cameras in the Canon line were designed FOR working pj's
> on several levels; I'm told the Nikons were too.   <<<<<<

Well common sense dictates simple reasoning why you wouldn't attend a Leica
seminar or convention when you use 6 EOS bodies and lenses. Although I'm
sure you may learn a thing or two about photography if you did attend the
Leica Seminar.. :-) No offence intended, as we have a great time and leave
ready to do battle. ;-) And always learn something we can use for later
shooting.

> It matters.  I don't have time to think about my cameras, I'm busy
> thinking about my pictures... and I want a camera designed by someone
> who knows what I need.  I don't know that Leica's ever even thought
> about the marketing on that level.  <<<<

I suppose I have to agree with you on this aspect, although  I've used Leica
gear for 50 plus years, sometime mixed with Nikons when there wasn't a news
type Leica SLR with complimenting lenses. And with or without my Leica gear
I never think about gear at any time. Unless of course I should've brought
the 400 and didn't.

But as soon as the Leicaflex SL came to life I went 3 of them right away
motor driven along with very fine lenses and used them on shoots from one
side of the world to the other and brought back some "nice pictures" from
covering the Olympics and a few other "events."  Today it's 3 R8's and
lenses from 15mm to 400.

No there aren't the numbers of leica SLR users there once were at big
international events, time and life changed with the advent of the Canon and
Nikon gear for the sole purpose of shooting "sports & news."

> This isn't to take anything away from the R, but ergonomics be
> damned, the guy who designed the 1n got inside my head to do it.
> First camera I've ever used that grew into my hand in a matter of
> about four seconds.  (And the F1N's I used when I started had
> something of the same thing...)<<<<<<<

Well you see the difference is, a camera can fit in one shooter's hand like
a dream and in that of another, it's brick. You saw no comfort in the R8
where I found it absolutely perfect right out of the box into use with my
large hands. And I've absolutely no problem with the ergonomics at all. They
are swweeeeeeeeeetttttttt!;-)

That's the luck of the draw.

> The only advantage Leica would have would be the quality of the
> glass... and in the PJ world, that's somewhat secondary.  The
> elements of the publishing process downstream from the photographer
> have a great deal more effect than the absolute quality of the image. <<<

However there are some of us who shoot major projects for publication where
the importance of the recorded image sharpness is as important as the
content within the image. And we strive for the ultimate sharpness to show
in the end product that we can produce from Leica glass. And trust me the
lens quality isn't thrown away due to news print machine reproduction.

Oh yes and this is all "real-time happening" hand holding photojournalism.

>  I can shoot with anything from an Olympus Stylus to a Canon to a
> Contax to a `Cron, on anything from Velvia to 1600 press. It'll look
> pretty much the same when it hits page 1.  Okay, for the magazines
> you MIGHT see some difference, but... think I'm going to get paid a
> dime more because the shot's got `cron bokeh as opposed to Canon
> blur?  <<<<

I think you're kinda mixing things a little here, as we pretty well
understand what your talking about... but that has absolutely nothing to do
with a Leica lens and it's produced quality and everything to do with the
general quality attitude because it's for the newspaper and no one can tell
the difference in any event. As I've seen and heard many times, "no one
gives a damn" as long as you have something for page 1.

 > Leica abandoned the PJ SLR market probably sometime in the 60's and
> due to installed base and the realities of publishing, it's not worth
> their while to go after it again.<<<<<

I beleive this has more to do with Leica economics along with their R&D than
the abandoning of the PJ market, as both Nikon and Canon went after the news
photogs like gang busters and pretty well wiped it out for Leica. Despite
there's some of us guys and gals still using them. ;-)

> PJ's tend to be willing to sacrifice cutting edge fancy for old reliable,
and although
> the M has mystique, the R doesn't. <,

True! The Leica R camera per se doesn't have the mystique of the rangefinder
Leica's, no question. And to some degree I think the "M mystique" has had an
influence at Leica Germany in developing the R line because the simple
reason of beating themselves against the Nikon / Canon dragon in an
un-winnable battle.

 > Deborah Copaken covered it pretty well... The Leica is the Porsche of
> cameras... if you have one, it means you're serious, you're
> dedicated, you're not screwing around... but you probably don't use
> it to go grocery shopping.<<<

A fine description indeed. :-) But these days you grab your digi cam to go
grocery shopping! ;-)

ted