Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/13

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Camera or photographer?
From: lrzeitlin at optonline.net (Lawrence Zeitlin)
Date: Sat Jan 13 16:15:33 2007
References: <200701131739.l0DHcuX0035774@server1.waverley.reid.org>

On Jan 13, 2007, at 12:39 PM, Ted wrote:

> Quite frankly I've always bought Leica range finder cameras for such a
> simple reason ..... "THEY ARE THE BEST TOOLS IN MY HANDS FOR THE KIND
> OF DOCUMENTARY PHOTOGRAPHY I'VE ALWAYS DONE!" Approximately 50 years
> plus, PERIOD! No other reason! Baubles be damned!
>
> Have they made a difference in the quality of my photography? You bet
> yer sweet ass it has, just look through the books I've done (8)! Or
> certainly the last 3 medical books, one a large coffee table issue.


You mean to tell me that it is the camera that makes the photograph,  
not the photographer. That any boob with a Leica, even me, can  
produce prize winning works.

Come off it Ted. You are certainly such a competent cameraman that  
you could take good pictures with any equipment, Canons, Nikons,  
Argus C3s, or even Holgas. Don't perpetuate the myth that it is the  
equipment, not the eye, imagination and judgment of the photographer  
that determines the artistic quality of the image. Otherwise you  
sound like a Leica flack.

Larry Z

Replies: Reply from telyt at earthlink.net (Douglas Herr) ([Leica] Re: Camera or photographer?)
Reply from h_arche at yahoo.com (H. Ball Arche) ([Leica] Re: Camera or photographer?)
Reply from lug at steveunsworth.co.uk (Steve Unsworth) ([Leica] Re: Camera or photographer?)
Reply from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Re: Camera or photographer?)