Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/04/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I don't belong to the LUG because of gear, I belong because of the people. If they shoot Leica, fine. If not, fine. This is a community of extremely talented and very wise individuals that I can learn from. I don't care what anyone shoots with. Ted or Tina or Doug or Jayanand, or Frank or B.D. or Luis or Phillippe or Nathan or Richard M. or WHOEVER could be shooting with a crappy cell phone and I would still take their advice to heart because the gear_doesn't_matter. There is always something better than the best. Then there is always something bigger than the best and the axiom in photography is that bigger is better. If Leica were the best then why aren't we shooting with 20x24" cameras? See, it's just prancing one-upsmanship but the image speaks for itself. Yes, Leica lenses are fantastic but they can be matched by other brands as has been shown. Some are worse than others. I love Leica lenses which is why I'll never get rid of my DR Summicron. That doesn't mean that it's absolutely the best out there. If I should spend $5000 on a Spotmatic F with a 50mm f/1.4 I would indeed have an amazing camera with one of the finest lenses but to spout off that it's the best because I spent so much money would make me a fool. It's perceived value rather like diamonds. A rather common elemental crystal given perceived value by a human controlling factor. Looking through all my old film images I can't tell which ones were taken with Pentax, Contax, Nikon, Canon or Leica. I happen to know which ones but others couldn't tell in a side-by-side comparison. Phil Forrest On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 13:38:28 -0400 Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > I love reading on the LUG about how Leicas are expensive becuae of its > perceived market value. > Leica's are expensive becuae they are a premium product. > Some things are better than other things in this world. > Its a marketing choice: "lets make the best". > Yes they are made of better materials to higher tolerances and better > quality control. And yes fewer of them are made so that brings the > price up. Leicas are for the most part worth it. > If I felt they were not I'd sure be spending my free time on some > other list. > > > > - - from my iRabs. > Mark Rabiner > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ > > > > From: Frank Filippone <red735i at earthlink.net> > > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > > Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 07:47:42 -0700 > > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > > Subject: Re: [Leica] 50mm ZM C-Sonnar > > > > It is not all about the cost of components. It is not all about > > the labor to produce. It is not all about the low production > > volumes. It certainly is not all about the price of the Euro to > > the USD. These are factors, but not dominant. > > > > Leicas are expensive ( mostly) because of perceived > > quality/value..... Or, said another way.... > > Whatever the market will bear. > > > > The apparent target market for the past couple of years is rich > > Russian and Asian Oligarchs...... Billionaires with nothing else > > to spend their money on. > > > > A used M8 is now about $2K. Used M9 are now running around $5250. > > If you want a bargain, go get one. > > > > If you expect a new Leica M camera for $2K, I have a bridge to sell > > you..... > > > > > > Frank Filippone > > Red735i at earthlink.net > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- philforrest.wordpress.com gallery.leica-users.org/v/philforrest