Re: Snobby Leica

[Godfrey DiGiorgi <ramarren@apple.com>]

My subjective, personal opinion, of course:

Leica makes some pretty good lenses, both M and R. The quality of finish 
in the lens mounts are generally very high. Leica SLR bodies have always 
been nicely made hunks of metal, which pleases me, but have not fit my 
hands well. The R8 is a departure from that .. it's still nicely made but 
it fits my hands very well indeed. (BTW, the lack of motor drive in the 
body is a PLUS for me ... I prefer a motor drive when I want it, and like 
to be able to remove it when I dont.) The II/III series RF cameras were 
brilliant and arguably the best of their time (some people prefer the 
Canon, some the Nikon, some the Contax). I owned three/four of them and 
used them extensively, always hated the poor, old fashioned viewfinder 
though. The M is a lovely piece of work and it's quality of design is 
demonstrated by the fact that the same basic camera, 40 years later, 
still sells well and is satisfying to many users, even at very high cost. 

However, I don't hold any camera make or type as sacred. A tremendous 
amount of my photography over the past 31 years or so has been done with 
Nikon equipment and, while I can see differences in the characteristic 
color and contrast of the Nikon lenses compared to the Leica lenses, to 
say one is "better" than the other is generally unsupportable. They are 
subtly different, some particular designs and examples are better than 
others. Similarly, I happen to like the look of Carl Zeiss lenses very 
much as well, and they are also subtly different from either of the above 
two. And so on down each of the lens makers' lines. I use and appreciate 
different products for different reasons, depending upon what they 
deliver.

Are Leica users snobbier than others? I dunno. I don't care either. To 
me, the cameras and lenses are tools for doing photography, and I'll use 
any tool that I have or that I find appropriate to get the pictures I 
want. I'm not a collector, although I do have many nice little 
collections of photographic tools which I appreciate. But my interest is 
ultimately photography, not cameras, and a good tool is a good tool. 
Leicas have been good tools for photography longer than most others 
around, so many owners harbor a certain satisfaction from owning a device 
with some historical cachet. There's nothing wrong with that. The only 
beef I have is a trivial one: the price that Leica wants for their 
equipment nowadays is so high that I can't really enjoy the equipment as 
much as I could if I could more easily afford it. Whether that price is 
too high for your satisfaction is up to you.

The minute they stop being useful photographic tools is the minute they 
lose the collectible, desireable aura to me. Collectible value is not 
based upon "special editions" and trim options, it's based upon quality 
and a reputation for solid, usable value in my book. 

Many have expressed a desire for more modern Leica RF camera, some of the 
thoughts have run to a model similar to the Contax G series, etc. I think 
there's certainly room for improvement in the Leica RF now, but I don't 
believe that just replicating a Contax G is the way to go, nor would I 
like to see the current M series dropped. There is a place in my heart 
for quality, mechanical, happy-without-a-battery photographic equipment, 
just as there is a place for high tech, modern, sophisticated equipment 
as well. Both are useful tools for certain circumstances. To have only 
one of these options and not the other would reflect a loss to me for 
photography in general.

Godfrey