RE: [Leica] Features or basics

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Utter and complete horse hooey! The post below sounds like nothing so much
as an America - Love It Or Leave It! diatribe from the Vietnam era.

Of course a camera is a tool for taking photographs. And of course the
bottom line is that a Leica M either is, or is not, the, or one of the tools
for you. HOWEVER....There is something grossly wrong with a company - read
management - that put's its effort into making copies of a 75-year-old
anachronism, rather than figure out how to get the damn flare out of the
rangefinder of a $2000 modern camera body it makes - especially when the
rangefinders of the earlier models of the M camera DIDN'T have the same
rangefinder flare. Nobody says Leica has to produce an M for shooting bob
sledding sequences. But to produce this Franklin Mint special and ignore the
real problems in the M - not the supposed needs for modernizations - the
damn imperfections in the present, otherwise sublime, mechanical rangefinder
camera is ridiculous.

I love Leica. I am going to stay and criticize it and not leave it.

B. D.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of imx
> Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 3:41 PM
> To: LUG
> Subject: [Leica] Features or basics
>
>
> There are currently a number of diatribes on this list and its companion
> (the LEG) about the lack of features of M cameras, the price
> level as it is
> and compared to delivered engineering quality, the loss of manufacturing
> quality as compared to previous models and so on. And of course
> the elusive
> topic of 'bad management' as "they' do not produce what 'we' want and
> demand.
> I have no intention to even try to start to argue about any of
> these topics,
> as this excercise in debating technique will end in a void, as past
> experiences have clearly demonstrated.
> Instead I wish to discuss these topics from another perspective, that is
> shifting away from the focus of features or gadgets and concentrate on
> results and satisfaction.
> The primary argument for buying a (new) M body, in my view, is the result
> expected from this tool. You want to take photographs and you
> select from a
> vast range of products the m-body as you are convinced that this
> camera has
> the characteristics and means to deliver. After a while you look at the
> pictures and you are satisfied. Fine. Period. You obviously do not need
> additional features.  The tool occasionally lets you down? You have it
> fixed. Another problem? You are obviously no longer satisfied and you buy
> another product. Why? Because the M does not deliver!
> Now you are not satisfied with your pictures. Is it because your
> talent and
> technique lets you down? Do not blame the camera. Blame yourself and
> improve! You are certain the lack of features (AF, AE, flare in
> the finder,
> inaccurate shutter) are the cause? Buy another camera with the
> features you
> need.
> You are able to get as good a picture with Canon SLR AF etc and an M? But
> you like the mechanical feel of the M and are sensitive to its
> heritage and
> tradition. Buy an M.
> You assume Canon is the better deal. By all means, buy one and Be
> Satisfied.
> You think that the current M 0.58 does not offer enough of what
> you need? Do
> not buy it. But do not blame the management for producing it.
> Their goal may
> be completely different from yours.
> You think these guys in Solms are nuts because they offer a Null-series
> instead of a M body with more electronics? Do you know their long
> term plans
> and their market?
> A Null-series camera is most obviously not targeted at the sports reporter
> for the Olympics. It is for the person who wishes to rediscover
> the style of
> photography of the early twenties and is fascinated by it. It
> makes sense to
> manufacture a camera body that forces one to do some thinking
> before making
> a picture. If that is your style of photography? No! Fine, than the
> Null-series is not for you!
> The lens of the Null-Series delivers performance that will challenge many
> Leica users and the functions are very basic. Compare it to
> biking? Why buy
> a Cannondale at $3000 and kill your body in trying to get over the hill
> while doing all the work yourself, when a second hand Suzuki jeep for the
> same price can do it without effort?
> It is a matter of style, philosophy and approach!
> The M and R systems have a set of advantages and disadvantages, which are
> benificial or detrimental to your type of picture taking. Choose carefully
> as the products are expensive. Too expensive for you: do not buy it. It is
> as simple as this.
> Reading all these diatribes, I must assume that those leica users are
> dissatisfied and dissappointed users of leica equipment. Please:
> sell it and
> buy products you really like!
> I know the answer of course: consumers may and even have a duty in
> delivering constructive comments and critique. Agreed. But what I see here
> is not a comment on the products as they are, but a wish list of
> what leica
> should try to develop, as seen by five or so individuals.
> I wonder why some people assume Leica has no direction, no
> imagination  and
> no plan and no feeling with their market, just because the
> company does not
> produce a hexar with a red dot?
> Maybe they are to clever to do just that!
> The M 0.58 is a fine instrument for a number of photographers and the
> Null-series is a fine product for persons who can and are willing to
> rediscover and re-create the roots of photography. Both do not appeal to
> you? Invest your money elsewhere!
> Erwin
>
>