[Leica] M7 review and comments by D.B

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@ision.nl>]

Some friends sent me a copy of an email to the LUG, written by Dr. Blacktape
that starts with this question.

DR. BLACKTAPE WOULD LIKE TO RAISE AN EXTREMELY SERIOUS
QUESTION REGARDING ERWIN PUTTS' "REVIEW OF THE NEW M7...

B.D., the name is Puts, Erwin Puts and I have no licence to kill, nor would
I want one. 
May I welcome you to that small band of individuals, who have over the years
questioned my credibility and independence . Every year or so, quite
predictably, the same ritual is restaged. While the demagogic question is
that I can not be independent and truly objective, as defined by any neutral
observer,(and I do presume that you would like to qualify for that post?), I
wonder what facts you have to support your answer that my prose is on the
same level if not identical to press releases and ' endorsements
from photographers to whom it [Leica?] gives free cameras'.
You are not expected to believe anything I write. It may have escaped you,
but we live in that priviledged area of the globe where free speech, free
thinking and free exchange offacts and opinions are allowed. At least I do
not expect this from you. If you feel (I do presume that the 'we' in your
question is just academic?) compelled to have to believe anything you do not
want, I would like to ask you, when and where did I ever force you to accept
my findings or opinions. If the 'we' refers to your audience, I wonder why
you want to question their ability to think and judge for themselves.
Is it not ironic, B.D., that you want to think for others?

The 'facts' you present to judge my prose as irrelevant are a remarkable act
of spin doctoring. 

"Erwin Putts gets an M7 ONE YEAR ahead of release"
Where did you read that in my report. I noted that I tested a Leica M7 that
had been in use for over a year and I said that I have been able to use an
m7 prototype  during some time. It is some leap of imagination to merge both
facts into the statement quoted above. It might be tempting to conclude
this, but would that neutral and unbiased observer not be careful enough to
inquire by the person who wrote the article if this conjecture is true. In
fact it is not. You just want to believe this,as it seems to suit your
purpose.
Then you make another remarkable observation. I get an M7 "- when Leica is
denying that there will ever BE an M7". I fail to see the relevance of the
juxtaposition of these remarks.

Then this really perceptive remark, that exposes my links to Leica.
"He gets extensive tours of the factory prior to release, so that he can
describe in worshipful prose the ancient sewing machines, manned by the
skilled Portuguese seamstress sewing the shutter curtain".
I wrote: "I happened to be in the Portugal factory when the first new  M7šs
started to be manufactured.".
Did I say 'extensive tours (more than one!)'?
As far as I know many Luggers have visited the Portugal factory and reported
on their observations. Many journalists get factory tours in Solms and
Portugal. So the very fact of visiting the factory is, according to your
rules of neutral observancy,  credible  evidence of becoming an extension of
the PR-department. You have indeed exposed in stark detail  the subtle
persuasions of the modern marketing conspiracy?
Again, would a careful observer who wants to be "independent and truly
objective", not want to verify his conjectures? Check and double check is a
scientific and journalistic rule. But not for you, it seems.
When I do observe a detail, that  visitors before me did not spot or did not
deem important enough to report upon: that ancient sewing machine and the
skilled and beautiful young worker (maybe I saw her first and then the
machine?), does that make my report a Leica advertisement? You seem to imply
this as this seamstress is your strongest case, it seems.
Again I fail to see why my genuine admiration for somebody's skills makes me
a suspect and un untrustworthy person. But then you claim to be a neutral
observer, so please enlighten me why admiration for skills is suspect in
your value scheme. 
You seem to imply that independent thinking is impossible after having used
a product in advance of the release date, after visiting a factory and
observing a seamstress working on shutter curtains.
I am deeply impressed by this remarkable imtellectual edifice you have
erected! And by your followers who have jumped on this bandwaggon.

Erwin
Erwin
    

 
Are we really expected to continue to believe that Erwin and his reports are
what any neutral observer would call "independent" of Leica and truly
objective?  We would suggest that we should judge his reports just as we
judge Leica's advertising materials, press releases, and the.
   

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html