[Leica] Ten years behind? I think not.

[leica at rcmckee.com (R. Clayton McKee)]

> I'm not really disagreeing with you. Forget about 4.5 fps vs 8 fps,
> simply the lack of autofocus makes the R series DOA with 90% of
> PJ's. 


If I may....

As a full time freelance PJ I DO have the odd idea (okay, maybe 
several odd ideas) on the topic.

Why is the R series DOA for me?  Several reasons:

1.  I own six EOS bodies and lenses covering the range from 14-400mm,
plus flashes, cords, other mount and camera specific accessories. Off
the top of my head we're talking about a cash investment on the close
order of, say, 25 grand? 30?   Cost to switch to R?  double, maybe? 
If I WANTED to, I couldn't.  The economics aren't there. (Same thing
applies to staff:  Those few staff jobs that still supply pool gear
supply N or C; never seen one supplying R.)


2.  Finding someone who can repair R's,  in the Western Hemisphere at
least, is problematic.  Yeah, I can ship them off, if I want to trust
somebody and have my cameras out of my hands for 2 weeks or more. 
This ain't gonna happen either.

3.  I've never yet seen an R in the hands of a professional PJ at an
event.  This matters not from a lemming reflex but because there's an
element of "cover me" here -- if in the middle of something a cable
croaks or a flash dies, I can frequently bum one from the guy beside
me (or cover his butt if needed).  Obviously this only works if the
gear's compatible.  (yes, I carry spares, and no, sometimes that's 
not enough.)

4.  Every workshop/pj convention/course I've ever been to was 
sponsored heavily by, among others, Canon or Nikon or both.  This
tells me these guys WANT my business, and they want it SERIOUSLY.  
The top end cameras in the Canon line were designed FOR working pj's 
on several levels; I'm told the Nikons were too.   

It matters.  I don't have time to think about my cameras, I'm busy
thinking about my pictures... and I want a camera designed by someone
who knows what I need.  I don't know that Leica's ever even thought
about the marketing on that level.  

This isn't to take anything away from the R, but ergonomics be 
damned, the guy who designed the 1n got inside my head to do it. 
First camera I've ever used that grew into my hand in a matter of
about four seconds.  (And the F1N's I used when I started had
something of the same thing...)

The only advantage Leica would have would be the quality of the 
glass... and in the PJ world, that's somewhat secondary.  The 
elements of the publishing process downstream from the photographer
have a great deal more effect than the absolute quality of the image. 

 I can shoot with anything from an Olympus Stylus to a Canon to a
Contax to a `Cron, on anything from Velvia to 1600 press. It'll look
pretty much the same when it hits page 1.  Okay, for the magazines 
you MIGHT see some difference, but... think I'm going to get paid a 
dime more because the shot's got `cron bokeh as opposed to Canon 
blur?  


Leica abandoned the PJ SLR market probably sometime in the 60's and
due to installed base and the realities of publishing, it's not worth
their while to go after it again.  PJ's tend to be willing to
sacrifice cutting edge fancy for old reliable, and although the M has
mystique, the R doesn't. 

Deborah Copaken covered it pretty well... The Leica is the Porsche of
cameras... if you have one, it means you're serious, you're 
dedicated, you're not screwing around... but you probably don't use 
it to go grocery shopping.
               Albest,

                        Clayton

---
R.Clayton McKee                http://www.rcmckee.com
PhotoJournalist                   rcmckee@rcmckee.com   
P O Box 571900                 voice/fax 713/783-3502
Houston, TX 77257-1900        pager 281/510-3588