Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]For an even better explanation of snobbery see: http://www.thesocialedge.com/archives/gerrymccarthy/2articles-dec2002.htm Regards, Greg > Hey, Simon...The statement anyone makes with branded accessories > is..."Look at me"...If one owns a Ferrari, and one really owns it > because one loves fast, hot cars, one doesn't need all the branded > accessories. On the other hand, if one owns it to make up for some > deficiency, then wants to yell to the world, "Look at me! I am really, > really hot shit!! I can afford to own a > ...Ferrari/Leica/Rollex/case of > Budweiser... ;-)" > > I have always avoided branded stuff...Either I like and need the item, > or I don't... > > This really is one of those amusing, ironic, LUG moments...Because > I can > remember all the discussion over the years that could be summed up > withthe line, to paraphrase James Carvil..."It's the glass, > stupid!" People > on this list have always told us that a body is just a box onto which > one mounts the incomparable Leica glass. So if some other manufacturer > can give me a really good quality M mount body, which will take my 35 > Summ ASPH, or my 28 Summicron ASPH, great! I'd rather save $500 or $1K > on the body and be able to put it into film or glass. > > Bottom line - Anyone who would even think about what other people > wouldthink if they saw a Noctilux - or any other lens - on a less > expensivebody - is more concerned about their own image than about > the images the > lens produces. ;-) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > [lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of > animal > Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 4:55 AM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > Hi, B.D. Well a lot of literature states that a retrofocus design like > that of the Schneider? R lens is better suited in principle but i dont > know for sure. The way people make statements with their acessories > cannot be ignored i mean Ferrari owners don,t make a statement with > their driving skills do they? simon > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> > To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 11:05 PM > Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > Hi, Simon - Obviously I don't know the answer to the last > question, > > although someone earlier suggested that the Zeiss designs might > indeed > > be better suited to use with digital sensor cropping. No, I > wouldn't > > expect Leica people will switch - why should they? The question > is > > whether Zeiss can grow the market. As to mount a Noct on a Zeiss > and > > what kind of statement does it make? Gee, I thought we make our > > statements with our photos, and not with our brand names....And > if the > > > Zeiss is as good as an M but cheaper, I'd be happy to tell > people that > > > I'm not stupid enough to pay extra just to get a red dot. ;-) > Or, put > > another way I'd be happy to tell people that what matters is the > > glass, and by purchasing the cheaper body I could afford the > expensive > > lens. Best B. D. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > > [lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf > > Of animal > > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 4:11 PM > > To: Leica Users Group > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > I didn,t try to engage you in a discussion about lens > performance > > data. Your 4.5 versus 2.8 remark deflates my Voigh.. remark > obviously > > . I just believe that if the lenses are not better then Leica's > people > > will not make a switch. Also to me the newborn doesn,t look as > nice as > > > a M. Another good reason not to buy one. Significantly brighter > > viewfinder would be nice of course. But mount a Noctilux on a > Zeiss? > > What kind of statement does that make other then i don,t want to > spend > > a thousand more on a real Leica? Would the new lenses be better > suited > > for a full frame digital sensor? > > > > best regards > > simon > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> > > To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> > > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 12:30 AM > > Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > > I'm not going to get into one of the lpm debates with you, > Simon - > > > you > > > > > and I view these issues, and photography, from very different > > > perspectives. > > > > > > And, yes, why not use a Cosina 15? Well, it's an f 4.5 and > this will > > > > be a 2.8; it's seat-of-the-pants focused and this will be > > > rangefinder coupled; and my guess is this will have a better > build - > > > > all valid reasons even if image quality were no better. But > I'm > > > certainly not against good image quality. > > > > > > B. D. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > > > [lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf > > > > Of animal > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 6:22 PM > > > To: Leica Users Group > > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > > > > Well if performance is no factor then why not stay with the > existing > > > cosina lenses like their 15mm,or put a sublime old 15 mm on a R? > > > > > > simon > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> > > > To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> > > > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 12:10 AM > > > Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > > > > > But that's the point, Simon - I'm not talking about > "performance" > > > > of > > > > > > anything; I'm talking about availability of, and price of, > > > > product. And if Leica thinks the path to survival lays > through > > > > winning a bunch of Erwin Puts bench tests by .xxx%, they're > dead > > > > on arrival. Fractions > > > > > > > of percentages aren't going to matter - actually having a > product > > > > will. If Leica can now turn on a dime and put out a real > digital M > > > > > six > > > > > > > months from now - BEFORE Zeiss comes out with one - and > price it > > > > so that it appeals to more than a handful of people for whom > money > > > > is no object, then they have a chance. If not... > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > > > > [lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On > > > > Behalf > > > > > > Of animal > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 5:54 PM > > > > To: Leica Users Group > > > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > > > > > > > As you mentioned earlier i think ,nothing is known about > the real > > > > > performance of the new system. Isn,t it a bit premature to > anounce > > > > a > > > > > > winner before a match? best regards simon jessurun amsterdam > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> > > > > To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 10:53 PM > > > > Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > > > > > > > > IF that's Leica's response to an entire line of new Zeiss > t-star > > > > > > lenses, a film rangefinder body, and what will undoubtedly > be a > > > > > digital body, then we most assuredly have the answer to > the > > > > > question. Because if Leica survives as the Hermes of > cameraland, > > > > > it might as well not survive. > > > > > > > > > > And there's another point to think about here, folks - > Leica is > > > > > still around today for only one reason: > > > > > > > > > > In the early 1960s, Zeiss/Contax and Nikon abandoned the > > > > > pro-rangefinder playing field. Nikon, which made what was > > > > > definitely > > > > > > > > the best body at that time - the SP - decided to put all > its > > > > > eggs in > > > > > > > > the SLR basket, a decision which was a loss for those of > us who > > > > > love > > > > > > > > rangefinders, but was obviously a winner for Nikon. And > Contax > > > > > must have decided that there wasn't going to be enough > > > > > rangefinder > > > > > > > business > > > > > > > > > to keep them going. > > > > > > > > > > So that left the barren playing field to Leica, which, > other > > > > > than improving it's lens line, hasn't done anything truly > > > > > innovative since bringing out and abandoning the M5. And, > when > > > > > you think about it, really hasn't done anything innovative > since > > > > > the "O." > > > > > > > > > > But because there have been enough photographers committed > to > > > > > using rangefinders, and enough dilitants committed to > owning > > > > > Leicas - and a scarf company willing to buy up a grand old > brand > > > > > name - Leica's limped along to the present day. > > > > > > > > > > Now, however, we are on the downward slope of the > technology > > > > > range > > > > > > > taking us into the next age of photography. Any company > that > > > > > wants > > > > > > > to survive in the new age is going to have to be a real > part of > > > > > that > > > > > > > > age. > > > > > > > > > And up to this point, Leica has, as usual, limped along at > the > > > > > back end of the parade. > > > > > > > > > > So this time Zeiss - well the > Zeiss/Kyocera/Hassleblad/Contax > > > > > coalition > > > > > - has decided to stick around and pickup the pieces. > Unless > > > > > Leica > > > > > > > is prepared to move, and move very quickly - perhaps by > talking > > > > > Nikon, Canon, or Olympus into a rangefinder partnership, > Leica's > > > > > days are, sadly, very much numbered. I say "sadly" with > total > > > > > sincerity, because > > > > I > > > > > am enough of a traditionalist to be touched by the Leica > > > > > heritage > > > > > - > > > > I'd > > > > > rather be shooting in a new age with a grandchild of HCB's > M3s, > > > > > than > > > > > > > > shooting with a Kocerstein's monster patched together with > parts > > > > > from > > > > a > > > > > washing machine, a high-milage care, and a disposable > camera. > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > B. D. > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > > > > > [lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On > > > > > Behalf > > > > > > > > Of Dan C > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:33 PM > > > > > To: Leica Users Group > > > > > Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leica has responded in part by offering the a la carte > Leica. > > > > > But > > > > > > > have you > > > > > seen the prices? Do I really want to spend upwards of > $4,000> USD > > > > for > > > > > the > > > > > privilege of picking the colour of my camera? Are there > enough > > > > > people > > > > > > > > > out there willing to do so to keep Leica afloat? > > > > > > > > > > -dan c. > > > > > > > > > > At 04:26 PM 29-09-04 -0400, B. D. Colen wrote: > > > > > >Emanuel says.. > > > > > >"The old era of Zeiss - Leitz rivalry was a heady time > for 35mm > > > > > > >design," and asks... > > > > > > > > > > > >"Now, in these days, how will Leica respond?" > > > > > > > > > > > >--- > > > > > >As they, sadly, always have ... With too little, too > late, and > > > > > >at > > > > > > > >too > > > > > > > > > >high a price. > > > > > > > > > > > >These are not the heady days of the Zeiss/Leitz > competition - > > > > > >which, if > > > > > > > > > > >we recall, were actually the days of the > Zeiss/Leitz/Nikon > > > > > >competition. > > > > > >;-) > > > > > > > > > > > >These are the days of the Zeiss/Kyocera/Cosina/Hassie > > > > > >consortium moving > > > > > > > > > > >in to clean up the remaining scraps from the rangefinder > table > > > > > >- scraps > > > > > > > > > > >that could have been Leicas had Leica moved 18 months > ago, or > > > > > >even further back, when the Cosina handwriting was writ > large > > > > > >upon the wall. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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> > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >