pico Posted December 16, 2016 Share #1 Posted December 16, 2016 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Those who think their aspirations for Leica products have not been acknowledged through the 'net might reconsider. The suggestions and wants of this list's constituency are bottomless, with the usual unrealistic wants. I am sure Leica has quantified the wants, many ill-considered but a few realized in production for better or worse. Leica's offerings are a successful effort to create rational products. Leica has produced models conceptually and functionally far from other digital camera makers, trying to accommodate potential user's wishes. IMHO some of their models have bent over backwards to satisfy a unprofitable vociferous minority. Edited December 16, 2016 by pico 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 16, 2016 Posted December 16, 2016 Hi pico, Take a look here Be Basic, forgeting wishful thinking.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter H Posted December 16, 2016 Share #2 Posted December 16, 2016 Those who think their aspirations for Leica products have not been acknowledged through the 'net might reconsider. The suggestions and wants of this list's constituency are bottomless, with the usual unrealistic wants. I am sure Leica has quantified the wants, many ill-considered but a few realized in production for better or worse. Leica's offerings are a successful effort to create rational products. Leica has produced models conceptually and functionally far from other digital camera makers, trying to accommodate potential user's wishes. IMHO some of their models have bent over backwards to satisfy a unprofitable vociferous minority. This is no doubt true, but if enough customers have irrational preferences the company has to decide how to respond doesn't it? Giving them what they want can be a rational decision even if the product loses a different kind of functional rationality, presumably. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 17, 2016 Share #3 Posted December 17, 2016 Are you speaking of the less than one percent of Leica's customers who are here on the forum? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted December 17, 2016 Author Share #4 Posted December 17, 2016 This is no doubt true, but if enough customers have irrational preferences the company has to decide how to respond doesn't it? Giving them what they want can be a rational decision even if the product loses a different kind of functional rationality, presumably. Yes! For just one example, what other old-world analog camera maker would even dare to make a digital model without an LCD display after it had already followed the nominal norm? I find it heartening! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted February 9, 2017 Share #5 Posted February 9, 2017 Are you speaking of the less than one percent of Leica's customers who are here on the forum? If the membership of the forum represents less than 1% of Leica's customers, Leica must have one hell of a lot of customers since there are 2680 pages of forum members with 20 members per page. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted February 9, 2017 Share #6 Posted February 9, 2017 If the membership of the forum represents less than 1% of Leica's customers, Leica must have one hell of a lot of customers since there are 2680 pages of forum members with 20 members per page. You seem to imply that all or even most members are customers as well. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted February 9, 2017 Share #7 Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) This is no doubt true, but if enough customers have irrational preferences the company has to decide how to respond doesn't it? Giving them what they want can be a rational decision... Giving them what they've no idea they want can also be a rational decision. The SL appears to be a big success, but before its introduction I don't recall many posts along the lines of 'My M is ok, but what I really want is a Sony A7, only larger, heavier, much more expensive and with a slightly worse sensor'. Eighteen months ago we apparently all liked Leicas because of their compact size, rangefinder focusing and optical viewfinder, whereas today the paradigm has shifted and what we really desire is an EVF coupled with the bulkiest lenses anybody has ever made for 35mm format. Deep down, maybe all we want is the reassurance of owning a far more expensive camera than a bog standard Canon or Nikon. Edited February 9, 2017 by almoore 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted March 5, 2017 Share #8 Posted March 5, 2017 Leica was lucky enough to have such a gullible customer base. The M8 was such a half-assed product, and the M9 a half-baked product. People wanted a piece of HCB and wanted to feel unique. Leica pushed the envelope to the max. The M10 is what the M8 was supposed to be and that technology was already possible back then. But the Leica customer is a very, very weird kind. It'll swallow anything Leica-M. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted March 5, 2017 Share #9 Posted March 5, 2017 Giving them what they've no idea they want can also be a rational decision. The SL appears to be a big success, but before its introduction I don't recall many posts along the lines of 'My M is ok, but what I really want is a Sony A7, only larger, heavier, much more expensive and with a slightly worse sensor'. Eighteen months ago we apparently all liked Leicas because of their compact size, rangefinder focusing and optical viewfinder, whereas today the paradigm has shifted and what we really desire is an EVF coupled with the bulkiest lenses anybody has ever made for 35mm format. Deep down, maybe all we want is the reassurance of owning a far more expensive camera than a bog standard Canon or Nikon. Hitting the nail on the head, this is how it's done. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 5, 2017 Share #10 Posted March 5, 2017 I've noticed quite a few comments on the forum lately from SL owners who moan about the size/weight of the lenses.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted March 5, 2017 Share #11 Posted March 5, 2017 I've noticed quite a few comments on the forum lately from SL owners who moan about the size/weight of the lenses.... Do they have to be owners to moan about it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 5, 2017 Share #12 Posted March 5, 2017 Do they have to be owners to moan about it? Well one or two are ex-owners, no no, guess not. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted March 7, 2017 Share #13 Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) Giving them what they've no idea they want can also be a rational decision. The SL appears to be a big success, but before its introduction I don't recall many posts along the lines of 'My M is ok, but what I really want is a Sony A7, only larger, heavier, much more expensive and with a slightly worse sensor'. Eighteen months ago we apparently all liked Leicas because of their compact size, rangefinder focusing and optical viewfinder, whereas today the paradigm has shifted and what we really desire is an EVF coupled with the bulkiest lenses anybody has ever made for 35mm format. Deep down, maybe all we want is the reassurance of owning a far more expensive camera than a bog standard Canon or Nikon. Speaking for myself (rather than presuming to speak for all of us) the M was never my "cat's meow" because I use long lenses most of the time. I prefer the EVF because the technology has advanced sufficiently so that I can focus my R lenses quickly and accurately, along with the inherent advantages of the technology such as much fewer calibration demands and the additional WYSIWYG dimension of exposure. If one must choose between a Sony and the SL (IIRC there are some who post on this forum who use both) there are good reasons for either choice that have nothing to do with owning a far more expensive camera than a bog standard Canon or Nikon. Edited March 7, 2017 by wildlightphoto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 7, 2017 Share #14 Posted March 7, 2017 I would hardly call you a typical owner, Doug Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted March 7, 2017 Share #15 Posted March 7, 2017 If one must choose between a Sony and the SL (IIRC there are some who post on this forum who use both) there are good reasons for either choice that have nothing to do with owning a far more expensive camera than a bog standard Canon or Nikon.I'm in total agreement. However, I don't think we'd need to dig very deep into the archive to find forum members who in the past claimed they used Leicas because of their compact size and optical viewfinder who now extol the virtues of EVFs and lenses that are the biggest (for their focal length) on the market. I'm totally sold on the benefits of EVF cameras in certain situations, but, for many, the Leica name is the most important factor in buying an SL. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted March 7, 2017 Share #16 Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) I'm in total agreement. However, I don't think we'd need to dig very deep into the archive to find forum members who in the past claimed they used Leicas because of their compact size and optical viewfinder who now extol the virtues of EVFs and lenses that are the biggest (for their focal length) on the market. I'm totally sold on the benefits of EVF cameras in certain situations, but, for many, the Leica name is the most important factor in buying an SL. The name is a big factor in purchases of all sorts of products. Cameras, cars, beers, watches, smart phones, operating systems... I don't see that singling out Leica makes any sense. Let's not forget that compact and excellent M lenses are well-supported on the SL and that many M lenses only work well on the Sony cameras after the camera has been modified. Edited March 7, 2017 by wildlightphoto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted March 7, 2017 Share #17 Posted March 7, 2017 I don't see that singling out Leica makes any sense. Let's not forget that compact and excellent M lenses are well-supported on the SL and that many M lenses only work well on the Sony cameras after the camera has been modified. Personally, I also don't understand why people would rather have a Rolex on their wrist than a Seiko, but this is a Leica camera forum rather a watch forum, so inevitably Leica is the focus of my comment. There are a number of reasons to favour Leica over other camera brands, but the most commonly cited reasons here - plasticky (in construction and output) Canons, 'unusable' (as one of the loudest forum members recently dubbed the A7 series) Sony's, soft Canikon lenses - don't stack up. Just liking them is sufficient reason to use Leicas, but over and over again people feel the need to indulge in camera wars to flag up their apparently superior taste. Regarding using Leica lenses on Sonys, I don't understand why people don't just use the affordable and excellent native lenses rather than gettting into the realms of adaptors. I understand that your needs are atypical, but if anybody wants to use a 35 or 50 on an A7, the logical thing to do is just buy a Sony/Zeiss. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted March 7, 2017 Share #18 Posted March 7, 2017 Regarding using Leica lenses on Sonys, I don't understand why people don't just use the affordable and excellent native lenses rather than gettting into the realms of adaptors. I understand that your needs are atypical, but if anybody wants to use a 35 or 50 on an A7, the logical thing to do is just buy a Sony/Zeiss. That which is logical to me or you might not apply to someone else whose priorities differ from yours or mine. For example, someone who wants to use a 35mm lens and has good use for both a CRF camera and an EVF camera and doesn't mind focussing manually it may make more logical sense to use a small M-mount lens on both cameras rather than buying separate lenses for each camera. This is clearly a YMMV choice and quite personally I take offense when anyone assumes his own priorities must apply to others. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted March 7, 2017 Share #19 Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) personally I take offense when anyone assumes his own priorities must apply to others. It's bewildering that anybody would choose to take offence over a politely offered opinion on something as trivial as cameras and lenses. So, with that in mind, I'm going to bow out, rejoin the real world and hang my head in shame for being insufficiently worshipful within the church of the mighty and all-conquering Leica. Edited March 7, 2017 by almoore Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.