Most exclsive camera means notihng

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've seen some shockingly bad photography from people who use a Leica, and I've seen some stunning photography from people using a mobile phone or Lomo.

 

To use a Leica is a personal choice. Some people simply don't like M's - they much prefer using an SLR, or other type of camera. Their photography won't be inferior by nature of their choice of camera.

 

For those of us who prefer using a Leica, our photography should be better for it.

[colonel]

A talented photographer could take a better picture with a cheap SLR then a new amateur with a Canon 1DsIII.

 

To see this, simply search Photography community, including forums, reviews, and galleries from Photo.net using the search phase "Canon Rebel":

Image Library Search Results - photo.net

 

You will see many pictures that put 5Dii and D700 users to shame

 

However, this is not the point. The OP was making a statement that the camera is totally irrelevant.

This is untrue. A talented photographer will tend to produce a better picture using a better camera. Not just for the out and out quality, but also the handling and other features.

 

Extremists who say that either the camera is not relevant, or that the camera is the most important thing, are both wrong!

 

PS: When I say the camera I mean the lens as well!

[Dutch]

For those of us who prefer using a Leica, our photography should be better for it.

Exactly. When using a camera, any camera, that matches personal preference, it should make the photographer better because they use it more often, more attentively and have more fun.

 

I think Leica has two sides to it. One side is the photography side that attracts a specific type of photographer. Their photography should improve when using a Leica.

The other side is the brand 'Leica', the exclusivity, and that attracts the sort of photographers with more money than brains. Most people are in the grey area in between, and I think that people are often initially attracted by the brand (as was the case with me). Those who have photography at heart will learn more before buying and will buy for the right reasons. But in our "quick-fix, one-hour photo, instant oatmeal society" some will be naive and buy for the wrong reasons, thinking instant success is imminent. Maybe that was what Pico tried to point out, that showing off of Leica gear gets in the way of people's efforts to develop as a photographer.

 

When I first learned about Leica I wanted an M8, the digital M, because I really didn't feel like using film. Film was old and cumbersome. Having learned more I have noticed that I almost bought an M for all the wrong reasons. I still want an M, but a film M, because that is really what I want to practice with, and have the experience of developing my own film. Really draw the process towards myself because I want to use photography as a creative outlet. I don't even have to get great results, as long as I have fun improving my skills to whatever level my talent allows me. I will, however, still freely admit that the myth that is Leica plays a part, it will motivate me even though I know it is silly.

[businessasusual]

My investment in Leica means something to me...and that is all that truly matters. If I owned all of it and felt that it meant nothing it might be time to take up the Bag Pipes and leave everyone here to enjoy their "fantasies". If I did not own any of it and felt this way - ditto!