Leica's advantage?

[tobey bilek]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am a guy who has a $35 quartz Timex, lives in a small house, drives a Chevy, but I like Leica cameras. It is all about need, and I have what I need, food clothing shelter and Leica.

 

And the Timex is reset two times per year when the time changes. It is off by 10 seconds. Why do I need better? Is there better ? Maintenance is $6 annually for a new battery. Ever price a CLA on a Rolex? You could by food for a month.

 

I always thought watches were a fraud and now I understand why.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[tadeyev]

I always thought watches were a fraud and now I understand why.

 

Funny thread here about watches...

What everyone has ignored in my view is that watches are in the first place emotional objects that no-one needs, and in addition, the only 'jewellery' a guy can wear.

 

But if if you enjoy the history, the brand and the background (far from everything is filled with Swatch movements by the way, as one poster has stated) then buy one and enjoy it.

 

If watches are 'fraud', then so are Ferraris, Rolls-Royces and whatever else you can think of. I get a bit tired by people dissing on high end watches, who then will probably openly think a multi-million dollar car collection is cool. Fiats or Ferrari's do the same thing, just like a Timex or Patek Philippe do.

Yet we don't begrudge the Ferrari owner his ride.

 

People buy and pay for what they love to own or use.

Let's let them enjoy what they want, as we enjoy Leica.

[pico]

I had a Rolex once but did not have a good time. When I retired they gave me a gold solar-powered watch and ruined my night life.

 

 

 

Sent from my Etcha-sketch.

[Paulus]

What I search for in a camera, I also search for in a watch. Reliability. In 2005 I bought a very sturdy divers watch. The years before I always bought cheap divers watches. Some of them did not even survive the warranty, so I could trade it in for a new one. Later I bought a Citizen divers watch which flooded after a cave dive. I had enough of it and bought a € 1000,- Oris. It did not let me down all these years. Other electronic dive computers broke down, but this watch stayed sturdy and and was also beautiful to look at.

I like the quality. Just like with the Leica's : quality, reliability and design. Also the ticking of the automatic movement I like, just like the MP /M6 has the wonderful sound a 1 second.

[jaapv]

If one wants to make parallels concerning Swiss mechanical watches and Leica, here's a totally different one altogether.

 

The Swiss watch industry is dominated by the Swatch Group Ltd and its subsidiaries. Swatch provides movements for all the watch companies under its subsidiary, ETA SA (and dba Valjoux.) They also own many of the well-known brand names including Breguet, Longines, Tissot, Tourbillon, and Blancpain.

 

In 2005 the Swiss government concluded that Swatch was a monopoly and had abused its market position. ETA SA was providing the industry with movements but had decided to stop selling anyone outside of the Swatch Group their mechanical ébauches and instead supply only fully assembled movements (ébauches are partially assembled allowing other watch companies to rework the movement and apply their own "in-house signature" to them and renaming them with their own name for the movement; this is common in the Swiss watch industry.)

 

Swatch complained that Asian counterfeiters were using their ébauches and that Swatch was losing control over their products. Anyway, long story short: the Swiss government made a settlement and allowed Swatch to end selling ébauches by the year 2008. After 2008 the Swatch movements were being sold to the watch companies only as fully assembled movements.

 

The point is that most all luxury brand watches contain a Swatch movement. The watches contain either a 2824-2, 2892.A2 or Valjoux 7750 movement made by Swatch. However, several of those luxury brands do indeed make their own in-house movements but only for their very expensive versions. But unless one is paying 8,500 or more Euro for a watch, then they are more than likely getting a Swatch movement in their watch.

 

The reality of the watch industry is that many high end watches are designed in-house but the guts (the movement) is made by a monopoly called Swatch Group Ltd. An analogy here is that the camera industry is similar in that the guts (the sensor) is often made by someone else. One could argue that Leica is sticking to their in-house sensor since they are contracting for proprietary sensors made by Truesense and now by CMOSIS. Most other camera companies use 'ébauches' or fully completed 'movements' (i.e., sensors) from Sony, etc.. So Leica is really more like the very expensive watches that do use in-house designed movements. The sensors are made for Leica and Leica only. And that no doubt adds quite a bit to the cost of a digital Leica.

 

Well, given that the shutters for the vast majority of cameras are made by Copal/Seiko we are looking at a similar situation.

[Paulus]

Still, a watch, or a camera are not only the inside , but the whole. Seeing a beautifully made watch is just as rewarding as an beautifully made camera.

[Paulus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am a guy who has a $35 quartz Timex, lives in a small house, drives a Chevy, but I like Leica cameras. It is all about need, and I have what I need, food clothing shelter and Leica.

 

And the Timex is reset two times per year when the time changes. It is off by 10 seconds. Why do I need better? Is there better ? Maintenance is $6 annually for a new battery. Ever price a CLA on a Rolex? You could by food for a month.

 

I always thought watches were a fraud and now I understand why.

 

 

And if you could get a patek phillippe or an other watch in the same price range as a gift, but you had to trade it for your Timex and had to wear it. Would you do it?

[semi-ambivalent]

I am a guy who has a $35 quartz Timex, lives in a small house, drives a Chevy, but I like Leica cameras. It is all about need, and I have what I need, food clothing shelter and Leica.

 

And the Timex is reset two times per year when the time changes. It is off by 10 seconds. Why do I need better? Is there better ? Maintenance is $6 annually for a new battery. Ever price a CLA on a Rolex? You could by food for a month.

 

I always thought watches were a fraud and now I understand why.

 

I have a Rolex SS Datejust I bought in 1977. I was five years out of High School. Worked hard to get the things I liked. It's still my only watch.

 

You waiting for an apology? Don't hold your breath.

 

s-a

[NJH]

Its a funny thread this as I used to be a bit of a WIS and have spent several years on a well known UK based watch forum where a certain Ming Thein used to be an active member. I have owned 3x Rolex but like Leica glass the thing with them is that if bought well they don't loose money and may in fact appreciate over time. Personally I feel that like many things in life the expensive top and upper mid teir Swiss brands are way over priced but it is absolutely nothing like buying a car or buying equipment/tools to do a job. I don't see a great deal of value in comparing Leica to Swiss watches as watches are really just a form of jewellery these days, I don't think Leica can cross that bridge they tried it in the past with all the special edition M6s and it was a bit of a joke.

 

On the original question its interesting to go back in time and compare a film Leica and typical lens with say an FM# and a typical normal focal length lens. What would surprise those who came here from huge DSLRs is that back in the mechanical film era there really wasn't much difference in either size or weight when making that comparison, people tended to shot Leica because you were either a rangefinder photographer or you weren't, simple as that. I don't even think the supposed technical or quality advantage of the lenses made much of a difference as anyone who really desired high image quality used medium format or bigger.

 

If Leica has one advantage in todays market place its that they have stayed true to the build, feel and simplicity of camera systems from those days when the Japanese such as Nikon for example have changed beyond recognition from the quality of products they made back then.

[pgk]

What I search for in a camera, I also search for in a watch. Reliability.

Back in 1982 I bought a pulsar Divers watch. Years later having thoroughly abused it, and dived with, it I lost it. the next year it turned up when I was digging in the garden where I'd obviously dropped it. I still have it though its a bit scrtached up now, and it still works as I had a battery fitted last year, although I wouldn't dive it as the seals are still the originals. So I can recommend Pulsar (of that vintage).

 

Today my 'phone replaces a watch as my actual timepiece.

[Guest]

Tomorrow my phone will replace my... as my actual...

Tomorrow it won't be called a phone any more but... and will be worn on their nose by all those who have a "phone" today = everyone.

(Google's Glas is a very early prototype.)

 

Cameras will be jewlery or old habits like watches, or for the nostalgic. Cameras for most purposes excluding strong teles.

 

Being a hobyist and in this respect a nostalgic, that's why I had my 30 years old simple Rolex and Omega refurbished and use film.

 

What is the use of wearing a tie or shoes, that are not trainers?

It's a choice.

[NJH]

Being a hobyist and in this respect a nostalgic, that's why I had my 30 years old simple Rolex and Omega refurbished and use film.

 

Combine the love for both by photographing the finer parts of your watches;

watch photography – Ming Thein | Photographer

 

Its why I mentioned Ming above as in a strange way despite never getting in to macro photography it was the fantastic images of his and a couple of others on a forum several years back that got me back eventually into photography and ultimately to here.

[Paulus]

Back in 1982 I bought a pulsar Divers watch. Years later having thoroughly abused it, and dived with, it I lost it. the next year it turned up when I was digging in the garden where I'd obviously dropped it. I still have it though its a bit scrtached up now, and it still works as I had a battery fitted last year, although I wouldn't dive it as the seals are still the originals. So I can recommend Pulsar (of that vintage).

 

Today my 'phone replaces a watch as my actual timepiece.

 

 

Great watch! Is it one like this?

 

VTG PULSAR SS DIVER 100m MENS WATCH ROTATING BEZEL DAY DATE SCREW-DOWN CROWN | eBay

 

A fellow dutch diver I know was diving the USS Atlanta 120 meter deep. He told he had a tool with a guaranteed 100 m waterproof. I forgot what it was, a light torch or camera house I don't know.

It collapsed at that depth. For that reason, of course everything can brake down, as long as you have the choice, you can look for a more sturdy tool.

 

At the other hand. A watch is like a piece of art, if you discard the functionality. Good art costs money.

[pgk]

At the other hand. A watch is like a piece of art, if you discard the functionality. Good art costs money.

That's a better Pulsar than mine:).

 

I have no problem with anyone appreciating a watch for its own intrinsic beauty/craftsmanship/engineering/artistry/etc, whatsoever. Just like Leicas, some are appreciated simply for what they are, not specifically for what they do, and why not? I'm not into watches myself though. But I do genuinely enjoy using my Leicas - how does one actually go about valuing the enjoyment or pleasure of using equipment, be it specific cameras or watches?

[jcraf]

For me, the Rolex Oyster is a design classic, underpinned by superb engineering and build quality, just like the Leica M cameras. And the Porsche 911.

 

My ownership of watch and camera has nothing to do with snob value; in fact both go pretty much unnoticed - the Rolex being steel only and not blinged up, the Leica Ms looking like inconsequential cheap little cameras to most. Just as I like it.

 

I sold my 911 a few years back, because people did notice.....

[Paulus]

That's a better Pulsar than mine:).

 

I have no problem with anyone appreciating a watch for its own intrinsic beauty/craftsmanship/engineering/artistry/etc, whatsoever. Just like Leicas, some are appreciated simply for what they are, not specifically for what they do, and why not? I'm not into watches myself though. But I do genuinely enjoy using my Leicas - how does one actually go about valuing the enjoyment or pleasure of using equipment, be it specific cameras or watches?

 

 

Or diving equipment Paul .... Good equipment is half the job done.And someone said, I thought it was Raymond Loewy, " when it looks good it also works good " .

 

I found some footage about the actual dive I told about. JP is one good cameraman! Doesn't even use a Leica;):

 

USS Atlanta Project | Global Underwater Explorers

[pgk]

Or diving equipment Paul .... Good equipment is half the job done.

Agreed! I used to use Poseidon regulators but ended up using UK built Apex, due to the need for annual servicing under our HSE regulations here in the UK. I still like the Poseidons - beautifully built but I found them just too expensive to maintain. Not that I ever used them to the depths you linked to. My gear is now pretty straightforward - it works well so I'm happy to keep it that way;).

[erlingmm]

Moderators: This thread should now be moved to Barnack's Bar, it is totally irrelevant for the topic of the forum it belongs to.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pgk]

Moderators: This thread should now be moved to Barnack's Bar, it is totally irrelevant for the topic of the forum it belongs to.

Was it ever?

[elgenper]

Moderators: This thread should now be moved to Barnack's Bar, it is totally irrelevant for the topic of the forum it belongs to.

 

…and it has been so since the very first post...