Chuck Albertson Posted March 17, 2018 Share #1 Posted March 17, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) This weekend's Financial Times (in the House & Home section, for some reason) has a tour through the lens fabrication line at Wetzlar. A good piece, though the author seems to be under the impression that the M8 is still in production: https://www.ft.com/content/1e27b37c-21f7-11e8-8138-569c3d7ab0a7 (behind the suscription paywall, though they may give you X number of free articles per month). 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 17, 2018 Posted March 17, 2018 Hi Chuck Albertson, Take a look here Leica lenses in the Financial Times. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
onasj Posted March 18, 2018 Share #2 Posted March 18, 2018 Paywall-bypassing link: https://outline.com/NTfMBY 12 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted March 18, 2018 Share #3 Posted March 18, 2018 ...Two aspherical (or flat) lenses... The bar's pretty low these days. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted March 18, 2018 Share #4 Posted March 18, 2018 ...Financial Times, no less. You’ve got to wonder what weightier stories were so poorly fact-checked and edited. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
derleicaman Posted March 19, 2018 Share #5 Posted March 19, 2018 Umm, couldn't spell Kaufmann's name properly. Really! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beena22 Posted March 19, 2018 Share #6 Posted March 19, 2018 The Leica “bouquet” Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 19, 2018 Share #7 Posted March 19, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Mistakes only 0.01% of the readers will notice; I think it is above average - for a marketing advertorial. The only real frown are "flat" aspherical lenses. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted March 19, 2018 Share #8 Posted March 19, 2018 (edited) I didn't mind the article. It's lightweight, but amusing. A good short story on the train home. ... Edited March 19, 2018 by david strachan 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gelatino Posted March 19, 2018 Share #9 Posted March 19, 2018 Soon newspapers will be writen "phone et(h)ic" The Leica “bouquet” 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted March 19, 2018 Share #10 Posted March 19, 2018 Thank you for the "behind the wall" link. On the M8, I suspect this piece was written some time ago and has been sitting in the files to be pulled out and used when required. The author is not a photography specialist at all: Architecture appears to be his real speciality, so not a bad job majoring on the artisan side another interest in his work. "Writer for the Financial Times Weekend since 2012. The ongoing ‘Artisans’ series of over 20 articles explores the stories behind threatened or evolving global craft techniques, materials and creativity." Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 19, 2018 Share #11 Posted March 19, 2018 On the M8, I suspect this piece was written some time ago and has been sitting in the files to be pulled out and used when required. I'm not sure, the article refers to the new 75 Noctilux quite a lot. I think it is just an honest mistake – the writer refers to the success of the M8 at a pivotal point in Leica's history and probably just mistakenly mentions that model again when he probably meant the M10. I think it is quite an interesting article (with little tidbits like the €250 cost of grinding a single lens surface) that gives a nice sense of the company's 'personality'. The minor inaccuracies contained within it are of no significance and are just things for Leica nerds to get in a rather predictable lather about. My only criticism is that the article ends on the €12,500 price of the 75 Noctilux which IMO feeds into the unaffordable luxury perception that many people have of Leica products when the reality is quite different. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted March 19, 2018 Share #12 Posted March 19, 2018 <snip> ... My only criticism is that the article ends on the €12,500 price of the 75 Noctilux which IMO feeds into the unaffordable luxury perception that many people have of Leica products when the reality is quite different. LOL, a near €7,000 digital camera body and lenses which average €3,000 each, can quite justifiably be called unaffordable luxury by many. As to a €12,500 lens, I'd rather save myself the expense of €10,000 and use my "relatively" less expensive €2,500 Summicron APO Asph for results that are none less pleasing. Naturally I understand the difference in aperture, but its practicality is moot in the modern digital high ISO era unless one believes they need it for "artistic" reasons. And don't get me started on the Thambar, it really is an enigma. A nicely written article, which gives a sense of history, dedicated long serving staff and attention to detail and quality. The perfect "advertorial" as Jaapv calls it. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 19, 2018 Share #13 Posted March 19, 2018 LOL, a near €7,000 digital camera body and lenses which average €3,000 each, can quite justifiably be called unaffordable luxury by many. Yes, I take your point of course but Leica also sells many M lenses like the 35 Summarit and other products like the CL that are considerably more affordable than the 75 Noctilux. The M10 is also priced in the same ballpark as the top end Canon and Nikon DSLR bodies. By quoting the price of the highest ticket item in the Leica catalogue (other than the pro marketed S body) it just feeds that commonly held perception that Leica prices are stratospheric rather than just high. By the way, do get started on the Thambar, I'm all ears. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted March 19, 2018 Share #14 Posted March 19, 2018 I'm not sure, the article refers to the new 75 Noctilux quite a lot. I think it is just an honest mistake – the writer refers to the success of the M8 at a pivotal point in Leica's history and probably just mistakenly mentions that model again when he probably meant the M10. Indeed you are correct, I was skimming a bit and omitted to see the 75mm qualification of Noctilux. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedro Posted March 19, 2018 Share #15 Posted March 19, 2018 The Leica “bouquet” though you had to admire how creatively he made it up as he went along with it 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kilmister Posted March 19, 2018 Share #16 Posted March 19, 2018 One of the problems journalists face is to get the spelling correct. Bokeh, bouquet? They look different but they both sound similar. Tomato, tomato? They both look similar but sound different depending where you live. No need to be too critical as the message comes across clearly unless you are a pedant. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedro Posted March 19, 2018 Share #17 Posted March 19, 2018 when even basic fact-checking becomes redundant and pedantic no wonder that at some point we end up ... in the age of fake news? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kilmister Posted March 19, 2018 Share #18 Posted March 19, 2018 Yes, Fedro, we are in an era of fake news. The last time this happened was in Germany in 1933 after the Reichstag was burnt and I do sincerely hope that history will not repeat one of its greatest mistakes. Meanwhile, please keep calm and carry on because the FT has a reputation for good journalism and the occasional misspelt word is hardly fake news. Spelling mistakes are smelling or spilling mistakes. I thought the article was very positive for Leica. The fact that lenses are hand-made is an endearing reminder of the need for human skills. It also reminds us as a reason for our lenses being expensive. Despite the initial cost they have enormous resale value compared to machine made lenses. Remember that FT subscribers and buyers are people with money. They tend to be rich so they know what rich people want; watches, jewellery, fancy cars, racehorses, yachts, etc. If it keeps Leica afloat then I see it as a bonus. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anika Posted March 19, 2018 Share #19 Posted March 19, 2018 Yes, Fedro, we are in an era of fake news. The last time this happened was in Germany in 1933 after the Reichstag was burnt and I do sincerely hope that history will not repeat one of its greatest mistakes. Meanwhile, please keep calm and carry on because the FT has a reputation for good journalism and the occasional misspelt word is hardly fake news. Spelling mistakes are smelling or spilling mistakes. I thought the article was very positive for Leica. The fact that lenses are hand-made is an endearing reminder of the need for human skills. It also reminds us as a reason for our lenses being expensive. Despite the initial cost they have enormous resale value compared to machine made lenses. Remember that FT subscribers and buyers are people with money. They tend to be rich so they know what rich people want; watches, jewellery, fancy cars, racehorses, yachts, etc. If it keeps Leica afloat then I see it as a bonus. Fake news every day in Germany in ARD and ZDF.... but I would not want to get deep into this discussion here.... 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anika Posted March 19, 2018 Share #20 Posted March 19, 2018 Leica is all about the idea of having something "extraordinary", so why not agree to the enthusiasm of the article. 3 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.