Let them try it ... (stay on topic, thanks!)

[Overgaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is a new thread on this subject as the other one got into a discussion on service repair. So please, stay on subject, thanks!

 

 

In reading http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/29126-who-still-using-their-5d-along.html I came to think, why doesn't Leica organize a really big "lend a M8" campaign amongst professionals.

 

As one said, a lot of pro photographers using dSLR are very interested in the M8, but idea of buying one seem far to them.

 

Whenever I use a Digilux 2, I always get one or more photographers approaching and saying "nice camera" and asking questions.

 

Little do they know. But when I look at the final results at the wire or in the paper later, the D2 produces as great (and often better) results than the dSLR (one reason is that you have to try harder not having a large zoom).

 

The occasions where a large zoom or tele IS needed are few (I don't do sports photos at all)

 

Many would like to have a simpler tool than a dSLR, something that does not frighten people like a large dSLR does. They also admire the soundless photographing. Even a dSLR is far from the sound of the good old Nikon F3 motorized tank, you still notice the distinct sound of a dSLR across a room.

 

I don't get that they don't just buy one. Then again, I have had long conversations with pro photographers telling how they love Leica and Hasselblad - but how expensive it is.

 

Which is not true. Great glasses as the Canon 200mm F/1.8 goes for the same prices as Leica 180mm F/2.0.

 

A Leica M8 house is less than a Canon Mark III.

 

I just think they don't know.

 

I think the experience so far with the M8 should tell that when someone gets a M8 in his or her hands for some weeks, they won't let go of it again.

 

So perhaps "lend a Leica M8 for a month" would be a way to go.

[hankg]

It's my understanding that Leica has lent out some cameras to pros (such as some Magnum photographers) but as Leica is small the program probably only reaches a relatively small number of photographers. So if you are a Magnum or VII member you'd likely be able to borrow a camera or 2 for a while, no problem - but the for the average journeyman PJ not likely.

[sdai]

I understand that a lot of users want a test drive before they are fully committed however, the low volume and limited revenue generated by the M probably won't be sufficient to support such a promotional program.

 

That being said, I think it's worth a try to contact your local dealer or Leica rep. and see if they could give you a loaner camera for a limited period of time.

[Guest localplayer]

if you are working pro at an agency you likely have access to company gear--mostly canon in the u.s. these days. an slr allows you to see what you are getting and enough automation to assure you can deliver. carrying a large camera/lens into a venue as a member of the press is more or less expected--carrying a little leica in will create more hassle with security, etc. (I know kinda of strange argument). Also, if you are covering a person with security, you won't be getting too close and need that zoom. the m8 ain't quiet...the mk canons on single silent-mode are just as quiet. last issue and a big one, most press guys or working shooters covering editorial don't have big bucks falling out of their pockets--so buying leica is seen the same as wearing a gold rolex--lot of flash--especially when a nikon or canon will do the job. your argument about a 200 1.8 doesn't hold either---the canon ones being used are really OLD and again usually checked out from the agency. flash--no viable solution for the m8 and something used daily by the pros on their job--your camera better work on remote also. (I have no clue on how to remotely trigger an m8)

 

leica can loan all the units they want to working pros, but few will buy them unless they can expense it somehow--keep in mind, you need a minimum of two bodies.

 

so while a pro may come up to you and ask you about your shiny m8, it is more out of passing fancy. would you really expect them to hold up to rigors of daily pro usage? the canon shutters are rated at 300K, what is an M8 shutter rated at? you drop a body and need a repair--CPS gets it turned around asap, or at big venues spots you another body. Not sure leica can keep up with that.

[jrc]

leica can loan all the units they want to working pros, but few will buy them unless they can expense it somehow--keep in mind, you need a minimum of two bodies.

 

I tend to agree; there are always a few pros who'd go for Leica -- we have a few here -- but for most, the Leica isn't flexible enough, and for most pros, frankly, tax deductions aren't going to make the difference (because their income isn't large enough that deductibility becomes decisive.) For pros, there is also the constant problem of compatibility and immediate access to replacements; if you drop your Canon or Nikon 200mm off a photo stand while working in West Podunk, Illinois, you can go to the West Poduck camera store and buy a replacement that afternoon. Can't do that with Leica.

 

The M8 basically fits in a slot that will work for a small number of professionals, for probably a bigger percentage of photo-artists (especially those who do street work), and for people who can afford to buy (or who are willing to sacrifice for) whatever camera that they want. My impression here is that the forum has a fairly large number of affluent technology professionals who are Leica fans; some may be brilliant photographers and some may be rather poor at it, but the decisive factor is income. I would expect that also to be true of non-forum Leica owners.

 

JC

[toke]

Hej Thorsten

 

I´m a pro photojournalist using M8 (and Canon mk2)

I think it would be great, if Leica would lend out M8 cameras, but I´m not convinced they are capable of supporting such a "pro test out programme".

 

I would love it, if Leica could/would support pro users, the same way, as Canon does!!!!!

 

I know a few other pros in Denmark using M8.

 

I love using the M8 for daily assignments, but am very aware of the camera's limits. Meaning I often has the canon gear in the car, if the need should arise.....but I would say, that I shoot M8/EOS 1dmk2 about 80/20%

 

I have also been approached by colleagues, who are very interrested in the M8. Some of them used to work with Leica M, back in the days....but none of them has made the jump....!

 

Yet!?

 

Toke

[ptomsu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am really getting kind of mad here - but before you continue reading please understand that I do not consider all Pro's being the same - ok!

 

WHY should Leica treat Pro's better than Amateurs (or semi professional photographers)?

 

Why should Pro's be able to test and play around and a normal user, who is paying the same amount is not getting these benefits?

 

Why do Pro's have less money than normal users? Why are they considered a better species than amateurs?????

 

I must say that this way of thinking is really annoying and actually shows the arrogance of some user who consider themselfs being somthing better because they claim to earn money with their equipment.

[jaapv]

A camera maker will see it as advertising to have visible pros using the product, Peter. I share your feelings, though.

[morffin]

Thats because a pro is likely to spend much more $$$$ on gear than a non pro. A pro will have several bodies and lenses. A pro will also update their gear much more often.

 

Also, in an off topic.topic.the NFL will require all sideline photographers to wear red Canon vests during games.

[toke]

What jaap said....

Toke

[Guest localplayer]

Peter

 

look at the ad's Canon runs in photo mags with all the sports shooters using white lenses. and yes, next year your NFL vest will have a canon logo on it---great advertising to get the masses to perceive your product as best in class. "if joe pro uses it, it must be good enough for me", or look "susie the pro just won a Pulitzer with an M8". also pros 'push' gear to its limits and beyond--great for building better cameras. so yes, Leica would be well served by getting pro's to use the camera--but again it really isn't the right tool for many situations. now if I were assigned to cover the White House, then it would be a great camera. If i have to go to Beijing for the Olympics--its is all Canon

[ptomsu]

Peter

 

look at the ad's Canon runs in photo mags with all the sports shooters using white lenses. and yes, next year your NFL vest will have a canon logo on it---great advertising to get the masses to perceive your product as best in class. "if joe pro uses it, it must be good enough for me", or look "susie the pro just won a Pulitzer with an M8". also pros 'push' gear to its limits and beyond--great for building better cameras. so yes, Leica would be well served by getting pro's to use the camera--but again it really isn't the right tool for many situations. now if I were assigned to cover the White House, then it would be a great camera. If i have to go to Beijing for the Olympics--its is all Canon

 

And why Canon and not Nikon?

 

What is really better with Canon compared to the features and technology available at Nikon?

 

See, what I mean is that advertising is ok, but evreybody should be as intelligent to judge by him/herself which is the better fit.

 

One should not always put on top what advertisement tries to sell. This is maybe the trend of our times, but not the real truth.

[charlesphoto99]

I am really getting kind of mad here - but before you continue reading please understand that I do not consider all Pro's being the same - ok!

 

WHY should Leica treat Pro's better than Amateurs (or semi professional photographers)?

 

Why should Pro's be able to test and play around and a normal user, who is paying the same amount is not getting these benefits?

 

Why do Pro's have less money than normal users? Why are they considered a better species than amateurs?????

 

I must say that this way of thinking is really annoying and actually shows the arrogance of some user who consider themselfs being somthing better because they claim to earn money with their equipment.

 

And this post really pisses me off. Why does the medical industry give kickbacks to doctors, wine and dine them and give them cut rates on equipment and medicine etc? Is this passed on to the patient? Is it fair? Or is it just the way industries work?

 

I make my living at photography, and if I don't have my camera jump to the head of the line in repair for example, I could be screwed. More than a matter of not being able to use the camera for my family picnic - it's about keeping a roof over my head. And if I'm loaned a piece of gear (which I've never been in the position to have happen) then the image made by that equipment may end up being seen by millions which reflects well on the manufacturer.

 

Photographers, alas, are making about the same as they were 10 years ago, esp in editorial. Can the same be said for other pro services? I think not.

 

A fellow photographer uses this as an email signature occasionally which I think is apropos:

 

“Lighting and composition are infinitely more important than which lens you own. If the guys with the most expensive lenses were the best photographers, my doctor and lawyer would be the best photographers in the world.”

[Guest stnami]

Companies like canon, nikon etc don't really make money out of pros their market is the general public. So get of your high horses, one or two pros to a neighbourhood cannot sustain a camera shop let alone the rest. Canon uses its white lenses as an aid to promote P&S's.

There is a bigger world out there , most don't care about any particular camera company, it about taking a photo and showing friends keeping as memories as oppossed to a magazine that heads of to the recycling depot or garbage.

[ptomsu]

And this post really pisses me off. Why does the medical industry give kickbacks to doctors, wine and dine them and give them cut rates on equipment and medicine etc? Is this passed on to the patient? Is it fair? Or is it just the way industries work?

 

I make my living at photography, and if I don't have my camera jump to the head of the line in repair for example, I could be screwed. More than a matter of not being able to use the camera for my family picnic - it's about keeping a roof over my head. And if I'm loaned a piece of gear (which I've never been in the position to have happen) then the image made by that equipment may end up being seen by millions which reflects well on the manufacturer.

 

Photographers, alas, are making about the same as they were 10 years ago, esp in editorial. Can the same be said for other pro services? I think not.

 

A fellow photographer uses this as an email signature occasionally which I think is apropos:

 

“Lighting and composition are infinitely more important than which lens you own. If the guys with the most expensive lenses were the best photographers, my doctor and lawyer would be the best photographers in the world.”

 

And why do you think I am a medical doctor? Better think before you poste!

[Guest sirvine]

It's all about clout, at the end of the day. I'm fairly certain Mario Testino won't have any problem getting a loaner from any maker if he wants one. I know for a fact that Leica is lending cameras to certain photojournalists, which is the kind of 'pro' they are probably most interested in.

[erl]

Logic really does seem to have gone out the window in this thread. (I forgot to close it, my fault:D )

 

Everyone seems to feel that 'their' case is the most important, only 'true' one. I am a working (just) Pro and I currently use primarily Leica M8. It suits my style of work. If it blows up, my retailer (not Leica) will support me with a loaner. In the past, Leica have. My retailer has offered gear to me to try. He knows I will usually buy. I DO claim priority over amateurs when it comes to getting the priveledge, but if they get in before me, so be it. I DO consider my livelyhood to be more important than their snapshooting weekends, but that is not to belittle their hobby. In fact i support them, literally, but that is another issue. (it's more about 'need' than money IMHO.)

 

Each of us must learn to be responsible for ourselves and stop expecting as a right that someone else will support us. If you can arrange that someone will, great, but be prepared to go it alone.

 

As an aside, but relevant if you stretch your imagination, whilst standing in the supermarket queue, a lady behind me pleaded if she could go ahead of me because she was expecting visitors. She had one article to purchase! I had a trolley load, including my dogs dinner. H e gets impatient. So I was spending more than her, but I let her go because I calculated her urgency was more important to her than mine was to me. I figure that to have been the reasonable outcome. What does it all mean? You think on it.

[hankg]

I am really getting kind of mad here - but before you continue reading please understand that I do not consider all Pro's being the same - ok!

 

WHY should Leica treat Pro's better than Amateurs (or semi professional photographers)?

 

Why should Pro's be able to test and play around and a normal user, who is paying the same amount is not getting these benefits?

 

Why do Pro's have less money than normal users? Why are they considered a better species than amateurs?????

 

I must say that this way of thinking is really annoying and actually shows the arrogance of some user who consider themselfs being somthing better because they claim to earn money with their equipment.

 

Do athletic shoe, bicycle, musical instrument and tennis racquet manufacturers feature endorsements by doctors, lawyers and accountants who use their products? No, they feature endorsements by pros who (are often paid to ) use their products. Many amateurs want to use the equipment the pros use and emulate the performance levels exhibited by the top level pros. So even though every manufacturer makes 99% of it's earnings from amateurs the pro photo market, like racing does for the auto industry, provides two things: cachet for the brand and a proving ground for the equipment.

[hankg]

You tell me which ad campaign is more effective:

 

Canon, the camera most used by pro photographers

 

or

 

Canon, the camera most used by accountants.

 

Nothing against accountants or doctors, who as a group are a lot smarter then pro photographers, and nothing against struggling pro photographers who can't get loaners -it's nothing to do with manufacturer arrogance. If I were Leica, with it's limited resources I'd be more interested in the opinion of the Magnum and VII photographers as a group and I'd be more interested in having photos published taken by M8's with names like Pellegrini, Nachtwey and Salgado, etc., in the credit line then any other group of users.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Thats because a pro is likely to spend much more $$$$ on gear than a non pro. A pro will have several bodies and lenses. A pro will also update their gear much more often.

 

Also, in an off topic.topic.the NFL will require all sideline photographers to wear red Canon vests during games.

 

 

Are you a pro? Shall we compare money over the last few years? A pro has to watch the bottom line when buying gear and be rational. An amateur has the ultimate freedom, provided his job generates the means....