Jump to content
KdB

So Leica makes cameras for pros... Really?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, KdB said:

 

The "Leica look and experience" is a marketing joke.

 

Well, to be fair, a number of others who have experienced multiple issues with their S system have stuck with it, not just because of the money sunk, but because of the otherwise superb user experience and quality results, especially the lenses. If you don’t like the results even when things work,  that’s another issue, and likely to dilute your reliability complaints.

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Well, to be fair, a number of others who have experienced multiple issues with their S system have stuck with it, not just because of the money sunk, but because of the otherwise superb user experience and quality results, especially the lenses. If you don’t like the results even when things work,  that’s another issue, and likely to dilute your reliability complaints.

Jeff

Hello Jeff.

When I say the Leica look is a joke, I mean it.

A few years ago, I posted a white and black landscape photo taken with a Nokia 808 on a french Leica user forum: no one could tell the difference on a 800x800 pixels photo.

Even worst, everyone was raving about the deep blacks, the tonal response, the gradient... Laughable at best.

 

Anyone who has medium Capture One or Lightroom skills can mimic that "famous" Leica look within minutes.

 

Kaïs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think "experience" is the key word in what Kais quoted, Jeff. It's a far different concept for a professional than it is for an enthusiast and I think that was made quite clear in his opening post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, KdB said:

Hello Jeff.

When I say the Leica look is a joke, I mean it.

A few years ago, I posted a white and black landscape photo taken with a Nokia 808 on a french Leica user forum: no one could tell the difference on a 800x800 pixels photo.

Even worst, everyone was raving about the deep blacks, the tonal response, the gradient... Laughable at best.

 

Anyone who has medium Capture One or Lightroom skills can mimic that "famous" Leica look within minutes.

 

Kaïs.

 

For online posts, might as well use an iPhone.

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, stray cat said:

I think "experience" is the key word in what Kais quoted, Jeff. It's a far different concept for a professional than it is for an enthusiast and I think that was made quite clear in his opening post.

Apparently not for him. See above.

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KdB said:

Hello Jeff.

When I say the Leica look is a joke, I mean it.

A few years ago, I posted a white and black landscape photo taken with a Nokia 808 on a french Leica user forum: no one could tell the difference on a 800x800 pixels photo.

Even worst, everyone was raving about the deep blacks, the tonal response, the gradient... Laughable at best.

 

Anyone who has medium Capture One or Lightroom skills can mimic that "famous" Leica look within minutes.

 

Kaïs.

 

Petty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, stray cat said:

Frankly, Kaïs' experience is deplorable and should not be regarded in any other way by anyone here. Jaap, I really can't see your point of defending Leica as you do in your first response as, apart from your factual claim that Leica doesn't claim to be aimed at the professional market, it doesn't matter to Kaïs how many times "sensor cracks and corrosion have been chewed to the bone on this forum". So what? It's obviously a serious issue and not every potential purchaser of Leica should have to float by here before they invest in the system. You do, however, mellow your comments somewhat in your second post.

Kaïs has every right to be extremely pissed off. To Kaïs all I can say is that at least you can be confident that your film Leicas won't let you down.

He has a right to be pissed off. However, not to bash. As for the sensor issue, I don't think it is fair to blame Leica as such. The cracks were obviously a manufacturing issue in a series of sensors, not by Leica - although, as assembler, they are liable for the product, but by Kodak etc., the corrosion issue in the end as well. There is a difference between liability and culpability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, KdB said:

Hello Jeff.

When I say the Leica look is a joke, I mean it.

A few years ago, I posted a white and black landscape photo taken with a Nokia 808 on a french Leica user forum: no one could tell the difference on a 800x800 pixels photo.

Even worst, everyone was raving about the deep blacks, the tonal response, the gradient... Laughable at best.

 

Anyone who has medium Capture One or Lightroom skills can mimic that "famous" Leica look within minutes.

 

Kaïs.

 

If you put your trust in Internet critiques for your photography... Good luck.

I don't know about you, but my end product is the print. One can certainly differentiate there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jaapv said:

He has a right to be pissed off. However, not to bash. As for the sensor issue, I don't think it is fair to blame Leica as such. The cracks were obviously a manufacturing issue in a series of sensors, not by Leica - although, as assembler, they are liable for the product, but by Kodak etc., the corrosion issue in the end as well. There is a difference between liability and culpability.

I agree to a certain extent Jaap.

It's Leica's role and responsability to R&D, produce, proof and test their camera choosing the best (if they they say so) components, materials, partners...

I didn't pay around 50 000$ to get subpar or unfinished products, or to lose important clients (who were delighted to have a Leica on location) because my camera has failed during a shooting.

Today Leica is the less reliable company: countless sensor-gates and failures, yet, they think they are making state of the art cameras. 

And the zero concern they show to their amabassadors, we the photographers,  is unacceptable, plain and simple.

As much as I trusted them and liked their photography approach, I am totally disappointed by the awful experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Well, to be fair, a number of others who have experienced multiple issues with their S system have stuck with it, not just because of the money sunk, but because of the otherwise superb user experience and quality results, especially the lenses. If you don’t like the results even when things work,  that’s another issue, and likely to dilute your reliability complaints.

Jeff

Hello Jeff.

If it is ok for you to accept that your camera can give you nice and clean images from time to time, this is your point of view.

I want my cameras to get me perfect images EVERY TIME, not randomly. There is no lottery here. The S has been created to shoot no mater the bad weather, the conditions, the photographer...

"when things work" is not a valid point. Things should always work.

Try to explain it to your clients...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jaapv said:

He has a right to be pissed off. However, not to bash. As for the sensor issue, I don't think it is fair to blame Leica as such. The cracks were obviously a manufacturing issue in a series of sensors, not by Leica - although, as assembler, they are liable for the product, but by Kodak etc., the corrosion issue in the end as well. There is a difference between liability and culpability.

JaapV: With all due respect, Leica bears responsibility for not fixing his camera for 6 months, for not letting him know the status of repairs. Leica and Kodak can work out any resolution they  so choose based on responsibility for the sensor issue(s), but Kais, as the end user, should not become a secondary 'victim' of either company's mess up.  Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, jaapv said:

Thanks, I stand corrected. You guys have me convinced. However, leaving the S out of consideration, I see Leicas more as aimed at high-end amateurs, despite all marketing speak. Perfectly usable to a pro as any camera can be if it fits his purpose nonetheless. At any rate, the OP has cause for complaint. I'm not sure whether the generalisation is valid.

 

I agree with you. It’s wrong to generalise, but how many (non-studio) pros use DSLRs, set on autoexposure, autofocus, often with ‘intelligent’ flashguns regardless of the light level and contrast? Using a rangefinder maybe seems like too much effort and brings too high a risk of failure. On the other hand, those photographers prepared to put the effort into their work (PaulMac springs to mind - I’m sure there will be others here) tend to have that effort rewarded by strong, well-thought-through images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Denys said:

I agree with you. It’s wrong to generalise, but how many (non-studio) pros use DSLRs, set on autoexposure, autofocus, often with ‘intelligent’ flashguns regardless of the light level and contrast? Using a rangefinder maybe seems like too much effort and brings too high a risk of failure. On the other hand, those photographers prepared to put the effort into their work (PaulMac springs to mind - I’m sure there will be others here) tend to have that effort rewarded by strong, well-thought-through images.

Hello Denys.

We are talking about reliabilty and trust here, not effort

The final output of any 500$+ camera can be sold to clients with today's modern camera.

Very few clients ask for the medium format look, let alone the "Leica look".

Let's be frank: what are the top used cameras on locations? On the field? In stadiums? At the Paris or Milano fashion week? Certainly not Ms or Ss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, KdB said:

Hello Jeff.

If it is ok for you to accept that your camera can give you nice and clean images from time to time, this is your point of view.

I want my cameras to get me perfect images EVERY TIME, not randomly. There is no lottery here. The S has been created to shoot no mater the bad weather, the conditions, the photographer...

"when things work" is not a valid point. Things should always work.

Try to explain it to your clients...

I’ve been just as harsh on the S reliability, service and communication issues, as well as the ultimate AF motor replacement policy.  I think there should have been a recall, with no customer cost.

But my point is that you took the bashing much further, suggesting that the IQ is crap, or at least marketing hooey.  And you cite screen posts as proof.  Ridiculous way  to judge. If you didn’t appreciate Leica results  (that always depends ultimately on the user, for any system), you had a funny way of showing that... for years, buying multiple systems.  The bashing about IQ dilutes your other points, and credibility,  IMO.

Jeff

 

 

Edited by Jeff S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, KdB said:

 

When I say the Leica look is a joke, I mean it.

A few years ago, I posted a white and black landscape photo taken with a Nokia 808 on a french Leica user forum: no one could tell the difference on a 800x800 pixels photo.

Even worst, everyone was raving about the deep blacks, the tonal response, the gradient... Laughable at best.

 

Anyone who has medium Capture One or Lightroom skills can mimic that "famous" Leica look within minutes.

 

Kaïs.

 

Well, I really don't understand why you spent all that money on Leica equipment if your Nokia can do as good a job. As a working pro you've made a seriously bad business decision! 

When I say I wouldn't choose Leica if I was depending on cameras for my living, I should clarify that a major part of that reasoning is when the camera is a tool for a job, why would I spend Leica money on overheads when other less expensive options will do the job and with proper levels of Pro back up service.

For film it's different - as one of the few companies who still make film gear I would choose Leica pro film use (and the mechanical M's are pretty much lifetime purchases). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, KdB said:

Hello Denys.

We are talking about reliabilty and trust here, not effort

The final output of any 500$+ camera can be sold to clients with today's modern camera.

Very few clients ask for the medium format look, let alone the "Leica look".

Let's be frank: what are the top used cameras on locations? On the field? In stadiums? At the Paris or Milano fashion week? Certainly not Ms or Ss.

I appreciate that the thread relates to reliability, trust and customer service..  ..my comment was made simply in response to Jaap’s one about how many pros use Ms. You are correct about top cameras used all over the place; it’s nothing new - I remember reading how many Magnum photographers used Nikon SLRs on commission, but had an M with them for personal work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

I’ve been just as harsh on the S reliability, service and communication issues, as well as the ultimate AF motor replacement policy.  I think there should have been a recall, with no customer cost.

But my point is that you took the bashing much further, suggesting that the IQ is crap, or at least marketing hooey.  And you cite screen posts as proof.  Ridiculous way  to judge. If you didn’t appreciate Leica results  (that always depends ultimately on the user, for any system), you had a funny way of showing that... for years, buying multiple systems.  The bashing about IQ dilutes your other points, and credibility,  IMO.

Jeff

 

 

This is what Ming Thein calls the shooting enveloppe.

Yes, I did (and still do) enjoyed my Ms: the handling, the low profile, the size... I was tired of having kilos of weight detroying my shoulders with the D3x and lenses.

But, regarding the output, nothing to brag about. I never said crap but "overated" and easily mimicable witin minutes. That's a huge difference. 

Add some contrast and structure, there you go, you have a Leica look for cheap.

 

If I didn't like and trust the products at first, I wouldn't have invested so much into Leica. No one forced me to do so.

I'm no fan boy, I buy and use camera to work, to send photos to my clients and to be paid for that, not to show off a red dot or any other brand.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, earleygallery said:

Well, I really don't understand why you spent all that money on Leica equipment if your Nokia can do as good a job. As a working pro you've made a seriously bad business decision! 

When I say I wouldn't choose Leica if I was depending on cameras for my living, I should clarify that a major part of that reasoning is when the camera is a tool for a job, why would I spend Leica money on overheads when other less expensive options will do the job and with proper levels of Pro back up service.

For film it's different - as one of the few companies who still make film gear I would choose Leica pro film use (and the mechanical M's are pretty much lifetime purchases). 

Hello James.

I'm not here to argue or be harsh with anyone.

You have your own understanding and interpretation of my post, I'm fine with that.

It's a matter of client relationship and how to differentiate. Everyone is free to spend his money to one's liking, right?

If the client feels more comfortable having a Leica on location, rather than a Fuji and if he's willing to pay, why should I bring a Fuji or a Sony?

Then, it's normal and legit to have a flawless and reliable equipment.

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Denys said:

I appreciate that the thread relates to reliability, trust and customer service..  ..my comment was made simply in response to Jaap’s one about how many pros use Ms. You are correct about top cameras used all over the place; it’s nothing new - I remember reading how many Magnum photographers used Nikon SLRs on commission, but had an M with them for personal work.

Totally on point 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, KdB said:

 

Add some contrast and structure, there you go, you have a Leica look for cheap.

 

 

 

Putting the ‘Leica look’ aside (I don’t believe in any one look... much longer discussion), printing has never been plug and play, darkroom or digital.  There are many more good photographers than good printers. Judging online is a waste of time.  Most quality gear these days is capable of great print results in the right hands within an overall workflow. The most important tools have always been between the ears. Nothing new or surprising there.  And no need to bash Leica on that basis IMO.

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...