Leica article in the New Yorker

[bradreiman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

fantastic article and no Manuel it doesn't make me feel snobbish or elitest at all. Quite the opposite really. I have used my 3b and m6 for many years and now the m8. Rarely has anyone noticed my cameras at all so I feel I go unnoticed which is how I like it. I do appreciate the history of these cameras which is a proud and storied history-look up "leica freedom train". i love the bresson quotes about his leica-i wish i could commit to poetry how i feel about these cameras like he. for me taking the picture is better than looking at it later and i think my photography benefits from that. i too have been through all the other cameras and still use the leica-every day mostly. no for me its not elitism it is pure satisfaction....B

[Iron Flatline]

It's funny to see that this article makes some people here to fell more snobish and elitists... but doesn't make them better photographers!

 

Bla, bla, bla...

 

And here we go for another thread to the glory of Leica... even when the M8 is less than perfect!

 

Never mind...

.

Hey, thanks for sharing your thoughts. That really was helpful, and this place is better because you're here.

[Advertisement]

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

[Zoran Milich]

My wife has actually written for the New Yorker and the writers who do the articles I think are the finest in North America (er...now honey, can I get another M8? They also get months and months to work on one article. I think for a camera and its history to be written up in the New Yorker is truly amazing.

[leicar7]

For John Camp,

 

If I might add to your parenthetical statement; the New Yorker is also one of the last U.S. magazines that emphasizes WRITING with articles that are longer than eight one-sentence paragraphs. (My English teachers would have flunked us if we had tried to get away with one-sentence paragraphs).

 

Steve Lee, please exploit this article.....

[ChrisC]

....Steve Lee, please exploit this article.....

 

I hope not. The fuzzy warm glow emanating from this thread alarms me. The article is steeped in uncritical nostalgia which would be harmlessly OK amongst consenting adults if it did not add to the uncritical mass holding Leica accountable to legacy traditions. As a customer I reserve my right to dissent.

 

The M8 is very good at what it does well, but in this age it falls a long way short of being a great classic camera design. Before I became a customer I held the view that Leica was a company with it's head in the sand, now I have a vested interest in Leica being modern again. For me that includes losing some legacy design anachronisms beloved by some here in this forum, but more importantly; irritating for lost customers. Your view may be different of course, but I found the article to be twee; and nostalgia does Leica a disservice considering how perilous it's market is.

 

I'm off to buy a hard hat and kevlar jacket.

 

.................... Chris

[wparsonsgisnet]

So ... I told the bride that I wanted to save the September 24th issue of the New Yorker because of the article about Leica.

 

Saturday nite she said she'd read the article, so I asked her what she thot. She said it was boring [husband gets dose of reality] and then she said, "5 thousand, huh?"

 

I'm still saving the issue.

[andybarton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's funny to see that this article makes some people here to fell more snobish and elitists... but doesn't make them better photographers!

 

Bla, bla, bla...

 

And here we go for another thread to the glory of Leica... even when the M8 is less than perfect!

 

Never mind...

.

 

The article wasn't about the M8...

[Guest Walt]

I hope not. The fuzzy warm glow emanating from this thread alarms me. The article is steeped in uncritical nostalgia which would be harmlessly OK amongst consenting adults if it did not add to the uncritical mass holding Leica accountable to legacy traditions. As a customer I reserve my right to dissent.

 

The M8 is very good at what it does well, but in this age it falls a long way short of being a great classic camera design. Before I became a customer I held the view that Leica was a company with it's head in the sand, now I have a vested interest in Leica being modern again. For me that includes losing some legacy design anachronisms beloved by some here in this forum, but more importantly; irritating for lost customers. Your view may be different of course, but I found the article to be twee; and nostalgia does Leica a disservice considering how perilous it's market is.

 

I'm off to buy a hard hat and kevlar jacket.

 

.................... Chris

Chris-

 

I am with you on this. It is an important insight that pops up occassionally on the forum and is then summarily ignored. There is much more interest here in "high-grade' equipment than in tools that facilitate photography. It is a mistake to think of this as a forum with anything more than a passing, peripheral interest in photography.

 

Leica's tradition, the important one and the one that garnered the loyalty of all the photographers mentioned in the TNY piece, is about producing robust, reliable, simple, ergonomically excellent tools. The M8, with all its functional virtues, doesn't qualify on this score, regardless of what it looks like, the brass top and bottom plates, the this and the that. When Leica releases a FAQ and says that the frame lines were designed as they were because "the image can be cropped," they've just eliminated from their market most of the photographers mentioned in the article.

 

What's remarkable is that the M8 is a pretty good photographer's camera despite, not because of, all its ridiculous pandering to nostalgia and "tradition." That's good. What's not good is the new Summarit lenses with their metal hoods and traditional Leica type face and what this suggests about Leica's future. The rectangular plastic hoods are in the real Leica tradition: light, shaped to properly shield the lens and absorbing impact on the front of the lens. They are functionally excellent. People think they feel "plasticky" and they want the old "high grade" hoods because they feel better and spruce up the equipment like a Bordeaux calf Luigi case. And who cares about the typeface for heaven's sake? This is the wrong direction, unless of course Leica really is after a high-end boutique market. Perhaps they feel they have little else to offer.

 

Leica is emerging from a period during which, in terms of market share, it had nothing but a boutique product. I hope they are able to shake this state of mind. Given their limited resources, time and experience, the M8 is probably the best they could hope to do. They did a credible job if you don't compare it to their real accomplishments like the IIIF, M3, etc or to any number of other excellent, contemporary cameras. Had this been a camera in the real Leica tradition, it would have been something like a blown-up version of the all titanium (no brass!) Ricoh GR-D with it's brilliant ergonomics. It would have looked nothing like "a Leica" and it would have been a real Leica, in the real tradition of the company. The Ricoh is much more of a photographer's camera than the M8 is, though limited in image quality and utility by its pocket format and fixed lens.

 

The M9, if they get to that, will tell the story. If it's got brass top and bottom plates and it's too slippery to hold on to without a tube appended to the brass bottom plate, the likes of you and I are finished in Leica's order books. This company has a lot to offer, but it doesn't lie in the kind of nostalgia that the TNY article revels in.

 

Walt

[wparsonsgisnet]

... It is a mistake to think of this as a forum with anything more than a passing, peripheral interest in photography...

 

Not guilty. And I have many friends, here.

[Guest Walt]

Not guilty. And I have many friends, here.

Bill-

 

Yes, I know that there are photographer's here too, but that's really not the gist of the forum. I used to write about wristwatches and this forum often reminds me of that: people buying expensive equipment, "the best." My experience there was that people bought such products in hopes that they would feel differently about themselves for owning the best. This is a lot of what luxury products are about. So, if many people show photographs here, it is to show what the equipment can do, that the equipment is the best and, by association, the owner is the best.

 

For the photographers like you and me and others, the forum has become a sometimes necessity for information because this camera is so problematic.

 

Walt

[andybarton]

Bill-

 

Yes, I know that there are photographer's here too, but that's really not the gist of the forum. I used to write about wristwatches and this forum often reminds me of that: people buying expensive equipment, "the best." My experience there was that people bought such products in hopes that they would feel differently about themselves for owning the best. This is a lot of what luxury products are about. So, if many people show photographs here, it is to show what the equipment can do, that the equipment is the best and, by association, the owner is the best.

 

For the photographers like you and me and others, the forum has become a sometimes necessity for information because this camera is so problematic.

 

Walt

 

You only have to look at the Photo sections of this forum to see what people are doing with their Leicas.

[ddp]

You only have to look at the Photo sections of this forum to see what people are doing with their Leicas.

 

Sadly many do not look there...or post for that matter.

[Guest tummydoc]

Bill-

 

Yes, I know that there are photographer's here too, but that's really not the gist of the forum. I used to write about wristwatches and this forum often reminds me of that: people buying expensive equipment, "the best." My experience there was that people bought such products in hopes that they would feel differently about themselves for owning the best. This is a lot of what luxury products are about. So, if many people show photographs here, it is to show what the equipment can do, that the equipment is the best and, by association, the owner is the best.

 

For the photographers like you and me and others, the forum has become a sometimes necessity for information because this camera is so problematic.

 

Walt

 

A most insightful and refreshingly candid assessment. Now, duck for cover

[JE]

Bill-

 

Yes, I know that there are photographer's here too, but that's really not the gist of the forum. I used to write about wristwatches and this forum often reminds me of that: people buying expensive equipment, "the best." My experience there was that people bought such products in hopes that they would feel differently about themselves for owning the best. This is a lot of what luxury products are about. So, if many people show photographs here, it is to show what the equipment can do, that the equipment is the best and, by association, the owner is the best.

 

For the photographers like you and me and others, the forum has become a sometimes necessity for information because this camera is so problematic.

 

Walt

 

That's an incredible amount of misunderstanding squeezed into a short post. Many of the photographers here(the LUF as a whole), at least those with whom I have become somewhat familiar, are more interested in the outcome than the fact that a Leica lens or body made it. Sure there are people more interested in the bling factor, but this forum is very much about learning about and learning how to appreciate photography. I don't think I've heard or picked up on any photographer who regularly posts in the photo section claiming to be the best simply because his finger pushes a Leica.

[wparsonsgisnet]

I actually prefer the feel and shutter sound of the M6/M4 line, but I prefer the image from the M8 to anything I was able to make before getting it.

 

For the 3 years I was using a D2, while waiting for the DigiM, I thought its 5MP were about equal to scanned 35mm negs from the film M's (Nikon 2700dpi neg scanner).

 

With the M8, I'm in the digital camp. ONLY because I stuffed money in the cookie jar for 2 years was I able to get an M8. It has made an enormous difference to my photography.

 

It may be that there are posters here who are most concerned with the Leica-ness of their cameras, but I would have said that this place is mostly full of photographers, many of whom I have to thank for their insights and generous help.

 

I admit that I feel very grateful to be using "a Leica," but not because it's a "Leica." I regard it as a fine tool and I rely on the "fine"-ness of the tool.

 

The pictures are all my fault.

[Guest Walt]

I actually prefer the feel and shutter sound of the M6/M4 line, but I prefer the image from the M8 to anything I was able to make before getting it.

 

For the 3 years I was using a D2, while waiting for the DigiM, I thought its 5MP were about equal to scanned 35mm negs from the film M's (Nikon 2700dpi neg scanner).

 

With the M8, I'm in the digital camp. ONLY because I stuffed money in the cookie jar for 2 years was I able to get an M8. It has made an enormous difference to my photography.

 

It may be that there are posters here who are most concerned with the Leica-ness of their cameras, but I would have said that this place is mostly full of photographers, many of whom I have to thank for their insights and generous help.

 

I admit that I feel very grateful to be using "a Leica," but not because it's a "Leica." I regard it as a fine tool and I rely on the "fine"-ness of the tool.

 

The pictures are all my fault.

Bill-

 

I would agree with your comparison to the film line and I also largely prefer digital. But I like digital, not because the image quality, but because the printing allows much more control. Tri-X 35mm was about what I wanted things to look like anyway. So yes, the M8 is digital and, for me, that's about all that I could say was exceptional about it.

 

I know there is interest in the "medium format" look of low ISO M8 files, but I'm personally not interested in that. If Leica can provide that too, that's fine. But if they are going to sacrifice the traditional capabilities of a Leica 35mm to accomplish that, then I say that they are off in pursuit of a new market for this camera, one that doesn't include me. The M8 doesn't make this sacrifice and I hope future cameras won't either.

 

I recently briefly used a friend's very inexpensive Nikon (a 40x or 49x at about US$500?). It is smaller, lighter, quieter and faster than the M8. It's execution is hugely more refined than that of the M8. If it weren't for the SLR-style viewing, I would get a few bodies like that (or five or six or 10) and two or three fixed focal length Nikon lenses and use that camera. It is functionally much closer to what a film Leica is than the M8 and I conjecture that, compared to an M8, it is very reliable. The image quality from this Nikon? Just fine.

 

On the M8 shutter release, it is hands down the worst I have experienced in 40 years of 35mm and 6x6 photography. Yes, one can learn it fairly well, but who ever heard of "learning" a shutter release. It's an incredible, important failure in this camera design and I hope the man who designed it is now cleaning the toilets at Leica headquarters.

 

This shutter release is, incidentally, precisely to the point of my original post about a concrete, rather than conceptual, interpretation of the Leica tradition. The concrete interpretation is that mechanical releases are traditional and that's what Leica folks will want. The conceptual interpretation is that a smooth, fast, unobtrusive release is traditional. Given the need to wake up the camera and lock exposure, an electronic release would have been in the Leica tradition. The current release is out no ones tradition, fortunately.

 

Walt

[wparsonsgisnet]

I would say the following:

 

1. I have been using my M8 since 12/13/06 -- with no important problems.

 

2. I have been using Leica glass since 1970 -- and it changed my life.

 

3. I don't use slr's so the R family isn't an option for me.

 

4. For Leica to produce this camera, with no prior experience in "computers" is amazing. I would say that they are getting way too much heat for the (expectable) problems that have occurred.

 

5. Their response has been positive: free filters, lens discounts, support. They even sponsor this website so they can get beaten up in public.

 

6. This is a unique company, not because they make an expensive product, but because they make the best lenses possible. The M8 mates well with the wondrous glass, in my experience.

 

7. The images I have printed over the last 9 months are so superior to anything I was able to produce before that it's amazing.

[jrc]

Bill-

 

I know there is interest in the "medium format" look of low ISO M8 files, but I'm personally not interested in that. Walt

 

I think this may be the heart of your problem with the Leica -- you're personally not much interested in what it can offer.

 

You say the Nikon files are just fine, and I agree -- but they're not as good. I have a D2x, Nikon's top of the line camera, and the files are fine -- but they're not as good. I also used to have a small Canon G7 as a pocket/tourist camera, and it's an absolutely brilliant camera, with capabilities that the Leica doesn't have. Except the files aren't as good.

 

The very essence of the Leica M line is that cameras are compact, and the files (or negs) are exceptional -- as good as anything available on any SLR, but without the SLR's size and flexibility. That's true with the M8. The small Nikons are not smaller than the Leica, although they are close, and they're lighter because they are made out of plastic. (Though some of that small size evaporates when you put a lens on them, because the lenses, even the primes, are larger than Leica's.) As for the shutter release, mine seems fine -- a little louder than an M7, but I don't care. You swant to expereiecne a really shabby release, pick up any of those small DSLRs and try them. Most have so much shutter lag that you can whistle a short tune between pushing the release and taking the picture. If you look on Digital Photography Review, you'll find that there is a specific comment on shutter release on about half the reviews; that's because the shutter releases are so bad.

 

IMHO, any DSLR camera that will produce files as good as an M8s, are about twice as big. And that's why some of us really like the Leica. I actually probably use the Nikon more, for the zooms and because it fends off water better (I shoot quite a bit from boats.) But, in return for those conveniences, I accept files that aren't as good.

 

JC

[Olsen]

Walt,

 

Your reaction is very typical at the many photo sites around the Net. Particularly after long 'high tech' discussions on expensive gear. We can all do it with a pin hole camera, we are told. Standing in a hamock. Sure. We are all supposed to feel guilty and ashamed of 'just being gear freaks'. Not real photographers.

 

I say; piss off!

 

We come together here to discuss what we have in common; some Leica gear.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wstotler]

We can all do it with a pin hole camera, we are told. Standing in a hamock.

This was laugh-out-loud funny and a great observation. It's be cheaper if it were true. (And not half as fun.) -Will