Bye Bye Leica

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Anybody that isn't a total slave to Leica is likely to understand where he's coming from. It's always struck me that Matt is very level headed and not in the least bit a blinkered Leica fanboy despite his tag. He's just as interesting talking about Kiev or Zorki cameras as Leica equipment because he's not a camera snob.

[S Maclean]

7 minutes ago, darylgo said:

There's many folks here on these forums using Voigtlander lenses, I haven't used them myself but from all the posts and reviews I read they are not far behind Lieca in both optics and mechanics.  At one point I was thinking he is working with Voigtlander however he specifically states he is not.  He did qualify his remarks about the lens rendering saying his use is for monochrome and center resolution.   

That is correct.  He favors character lenses on the softer side.

 

As for CV lenses I can say in my experience the 75 1.5 the 35 1.2 and the 50 1. Are incredible. Simply incredible. The 50 beats the noctilux technically and on results and the 75 is a perfect portrait lens that makes light dissolve into the background.  The 35 has a little more CA but good contrast and a rendering similar to a 50 Lux but more creamy.

 

[Gobert]

Every human being has the right to make mistakes, even Mr. leica.

[elmars]

But I had Voigtländer lenses of older design and newer design. I no longer have them for various reasons. But those reasons do not include the fact that they are not good. On the contrary, in recent years Voigtländer has made a huge leap forward and is challenging Leica. This is quite serious competition. 

[jdlaing]

2 hours ago, Gobert said:

Every human being has the right to make mistakes, even Mr. leica.

For some it is not a right but a vocation. 😃

[Robert Blanko]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb S Maclean:

I have corresponded with Matt about a variety of things. He's a great guy. Pretty humble and always helpful.

On the subject: we all justify our Leica expenses because of the way they hold their value....the whole point of that is that we can always sell them for equal or more value when in need.  It seems a little stupid of us to then criticize someone for doing exactly that. 

A house of, for example, 400 g, needs a downpayment of 40 to 80 g’s.  That's not that many lenses, sadly.  Also, he is saying he needs the money to help with some other things, not that the lenses cover the total of the money needed.

Anyway, I find the criticism here extremely Petty. 

 

 

I'm sorry that my comment apparently could be understood the way you did. By no means I wanted to score off the well-appreciated Matt Osborne aka Mr. Leica. I really appreciate his well-balanced and result-driven reviews which are IMHO without fanboy bias.

But when I viewed his comment regarding the funds for a house from my personal perspective and considered that currently a serial house here in Munich ridiculously costs about or more than 100 NOCTILUXs M 1:0,95/50MM or 300 SUMMILUXs M 1:1,4/50MM ASPH, I could not help making this comment which I should have marked as sarcastic.

[Herr Barnack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, 250swb said:

Anybody that isn't a total slave to Leica is likely to understand where he's coming from. It's always struck me that Matt is very level headed and not in the least bit a blinkered Leica fanboy despite his tag. He's just as interesting talking about Kiev or Zorki cameras as Leica equipment because he's not a camera snob.

That's a lot of poop flinging.

Is that the brush with which you paint anyone who doesn't think the same as you and/or Mr. Leica?

Edited February 26, 2023 by Herr Barnack

[rramesh]

He's having what I would call a 'mid life identity crisis'. Hopefully he will get over it soon.

Edited February 27, 2023 by rramesh

[trickness]

If you want to make money on YouTube, a little sensationalism never hurts.

[hdmesa]

3 hours ago, rramesh said:

He's having what I would call a 'mid life identity crisis'. Hopefully he will get over it soon.

I thought midlife crisis meant buying Leica lenses 🙃

[SoarFM]

I have a few Voigtlanders. Really good stuff. 50mm 1.2 Aspherical is very nice, as well the 50 1.5 Heliar Classic when you want a softer look.

After years of churning in and out of various systems I finally did what I knew I had wanted to do for years. I went all in on the Leica M (now M11 and M10M) and a range of Leica lenses from 28-75. I'm not sure it'll be cheaper in the long run, but that's OK. Life is short.

[adan]

Realistically, of the 10 lenses he mentions overall, I only have one anyway (75mm f/1.5 Nokton).

So if I had ANY OF the other CV or Leica lenses he mentions, they'd be on the bubble to be sold. In fact I did get rid of a 35mm Summicron-ASPH last month, in favor of a hard-to-find 6-bit-updated 1983 Canadian Leitz 35mm Summicron IV that suddenly popped up on my radar.

It is interesting that one of Mr. Leica's preferences (for max. center resolution even at the cost of a little-lower corner resolution) is part of what I like about the late-Mandler 1980s lenses.  So the Nokton fits in nicely with my "new" 35IV, my 1970 50mm Mandler/Wetzlar 50mm f/2 III, and my 1983 21mm Elmarit.

 

[250swb]

14 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

That's a lot of poop flinging.

Is that the brush with which you paint anyone who doesn't think the same as you and/or Mr. Leica?

I didn't mention your name did I? 😉

It's perfectly evident people will pay $6000 for a Leica lens, quote MTF graphs until the cows come home, go weak at the knees over its corner to corner sharpness, and then because it's what you do with Leica 'glass' they shoot it wide open for the bokeh where there is no corner sharpness, or hand held at 1/8th second because tripods are for sissies. The irony of criticising Voigtlander lenses is entirely lost on them because they have the best lens in the world. And who judges a photo based on corner sharpness anyway?

[Chris W]

I'm still amazed people are over-reacting to the video, or pretending to over react.

The comment about being over 40 and still not owning a house is just a light hearted quip, based on him having spent the last ten years buying expensive cameras and lenses.

You would never sell a couple of £5000 Leica lenses and buy a house in London, BUT, you are required to have a decent deposit, based on which a bank will lend you the money to buy a house. Many people start with a deposit of £10,000.

If anyone had taken the trouble to watch his lens reviews, he's pretty balanced. He's not just chucking out accurate, sharp lenses in favour of soft character. Like anyone, he reviews the lenses level headedly, then concludes whether he will buy one or not.

He has raved about accurate and sharp lenses in the past, then concluded the lens is expensive and doesn't deliver the character that he personally likes. he doesn't give the lens a bad review because it doesn't match his personal criteria.

[9000 Kelvin]

Good luck with the new lenses Mr. Leica.
I found some videos in www in which some mor "influencer" switch to Voigtländer.
The gap of quality becomes less in their eyes.
No Problem I think.
For Leica the challenge to become more inovative.  (Lenses and camera und software....)
Or better in marketing.
James Bond D-Lux 😉

PENG
 

[intangiblethings]

To a degree, he uses his gear on the regular to actually earn a living. That often means putting your gear through its paces and subjecting it to wear and tear. 

I have a few M bodies and never ever considered getting any Leica glass cause I don't want to baby anything I own nor do I want to look at my gear as an investment. If you treat gear like something with resell value or to hold value, it'll directly influence how you use (or don't use) your gear in my opinion. 

Unless I get a great deal new, I lean into mint second-hand glass almost always. 

[SoarFM]

4 hours ago, intangiblethings said:

To a degree, he uses his gear on the regular to actually earn a living. That often means putting your gear through its paces and subjecting it to wear and tear. 

I have a few M bodies and never ever considered getting any Leica glass cause I don't want to baby anything I own nor do I want to look at my gear as an investment. If you treat gear like something with resell value or to hold value, it'll directly influence how you use (or don't use) your gear in my opinion. 

Unless I get a great deal new, I lean into mint second-hand glass almost always. 

Here’s a good rule of thumb. The value of the gear in your camera bag should not exceed the value of your car that you place it in.

The corollary to that is never own a car where a ding here and there from the parking lot drive you mad. Apply same principle to your cameras.

The above does not apply to collector cars or cameras—which I don’t have.

I also admit that if I take all my gear it will exceed the value of my car. Whether I have too much gear or too little car is the question.

[Herr Barnack]

7 hours ago, 250swb said:

I didn't mention your name did I? 😉

It's perfectly evident people will pay $6000 for a Leica lens, quote MTF graphs until the cows come home, go weak at the knees over its corner to corner sharpness, and then because it's what you do with Leica 'glass' they shoot it wide open for the bokeh where there is no corner sharpness, or hand held at 1/8th second because tripods are for sissies. The irony of criticising Voigtlander lenses is entirely lost on them because they have the best lens in the world. And who judges a photo based on corner sharpness anyway?

Your response has nothing to do with my question.  Which answers my question. 

Have a nice day.

[84bravo]

1 hour ago, SoarFM said:

Here’s a good rule of thumb. The value of the gear in your camera bag should not exceed the value of your car that you place it in.

The corollary to that is never own a car where a ding here and there from the parking lot drive you mad. Apply same principle to your cameras.

The above does not apply to collector cars or cameras—which I don’t have.

I also admit that if I take all my gear it will exceed the value of my car. Whether I have too much gear or too little car is the question.

I buy my cars new and on the economy end of models and run them until the wheels fall off. I buy my Leica camera gear used (generally speaking) and use them professionally. My current daily driver car is worth less than $1000. My daily working camera bag is worth about $40k +.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Herr Barnack]

3 hours ago, 84bravo said:

I buy my cars new and on the economy end of models and run them until the wheels fall off. I buy my Leica camera gear used (generally speaking) and use them professionally. My current daily driver car is worth less than $1000. My daily working camera bag is worth about $40k +.

Not unusual at all.  I have met more than a few serious photographers who have ratty old cars and a camera gear bag whose contents would make your checkbook burst into flames.

Quote

Here’s a good rule of thumb. The value of the gear in your camera bag should not exceed the value of your car that you place it in.

Way too restrictive.  A better rule of thumb would be "The value of the gear in your camera bag should not exceed the value of your private jet." 

If you don't have a private jet, all is good. 😊

Edited February 27, 2023 by Herr Barnack