Everythingis1 wrote:
It's because people are so emotionally invested in a brand that they take it so personally. They dig deep into the realm of abstractions in attempts to explain away what is a purely emotional foundation for their rationalization of ownership. I have no issues with Leica or its prices, but what I do take issue with is people using magical thinking to justify something instead of just being honest with themselves.
Nobody is convincing anyone that the tactile experience of using the camera is worth 10's of thousands of dollars and it isn't just your emotional attachment to the brand. That would be some weird grotesque fetish. ...Show more →
"No problem with Leica prices" – , ok. So it's just about your personal mission to debunk magical thinking? Whatever. You're just jelly, dude.
Attached is a photo showing a non-magical benefit of the M system. Have you ever held an M camera? They are insanely small (although dense). And it may be vanity, but one of these cameras will render me as discrete at dinner party, and the other will render me the official photographer
Everythingis1 wrote:
If you think the physical act of shooting a Leica is so unique and satisfying and irreplicable over all other cameras that it's worth many thousands of dollars in premium you are absolutely completely delusional.
The fact that you had to fabricate an entire post to try and "bait" me into calling something that is completely delusional what it is, as if that makes it proof that it is not, is some serious mental gymnastics. You're just like the other Leica users , you own it because of the brand name. You're not unique in why you own one, deal with it. Past delusional you're also a liar if you spout that the brand and aesthetic were not the pretext for you owning one in the first place, no matter what kind of "magical" reasons you end up coming up with after the fact. ...Show more →
I advise a bit caution here since Steve is super knowledgeable when it comes to camera stuff in general, and he certainly doesn't strike me as brand-addicted. As others might have misjudged you from your earlier posts, also don't judge other forum members upfront either. I think he just tried to give a reason why he is enjoying shooting with Leica - so did others here. Nothing wrong with this especially if it is profession or just hobby. Some spend money on a fancy motorcycles, cars etc (I don't! ) but this is simply life. You have your conviction about Leica brand etc - I can accept this. But you also need to accept other opinions since this whole thing is just subjective preference anyway.
Desmolicious wrote:
Here's where your wrong.. I'm lucky to have a cr@p tonne of gear. Film and digital. Fuji, Nikon, Olympus, Leica, Hasselblad etc etc.
What Leica brings to the table - for my taste - is the unique combination of providing exactly the bare minimum of what I want for my photographic process. Maybe not yours, most probably you enjoy all the stuff that cameras like my Nikon Z7 offers. And that is cool.
But I have next to zero interest in anything that is basically a light tight box, with a lens. And if I'm feeling saucy, a meter.
Leica brings that, but what they also bring is an unmatched feel to that process. The cameras make you want to use them, they make you want to go out and look for reasons to use them.
Perhaps you get that from your cameras. And that's cool. But then if you do, am I going to accuse you of having some grotesque fetishism? No. Because that frankly is a weird statement, and reflects on the person making the statement.
Superb design, and choice in construction is what Leica brings to the table. No-one else offers anything in that realm, and frankly that is why Leica can set their prices as they do.
If that bugs you, don't be mad at Leica. They are a business after all designed to turn a profit.
Be mad at the lack of competition. If Nikon, Canon, Sony or whoever stepped up onto that playing field, perhaps things would change. But it still would be very difficult because Leica stayed with their vision since the first M camera was released in the 1950s. You pick up an M3 from 1955, and an M10 from today, and instantly you know how they work, and the familiarity of the construction and handling is right there.
There's nothing fetishistic about that. That is the company remaining true to its vision, and that vision being successful in the fact that it has been embraced over the decades by its customers.
We pick the best tools for what we want to do. And the best tool is the one you want to use the most.
p.s I bought my Z7 to scan film. I actually much preferred my D850 that I traded it in for, and wish I hadn't done that. I found the D850 much more enjoyable to use as it handled better, and was so much better using my old Nikon manual focus lenses.
I actually also liked using the D850 as a camera, not just to scan film! ...Show more →
This reads like some sort of lifestyle advertisement. The camera makes you want to use it because you have an emotional attachment to it because of it's brand it's "legacy". The entire POST reads as fetishistic, how can this delusion be so strong? It's like a religion, people insisting God is real (Leica's are special and worth a huge premium) even though they can't prove it. They can't admit they just like the emotional comfort of BELIEVING God is real because admitting that leaves open the possibility that it's not objectively true.
highdesertmesa wrote:
"No problem with Leica prices" – , ok. So it's just about your personal mission to debunk magical thinking? Whatever. You're just jelly, dude.
Attached is a photo showing a non-magical benefit of the M system. Have you ever held an M camera? They are insanely small (although dense). And it may be vanity, but one of these cameras will render me as discrete at dinner party, and the other will render me the official photographer
Gee, I wonder why "You're Poor" "You've probably never used one" "You've probably never even held one" are the logical fallacies of choice for someone defending their Leica purchase?
Jun 23, 2021 at 04:39 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Everythingis1 wrote:
If you think the physical act of shooting a Leica is so unique and satisfying and irreplicable over all other cameras that it's worth many thousands of dollars in premium you are absolutely completely delusional.
The fact that you had to fabricate an entire post to try and "bait" me into calling something that is completely delusional what it is, as if that makes it proof that it is not, is some serious mental gymnastics. You're just like the other Leica users , you own it because of the brand name. You're not unique in why you own one, deal with it. Past delusional you're also a liar if you spout that the brand and aesthetic were not the pretext for you owning one in the first place, no matter what kind of "magical" reasons you end up coming up with after the fact. ...Show more →
I never said the physical act of shooting a Leica is so unique and satisfying and irreplaceable over all other cameras. I never said anything even close to that. I said I like rangefinder focussing. That you are interpreting my saying that I like rangefinder focussing as saying something I am not saying says a lot more about you than me. And I did not pay more for my Leica camera than my other cameras. Both my Sony camera and my Fuji camera were more expensive than my Leica camera and my Nikon camera was only $500 less. I don't need to justify the price I paid for my Leica camera because I didn't pay all that high of price for it and certainly not more than my other cameras. Oops, I guess some of your assumptions are a little off.
I didn't fabricate any post and I certainly was not trying to bait you. I am certainly not doing any mental gymnastics. Nor am I lying. Nor do I think in any way I am unique. You certainly doesn't hesitate throwing around a lot of accusations when you actually don't know me at all and don't have a clue about my motives or who I am. I know why I bought the camera and it isn't what you think. I own the camera because I like rangefinder focussing, and I think I am in a much better place to judge the reasons I bought the camera than you are. You are the one who is engaging in magical when you think you know other people's motives with zero information about them. Now the question is whether you are going to take responsibility and own up to this magical thinking--whether you are going to deal with it or not.
Everythingis1 wrote:
Gee, I wonder why "You're Poor" "You've probably never used one" "You've probably never even held one" are the logical fallacies of choice for someone defending their Leica purchase?
Lashing out just puts your insecurities on display for all to see.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I never said the physical act of shooting a Leica is so unique and satisfying and irreplaceable over all other cameras. I never said anything even close to that. I said I like rangefinder focussing. That you are interpreting my saying that I like rangefinder focussing as saying something I am not saying says a lot more about you than me. And I did not pay more for my Leica camera than my other cameras. Both my Sony camera and my Fuji camera were more expensive than my Leica camera and my Nikon camera was only $500 less. I don't need to justify the price I paid for my Leica camera because I didn't pay all that high of price for it and certainly not more than my other cameras. Oops, I guess some of your assumptions are a little off.
I didn't fabricate any post and I certainly was not trying to bait you. I am certainly not doing any mental gymnastics. Nor am I lying. Nor do I think in any way I am unique. You certainly doesn't hesitate throwing around a lot of accusations when you actually don't know me at all and don't have a clue about my motives or who I am. I know why I bought the camera and it isn't what you think. I own the camera because I like rangefinder focussing, and I think I am in a much better place to judge the reasons I bought the camera than you are. You are the one who is engaging in magical when you think you know other people's motives with zero information about them. Now the question is whether you are going to take responsibility and own up to this magical thinking--whether you are going to deal with it or not....Show more →
So range finder focusing is the only reason you own a Leica and it's worth as much as your other significantly more capable cameras? Nothing to do with the brand name or the aesthetic of the camera? I'm calling complete BS plain and simple. You're either lying or ignorant to what years of advertising did to your perception. If what you were saying were true you would be in such a statistical minority as to render it an outlier not even worth considering in the conversation. So what's my magical thinking? Are you really trying to tell me people are buying 10k Leica's because of the act of focusing using a rangefinder? Oh, thats right, you're different though so you don't need to be lumped in with the vast VAST majority of Leica users.
So why so responsive if my post clearly doesn't apply to you? Maybe... you're emotionally attached to a brand name?
Everythingis1 wrote:
If you think the physical act of shooting a Leica is so unique and satisfying and irreplicable over all other cameras that it's worth many thousands of dollars in premium you are absolutely completely delusional.
The fact that you had to fabricate an entire post to try and "bait" me into calling something that is completely delusional what it is, as if that makes it proof that it is not, is some serious mental gymnastics. You're just like the other Leica users , you own it because of the brand name. You're not unique in why you own one, deal with it. Past delusional you're also a liar if you spout that the brand and aesthetic were not the pretext for you owning one in the first place, no matter what kind of "magical" reasons you end up coming up with after the fact. ...Show more →
Please. Have you had the opportunity to learn how to shoot a Leica rangefinder? Not a shop try-out ,rather a 3-4 weeks +, mano a mano? If not, then I highly recommend, if you get the chance and photography is in your blood, AND are truly interested in what it's all about to use a rangefinder to create, then again, I highly recommend.
FWIW, if you want to carpet bomb an online Leica community do slog around the painful Leica Tax "we" have to pay is probably a good way to collect the emotional responses you write about. YES, the Leica Price is horrific. But there is a method to the madness for those willing to see.
Of course I also hate to pay for the latest Sony super tech in their cameras and lenses too. But as in life it is what it is. "we have to pay to play" But honestly too many ways to get around full retail for Leica or Sony...
LBJ2 wrote:
Please. Have you had the opportunity to learn how to shoot a Leica rangefinder? Not a shop try-out ,rather a 3-4 weeks +, mano a mano? If not, then I highly recommend, if you get the chance and photography is in your blood, AND are truly interested in what it's all about to use a rangefinder to create, then again, I highly recommend.
FWIW, if you want to carpet bomb an online Leica community do slog around the painful Leica Tax "we" have to pay is probably a good way to collect the emotional responses you write about. YES, the Leica Price is horrific. But there is a method to the madness for those willing to see.
Of course I also hate to pay for the latest Sony super tech in their cameras and lenses too. But as in life it is what it is. "we have to pay to play" But honestly too many ways to get around full retail for Leica or Sony......Show more →
"Method to the madness for those willing to see". That sounds an awful lot like a religion, and that is exactly what I'm talking about. It always has to be something intangible for some reason, not the simple truth that the branding itself is what's driving purchases.
Everythingis1 wrote:
"Method to the madness for those willing to see". That sounds an awful lot like a religion, and that is exactly what I'm talking about.
Everythingis1 wrote:
"Method to the madness for those willing to see". That sounds an awful lot like a religion, and that is exactly what I'm talking about. It always has to be something intangible for some reason, not the simple truth that the branding itself is what's driving purchases.
I think you made your point loud and clear. We get that you are definitely not a Leica fan and strongly believe their gear is not worth the price for what it provides. As you probably can already tell, many fellow members disagree, so let's just leave it at that.
After calling members disillusioned and accusing some of them of lying for no obvious reason, I think it's time for you to hit the breaks. -- If the name-calling and posts about this continue, they will be removed without further notice. Thank you.
We are a very friendly group here and my intention is to keep it this way.
LBJ2 wrote:
Fred, I'm all in for quickest, easiest way to get from point A to point B. If you are looking for interested parties to your offer, please count me in
I thought about this for a while and believe it may be the best solution. I am always hesitant to fragment the forum any further as we need high activity for a new board to succeed. The alternative board was super active in the past because it had Sony as the main actor. We were adapting all sort of lenses on Sony and therefore the "alternative" name made a lot of sense.
At that time, it was really the "alternative" to Canon and Nikon SLRs.
Now that Sony and Fuji have their own dedicated boards, most of the discussions here are about legacy lenses that can be adapted to Leica or compatible Leica lenses adapted to other cameras. Therefore calling it "Leica & Alternative Gear" makes more sense for our board today.
Everythingis1 wrote:
This reads like some sort of lifestyle advertisement. The camera makes you want to use it because you have an emotional attachment to it because of it's brand it's "legacy". The entire POST reads as fetishistic, how can this delusion be so strong? It's like a religion, people insisting God is real (Leica's are special and worth a huge premium) even though they can't prove it. They can't admit they just like the emotional comfort of BELIEVING God is real because admitting that leaves open the possibility that it's not objectively true.
I'm sorry you don't like the gear that you use.
Nothing sucks as much as buyer's remorse.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I thought about this for a while and believe it may be the best solution. I am always hesitant fragmenting the forum further as we need high activity for a new board to succeed. The alternative board was super active in the past because it had Sony as the main actor. We were adapting all sort of lenses on Sony and therefore the "alternative" name made a lot of sense.
At that time, it was really the "alternative" to Canon and Nikon SLRs.
Now that Sony and Fuji have their own dedicated boards, most of the discussions here are about legacy lenses that can be adapted to Leica or compatible Leica lenses adapted to other cameras. Therefore calling it "Leica & Alternative Gear" makes more sense for our board today.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I thought about this for a while and believe it may be the best solution. I am always hesitant to fragment the forum any further as we need high activity for a new board to succeed. The alternative board was super active in the past because it had Sony as the main actor. We were adapting all sort of lenses on Sony and therefore the "alternative" name made a lot of sense.
At that time, it was really the "alternative" to Canon and Nikon SLRs.
Now that Sony and Fuji have their own dedicated boards, most of the discussions here are about legacy lenses that can be adapted to Leica or compatible Leica lenses adapted to other cameras. Therefore calling it "Leica & Alternative Gear" makes more sense for our board today.
, ok. So it's just about your personal mission to debunk magical thinking? Whatever. You're just jelly, dude.
) but this is simply life. You have your conviction about Leica brand etc - I can accept this. But you also need to accept other opinions since this whole thing is just subjective preference anyway. 
