robert_in_ca wrote:
I think lens/body communication matters, and L-Mount does allow manufacturers to optimize their own lenses and bodies. But I don’t think it’s accurate to say Leica lenses have a Leica focusing algorithm that only works properly on Leica bodies. The AF system is mostly body-side, and Panasonic officially supports Leica SL lenses on the S1RII family with AF modes. So unless there’s a specific tested lens/body combo showing better hit rates on the SL3-P, I wouldn’t use that as the main justification for the Leica price difference.
My understanding is that they have two different sets of focusing algorithm's ... that's not to say "only works properly", rather optimized to function differently. Kinda that "snap" into place vs. "wobble" into place type of thing. Again, I can't speak to it, since I've not yet owned the SL APO series glass on my SL bodies. Since my AF needs are few and I like to shoot my M lenses on the SL ... I have yet to invest in the SL APO glass. Just an awareness of a "potential" difference for consideration. Pondering what other small diff's (i.e. user experience, etc.) might be in play, as well.
It wasn’t directed at anyone in particular, it’s just something I see nearly every day in every corner of the internet and largely what this thread turned into.
OwlsEyes wrote:
I'm assuming that this is directed at me, as I'm the one suggesting that the money spent to give gear away results in a disingenuous analysis of the gear. Good luck on your YouTube endeavors, but know that most experienced people in the media are seeing declining income. I've been a part of the production side on the back end... editing work and filming for others, I certainly know the time it takes. For most, it is one income stream... a tiny income stream, but seeing people watch the creator's video and comment on a video offers a great ego/dopamine boost that can be borderline addictive.
There remains a few people in the YouTube photo business that have my respect... for whatever that's worth, but there are many who don't.
There are no sour grapes on my end... I am just saying, buyer beware.
Now, I will gracefully bow out of this part of the discussion and let you have the last word.
bruce
Nobody is forcing Leica on anyone. It’s just a brand. Years ago companies reached people through magazine articles, workshops, and lectures. Today a lot of that has simply shifted to YouTube. That’s the reality of the current media landscape, and it isn’t going away. IMO
Companies are going to market where people are paying attention. That’s capitalism. It isn’t perfect, but it’s better than the alternatives.
If someone doesn’t like influencer marketing, they don’t have to watch it or buy the product. We used to say to not patronize that business.
Surfnsun wrote:
Nobody is forcing Leica on anyone. It’s just a brand. Years ago companies reached people through magazine articles, workshops, and lectures. Today a lot of that has simply shifted to YouTube. That’s the reality of the current media landscape, and it isn’t going away. IMO
Companies are going to market where people are paying attention. That’s capitalism. It isn’t perfect, but it’s better than the alternatives.
If someone doesn’t like influencer marketing, they don’t have to watch it or buy the product. We used to say to not patronize that business.
I think the criticism isn't so much aimed at Leica for marketing their stuff in a particular way or via particular channels, but at the fact that it's hard to know what to think of influencers. At least old style media companies had a brand to uphold over long time frames and getting into the business required real commitment. Now, anyone can start talking about whatever they want to talk about and there's is absolutely no checkpoint between that person and the viewer, no editors, no owners.
On Leica, let's just say I think Leica should pay perpetual royalties to the estate of Henri Cartier Bresson. If he and some of his buddies hadn't used Leica at a time when magazines became a thing, they'd be just another brand with a funny-looking camera
johnvanr wrote:
I think the criticism isn't so much aimed at Leica for marketing their stuff in a particular way or via particular channels, but at the fact that it's hard to know what to think of influencers. At least old style media companies had a brand to uphold over long time frames and getting into the business required real commitment. Now, anyone can start talking about whatever they want to talk about and there's is absolutely no checkpoint between that person and the viewer, no editors, no owners.
On Leica, let's just say I think Leica should pay perpetual royalties to the estate of Henri Cartier Bresson. If he and some of his buddies hadn't used Leica at a time when magazines became a thing, they'd be just another brand with a funny-looking camera ...Show more →
johnvanr wrote:
I think the criticism isn't so much aimed at Leica for marketing their stuff in a particular way or via particular channels, but at the fact that it's hard to know what to think of influencers. At least old style media companies had a brand to uphold over long time frames and getting into the business required real commitment. Now, anyone can start talking about whatever they want to talk about and there's is absolutely no checkpoint between that person and the viewer, no editors, no owners.
On Leica, let's just say I think Leica should pay perpetual royalties to the estate of Henri Cartier Bresson. If he and some of his buddies hadn't used Leica at a time when magazines became a thing, they'd be just another brand with a funny-looking camera ...Show more →
