It's cute, but the attitude described permeates through all brands. Leica's an easy target because they require a healthier budget, but there are loyalists for every brand who would say roughly the same thing. It's a bit of a cheap shot to brand it as though it was unique to Leica.
The Leica man rarely takes his own pictures. He has others to bother with that for him if he is on holiday. If the Leica man requires art, he has it purchased for him.
I'm not a Leica owner, nor do I imagine I would be. It doesn't match my photographic habits. In just about anything you can find a Leica "equivalent". A brand that creates its own value through a combination of quality of construction/production and created mythology. It's a brand strategy and I don't fault it. I'm less tolerant of the brand consumers who amplify that myth. It reminds me of another lifelong hobby of mine, flyfishing. I can't tell you the number of times I ran into "branded" fisherman who needed to tell me how awesome their gear and hence fishing prowess was as I quietly out fished them. It's not the gear that catches the fish, it's the person who knows how to use it. Same in photography, its not the camera its the person whose eye sees the image. When I look at an image I don't care whether it was taken with a Leica or Sony or iPhone. But, start to tell me how the image couldn't have happened without the micro contrast that only Leica has mastered and you'll lose my attention pretty quickly. At the same time, I didn't really care for Ken Rockwell's little essay. It's too easy and honestly sounds envious that he doesn't have the "Leica Man's Lifestyle". And, let's be honest here, Leica isn't the only brand that has its zealous fans. How many of us remember the Nikon suburban street shooters modeling themselves after combat field reporters?
The greatest lesson I ever learned about photographers and equipment was when I discovered that a good portion of Weston's most important photographs came at a time when he was nearly indigent and couldn't afford anything close to the best equipment of the day. Make a good image. I don't care what you used to do it.
Kevner wrote:
I'm not a Leica owner, nor do I imagine I would be. It doesn't match my photographic habits. In just about anything you can find a Leica "equivalent". A brand that creates its own value through a combination of quality of construction/production and created mythology. It's a brand strategy and I don't fault it. I'm less tolerant of the brand consumers who amplify that myth. It reminds me of another lifelong hobby of mine, flyfishing. I can't tell you the number of times I ran into "branded" fisherman who needed to tell me how awesome their gear and hence fishing prowess was as I quietly out fished them. It's not the gear that catches the fish, it's the person who knows how to use it. Same in photography, its not the camera its the person whose eye sees the image. When I look at an image I don't care whether it was taken with a Leica or Sony or iPhone. But, start to tell me how the image couldn't have happened without the micro contrast that only Leica has mastered and you'll lose my attention pretty quickly. At the same time, I didn't really care for Ken Rockwell's little essay. It's too easy and honestly sounds envious that he doesn't have the "Leica Man's Lifestyle". And, let's be honest here, Leica isn't the only brand that has its zealous fans. How many of us remember the Nikon suburban street shooters modeling themselves after combat field reporters?
The greatest lesson I ever learned about photographers and equipment was when I discovered that a good portion of Weston's most important photographs came at a time when he was nearly indigent and couldn't afford anything close to the best equipment of the day. Make a good image. I don't care what you used to do it....Show more →
I would argue that Rockwell does have the Leicaman's lifestyle and this was a confession piece. His writing comes across like someone who is thoroughly self-absorbed. I used to read his reviews all the time, especially when I shot Nikon FX and DX, but having seen too many of his hyper-saturated images, I quickly realized he's all about gear, and not so much about photography. Whether I like his images or not, I will give him credit for showing them, and he does manage to compile a lot of gear information.
That said, this thread is very troll-centric like all the "why do people buy Leica" threads.
As I stated here on FM some time before - Leica users don't fall just into one group, there are from my experience at least four very different user groups present:
1. The collector who rarely actually uses but sees Leica gear as some kind of investment and enjoyment to have. It's treated like a valuable coin, stamp, or wine collection. Intersects with vintage Leica gear collector group.
2. The Professional who can deduct Leica prices from income tax and makes revenue with the taken photos.
3. The Hobbyist: uses the owned Leica gear - in this group itself is a wide range of users how much they are willing to spend for the hobby, purchasing new and/or old, which medium (film or digital) is preferred etc etc.
4. The Influencer: I can see some remarks stated in the cited article often fitting here - some are Leica freelancers and work directly or indirectly for the company by showcasing Leica products but often not vesting much time on a single item to make use of. Some do it just to get Leica marketing items and be able to test gear for them.
