Leica in the clag
Posted by: Derek Wright on 22 February 2005
AS quite a few of you are interested in Leica and Leitz - just news of their finacial plight
see
News
see
News
Posted on: 16 June 2005 by Johns Naim
Hmmm...
Tuan said:
Well, of course the opposite but equal approach/comment is that a Leica is NOT a Nikon camera.
Both the R & M series Leicas are not as versatile as the F or D series pro Nikons, cannot achieve similar results re getting the shot in virtually any photographic situation, have inferior metering, electronics, and a considerably less durable shutter.
One is a beautifully built camera, which is very nicely balanced, and ergonomicly laid out; designed primarily for advanced amateurs and enthusiasts. The Nikon F & D series pro cameras are also beautifully and consistently built, with superb balance and ergonomics, and are designed primarily as a professional camera for professionals. And that is also a difference - that the Leica cannot match, as it is not designed to be a professional camera....so yes, you cannot compare a Leica to a Nikon....just my 2 c worth to balance the equation....
Cheers...
John...
Tuan said:
quote:A Leica camera (I have M6 and R6.2) is NOT a Nikon camera. The joy of using a Leica camera cannot be reproduced with other cameras. The Leica way of taking picture (especially with the M- series needs to experience to understand). It is a joy to hold and use a Leica camera.....
Well, of course the opposite but equal approach/comment is that a Leica is NOT a Nikon camera.
Both the R & M series Leicas are not as versatile as the F or D series pro Nikons, cannot achieve similar results re getting the shot in virtually any photographic situation, have inferior metering, electronics, and a considerably less durable shutter.
One is a beautifully built camera, which is very nicely balanced, and ergonomicly laid out; designed primarily for advanced amateurs and enthusiasts. The Nikon F & D series pro cameras are also beautifully and consistently built, with superb balance and ergonomics, and are designed primarily as a professional camera for professionals. And that is also a difference - that the Leica cannot match, as it is not designed to be a professional camera....so yes, you cannot compare a Leica to a Nikon....just my 2 c worth to balance the equation....
Cheers...
John...
Posted on: 16 June 2005 by Joe Petrik
Posted on: 17 June 2005 by Rockingdoc
quote:Originally posted by Roy T:
And the winner of this year's Prince Albert award for the person who in the judge's view combined knowledge of photography and male jewelry is . . . . . . ?
Will that include fitting please?
Posted on: 17 June 2005 by Chris Kelly
First, a declaration of interest. I have 2 M7s (.58 and .85 v/fs, for those who care), a Leica R9 and a Leica Digilux2. I also have a Canon 1DMk11.
If the Leicas are just jewellry, I really ought to wear them more! To be honest, in the circles in which I move very few people recognise the difference between one camera brand and another. I get plenty of "the flash didn't go off" when I use an M7 with the Noctilux but otherwise nobody either knows or cares. I select a camera to use based on the subject, the situation and, frankly, my mood.
If you don't "get" the Leica thing, which is to me a certain look to the images and a certain shooting style, then use whatever works best for you. But on the Naim forum, to slag off Leica users is slightly pot and black kettle territory, imho.
The biggest boon of the digital vs film thing is the ability to double check instantly that I have captured what I intended. Otherwise, I get my film processed and the negs scanned and returned with a CD from my traditional local photo retailer.
If the Leicas are just jewellry, I really ought to wear them more! To be honest, in the circles in which I move very few people recognise the difference between one camera brand and another. I get plenty of "the flash didn't go off" when I use an M7 with the Noctilux but otherwise nobody either knows or cares. I select a camera to use based on the subject, the situation and, frankly, my mood.
If you don't "get" the Leica thing, which is to me a certain look to the images and a certain shooting style, then use whatever works best for you. But on the Naim forum, to slag off Leica users is slightly pot and black kettle territory, imho.
The biggest boon of the digital vs film thing is the ability to double check instantly that I have captured what I intended. Otherwise, I get my film processed and the negs scanned and returned with a CD from my traditional local photo retailer.
Posted on: 17 June 2005 by Berlin Fritz
They look great I always find on a freshly scrubbed bare hardwood dining table ! and as my mate Dave's bird always say's "you can have the very bestest bigboys toys in the world, but without that silly lickle thing called talent they're simply useless, but beautiful objects" innit :
Posted on: 17 June 2005 by Rockingdoc
Well that shows how little you know Fritz. Next, you'll be saying that high-end Hi-Fi isn't a proper hobby at all, and just consumerism gone mad.
Posted on: 17 June 2005 by Berlin Fritz
You're entitled as always to your opinion, and so is my mate Daves girl, I was referring to photograhy high end actually, but it's all a larf innit, if yer can afford it.
Fritz Von People say to me why have you got such lovely guitars if yer cannie even tune the buggers ? Fair point innit
Fritz Von People say to me why have you got such lovely guitars if yer cannie even tune the buggers ? Fair point innit
Posted on: 17 June 2005 by KenM
I've used, and I stil have quite a number of film cameras fromm the last 40 or so years. Even a plate camera. I can't bring myself to sell them for (relative) peanuts, so I've put them in a cabinet so that at least, they can give me some pleasure.
Meanwhile, my photography is all done with digital.
I can't understand people who claim that lots and lots more megapixels are needed before digital can compare with film. From 35mm, I could sometimes enlarge to 20"x16"b ut only using prime (non-telephoto) lenses. My 3Mp digital gives me good A4, so the current 8Mp models, and digital SLR's with prime lenses are probably not too far away.
Meanwhile, my photography is all done with digital.
I can't understand people who claim that lots and lots more megapixels are needed before digital can compare with film. From 35mm, I could sometimes enlarge to 20"x16"b ut only using prime (non-telephoto) lenses. My 3Mp digital gives me good A4, so the current 8Mp models, and digital SLR's with prime lenses are probably not too far away.
Posted on: 17 June 2005 by Berlin Fritz
Neither can I; believe it or not, but that's another matter entirely, innit
Posted on: 18 June 2005 by Martin D
Posted on: 11 November 2005 by Martin D
The Leica Camera Group, Solms, has closed the first half year of fiscal 2005/2006 (FY end March 31) with sales growing by 6.7 % on the previous year period, to Euro 48.0 million. The largest sales growth was recorded by the binoculars, scopes and rangefinders of the Leica sports optics division, which increased by 34.4 % to Euro 17.7 million. The main driving force behind this positive development were the LEICA GEOVID BRF high performance binoculars with their integrated laser rangefinder. The integration of digital technology into the existing product range was also decisive for the 30.5 % growth experienced in the Leica system cameras division, which posted sales of Euro 16.6 million. The delivery of the LEICA DIGITAL-MODUL-R had a favourable effect on the sales of this division. The module is a globally unique digital complement to existing 35mm SLR cameras, as well as an example of the combination of classic Leica values and useful system complements. The demand for LEICA DIGITAL-MODUL-R will continue to exceed the Company’s manufacturing capacities. In addition, the analogue reportage cameras and lenses of the Leica rangefinder system experienced a slightly positive development.
Posted on: 12 November 2005 by John Bailey
Splendid. Roll on the digital M.
Posted on: 13 November 2005 by Martin D
me too