Is Leica the Naim of Photography?

Posted by: Ardbeg10y on 13 June 2018

I bought a bigger house 3 years ago. That was the startingpoint of a journey in Hifi. I auditioned a Supernait, I liked the fact that any music I threw against it worked well. Even simple mp3's or Spotify via the ChromeCast Audio. Now, being a bit further on my way, I still enjoy the Supernait driving Ovators now, but also my 72/140 or the AV2+Nait 5 which is serving my TV. My brother has an humble UQ2 and that is gorgeous as well. Any Naim set I've heared did keep something of apparently a certain sound signature which I feel attracted to. It is just right and it makes me dipping my toe in different music too.

I have been taking pictures since I was a kid, I've always been in the Minolta / Sony world (I use a Sony A58 now), though I'm impressed by the details, I still feel that there is much to learn, but also to improve on the gear side.

Having that doubting / itchy feeling, I ended up in watching a youtube video by Thorsten Overgaard where he mentioned 'perceived sharpness'. He explained that the sharpness you perceived is not necessarily related to the megapixels (obviously, I knew that), but mostly realized by a good lens. And in his perception, Leica does that.

Going back to my Naim domain, my AV2 renders more details from audiofiles, but my Supernait is simply better. It portrays the music on an empty canvas - it feels.

So, in my simple perception, both Naim and Leica focus on actually having the analogue side of things right first, before even thinking about digital.

Both Naim and Leica seem to have iconic designs.

Both Naim and Leica seem to have rock solid build quality.

Is Leica the Naim of Photography, and should I really start collecting coins for lenses which start (!) at Euro 1200?

Posted on: 22 June 2018 by alainbil

Eloise posted:
Mr Fjeld posted:
Yes, the lack of functions is perhaps one of the best features with the M(essucher) camera. Few controls, no programs, no mirror and no menus to worry about.
I agree with the above and the M cameras as great and unique.

Leica also make very good "conventional" cameras if that's what you want. The SL is a pro mirrorless built like a tank and with very good auto focus lenses. The S is a medium format SLR but with a prohibitive cost. The Q full format is fabulous and has auto focus and the new CL with a reduced censor looks very very interesting indeed with interchangeable lens mount and adapters which means you can use a plethora of lenses; R-lenses, M, SL etc.
I disagree with this (above). The “conventional” cameras are where Leica fall down. They live on past glories and the “red dot” allows them to overprice their offerings.

I concur with you Eloise. I see no reason, but brand name, to buy an "affordable" Leica camera.

Posted on: 22 June 2018 by Bananahead

Christopher_M posted:
Bananahead posted:
What is the photography equivalent of PRaT ?
An interesting thought which I had never considered. Are you some kind of management consultant who drops in to organisations who throws a metaphorical stone into a pond and watches the ripples?!
Off the top of my head, it would include a fast lens in the golden hour.

I was wondering if, in Leica context, it might be Colour, Resolution and Pretentiousness.

Posted on: 22 June 2018 by Christopher_M

Christopher_M posted:
Bananahead posted:
What is the photography equivalent of PRaT ?
Off the top of my head, it would include a fast lens in the golden hour.

There's a superb portrait of one of the Windrush generation on the front of today's Guardian, as an example. It's of 92 year old Alford Gardner and was taken by Christopher Furlong of Getty.

Just the pure pleasure photographic PRaT, for me.

Posted on: 22 June 2018 by Christopher_M

^ Sorry, I've made a mistake. It's not by Christopher Furlong.

You can see it here, top right

https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian