If You Don'T Own A Leica You Are Not A photographer
- Thread starter 1Ds
- Start date
- Status
sehsuan said:wah! so few in circulation only? :sweat:
anyway, i've learnt that holding a big lens sometimes makes me a clown. no link to Clown ah...
what are high class elderly gentlemen doing with Leica's in a kopitiam instead of a posh restaurant, anyway? :dunno:
:bsmilie:
1200mm less than 12, i read somewhere, two are own by a astro viewing company.
maybe the Ah peh was juz saying to the fren what he heard,
Ah peh :think: whispered,"u noe wat I've heard?"
Fren asked,"wat?" :what:
Ah peh,"If You Don'T Own A Leica You Are Not A photographer..... !" :nono:
LOL....juz a diff version.
but have to interpret his word very accurately, personally I'm not a juz a photographer, I'm an amatuer photographer.
Lotsa of pple here oso not juz photographer, some are professional photographers.
:blah: :blah: :blah:
Ah peh :think: whispered,"u noe wat I've heard?"
Fren asked,"wat?" :what:
Ah peh,"If You Don'T Own A Leica You Are Not A photographer..... !" :nono:
LOL....juz a diff version.
but have to interpret his word very accurately, personally I'm not a juz a photographer, I'm an amatuer photographer.
Lotsa of pple here oso not juz photographer, some are professional photographers.
:blah: :blah: :blah:
Wow, old thread still going on strong. Many strong opinions, but then how many of you have actually tried a leica lens on 35mm film to understand what the gentleman were REALLY trying to say, not literally that is.
Parchiao said:
'If you don't own a Leica You are not a photog' is way too much liao la! Not very healthy way! :nono:
But you are right, many people used to condemn something even without using it! That is the problem.
Leica when use it to take B&W, it seems to offer a better tonality than Japanese optics so thats way there are still many fine-arts photogs still using it. You got to see it to believe it.
Megadark said:
Can I use your hole ?? ;p Ermmm, your pin hole tat is.....
Back to the topic,
I have a friend who use Minolta, then change to nikon, then change again to leica. All due to influence of another friend. He stop at leica not because he know it's good I tink, but because he fell-out with this friend and there is no one to influence him anymore.
Same goes for the PDA he use, always up-grade because someone tell him so....Rich people they are....
vader said:Can I use your hole ?? ;p Ermmm, your pin hole tat is.....
Back to the topic,
I have a friend who use Minolta, then change to nikon, then change again to leica. All due to influence of another friend. He stop at leica not because he know it's good I tink, but because he fell-out with this friend and there is no one to influence him anymore.
Same goes for the PDA he use, always up-grade because someone tell him so....Rich people they are....
Can ask him to pass me the stuff he discarded?!
Leica is a terrific piece to own if one has the $$. Most importantly, it's the man behind the machine that matters. If one can only be a good photographer with a Leica, or for that matter, anyother brand names; then perhaps the true skill of the person is in question.
clive said:
This I beg to differ. So long as they still make the film, and you know how to process it...
even for digital cameras. If it is still usable... how can it get outdated ? It can only get unwanted.
Practicality is what you make of it, and not a demographic legality.
Ha ha ha the biggest joke of all, maybe Ah Pek don't own a Leica also. BTW he should also clarify which Leica M series or R series. You are not a "Photographer" if you don't own a Leica M series not the R series. In any case if you have a M series don't used it to take pictures it is only for show, usually people who carry one also carry a Casio to go along so as to take "real" pictures. Ha ha ha.
i own a leica projector. the red dot is much bigger than those on the leica cameras. so am i a photographer?
ah...well....i guess everyone would luv to try shooting with a leica if someone is willing to loan it out?
i think i would wanna try....just to really justify. :think:
why dont they bring thier bank passbook n compare whoS has the most money ??? this old mans r (how lan) only :thumbsd: nothing great about their photo .do agreed leica is differance but not better..JUst like car toyota carmy n mer 180 differance but when u sat into it cant ready tell ,but one thing can tell $$ difference alot...So what yr objective great picture or show OFF :blah:
Well.....I don't ignore them.....I ask them.....can show me some leica taken pics? well again.....they cannot show me leh..... :dunno: nothing to show leh.....I muz ask them out if I know them......we'll go shooting together....then see if they got pics to show me....problem is...maybe some of them also don't have film inside their leicas !!! Show-offs !! haha....!!! :devil:
Mmmmm, i offer some cliched comments :
1) A camera is a tool
2) Different brand/make of lenses offer different optical signature
3) The Leica attained celebrity status partly due to Magnum, and
their famous users: HCB, Robert Capa...
4) In a low-light, unobtrusive environment, there are very few competitors
mainly because (related to the Leica M mystique):
a. Leica is 35mm format and in that era (in the 1940-1970?),
cameras are much bigger and more intimidating.
Even a current SLR with flash is still bulkier/more visible than Leica M.
Admittedly, Minox and the current crop of slim digi-cam is so much
smaller than their 35mm brethen, the quality is not there yet (refer to b).
b. Leica M has very little shutter lag and better handholdability.
(Of course, this applies to other well-built rangefinders,
e.g. Hexar, Contax G)
c. Leica M has another strength in that its lens performed very well in
wide open aperture.
Using high ASA film (or B&W), big aperture and low shutter speed,
Leica M can capture intimate indoor picture with little disturbance
that very few cameras can.
d. Leica M is mechanical and was designed/made in Germany (then).
It is now manufactured in Canada.
But time has moved on, and people are less attached to mechanical workings.
E.g.1 a watch may cost $10k for its watch movement but
a $20 casio can tell time as well/ or even more accurately
than the immaculately machined, intricate gear, wheel, pinion, winding blah,
blah, blah....
E.g.2 A cheapo Kodak disposable camera can render a more realistic picture
than Cezanne's apple or Monet's morning on the Seine, but technology
advance cannot discount anything from the works of the masters
All in all, Leica M is a niche market, excels in a particularly narrow segment:
Low light hand held photography (no-flash and preferably B&W)
If you make a living in an aperture lower than F2.8, no flash, B&W,
paparazzi environment, who enjoys 8R or greater blowup, no zoom,
prefered wide angle to long focal length (preferably max at 100mm)
Leica M has very few competitors.
But I admit that owning a Leica does not immediately make you a photographer. Similarly, not owning a Leica does not degrade
you to a non-photographer.
1) A camera is a tool
2) Different brand/make of lenses offer different optical signature
3) The Leica attained celebrity status partly due to Magnum, and
their famous users: HCB, Robert Capa...
4) In a low-light, unobtrusive environment, there are very few competitors
mainly because (related to the Leica M mystique):
a. Leica is 35mm format and in that era (in the 1940-1970?),
cameras are much bigger and more intimidating.
Even a current SLR with flash is still bulkier/more visible than Leica M.
Admittedly, Minox and the current crop of slim digi-cam is so much
smaller than their 35mm brethen, the quality is not there yet (refer to b).
b. Leica M has very little shutter lag and better handholdability.
(Of course, this applies to other well-built rangefinders,
e.g. Hexar, Contax G)
c. Leica M has another strength in that its lens performed very well in
wide open aperture.
Using high ASA film (or B&W), big aperture and low shutter speed,
Leica M can capture intimate indoor picture with little disturbance
that very few cameras can.
d. Leica M is mechanical and was designed/made in Germany (then).
It is now manufactured in Canada.
But time has moved on, and people are less attached to mechanical workings.
E.g.1 a watch may cost $10k for its watch movement but
a $20 casio can tell time as well/ or even more accurately
than the immaculately machined, intricate gear, wheel, pinion, winding blah,
blah, blah....
E.g.2 A cheapo Kodak disposable camera can render a more realistic picture
than Cezanne's apple or Monet's morning on the Seine, but technology
advance cannot discount anything from the works of the masters
All in all, Leica M is a niche market, excels in a particularly narrow segment:
Low light hand held photography (no-flash and preferably B&W)
If you make a living in an aperture lower than F2.8, no flash, B&W,
paparazzi environment, who enjoys 8R or greater blowup, no zoom,
prefered wide angle to long focal length (preferably max at 100mm)
Leica M has very few competitors.
But I admit that owning a Leica does not immediately make you a photographer. Similarly, not owning a Leica does not degrade
you to a non-photographer.
- Status
Similar threads
