2
Upper West Side, NYC, 2014 (cdn.masto.host)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/photography@fedia.io
18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Upper West Side, NYC, 2014.All the pixels, but not enough to cover a down payment on a small one bedroom, at flickr.com/photos/mattblaze/14#photography

Skyline of the Upper West Side of NYC along lower Central Park West, captured from a high vantage point. A storm is brewing.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago (15 children)

I have mixed feelings about the Leica M system. The lenses are of very high quality, and everything is small enough that I can travel (or hike) with a fairly complete kit when I'd otherwise not bring a camera at all. Most of my favorite "opportunistic" photos have been with a Leica.But everything is obscenely expensive. and while the small size is great, it's also a compromise. I usually wish I had my larger camera (with movements, etc) with me instead.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    @mattblaze when a man whose budget stretches to medium format digital backs tells you that your camera and lenses are too expensive, well!I do think that their niche is so very small, these days. Compact size can only go so far before the body is hard to hold and only so many people want to shoot without autofocus. I can only imagine how furious I’d be if I’d spent all that money and got a model with sensor rot.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago (11 children)

    The other thing that drives me nuts about Leica is their marketing, which makes you feel like you're buying fine jewelry rather than a useful camera system.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    @mattblaze I’m indifferent to the tone of their marketing, it does seem to encourage a portion of owners to be very quick to assert variations on “if one cares about photography, one owns an M.”The kit costing so much seems to add onto it; if I had a nickel for every M review that has insisted real photographers don’t need autofocus I might be able to afford one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    @rodgerd so much this. Leica kool-aid drinlers are insufferable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    @mattblaze I was given a good biography of Henri Cartier-Bresson five or so years back, and the difference between "how Cartier-Bresson is fetishised by a certain sort of rangefinder fan" and his actual life gave me whiplash.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    @mattblaze My experience is that Leica is slightly less marketing heavy and more useful in their "professional" optics product lines.Things like total stations, microscopes, etc. Leica Microsystems is all business - sure, they have flashy marketing brochures, but it's all centered around what the thing can do for you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    @mattblaze yeah I hate the culty, fashion-oriented branding as much as I like the cameras. I have one of the Voigtländer cameras Cosina made. I think they could have kept going and made a great alternative to Leica digital bodies at least.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago

    @thomasjwebb I've had good luck with most (non-ultrawide) M lenses on a Sony Alpha body (via an adapter). That's a bit bulkier, a lot cheaper, and you get (slow) autofocus. (My profile photo is a selfie make on a Sony with a Noctilux wide open - try that without autofocus!)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent