@mattblaze My first 35mm camera was a 1927 Leica, a family heirloom. I learned B&W photography with it. Pretty worn and well-used. But yeah, the price

@mattblaze I think they’re simply positioning themselves in the luxury market. Marketing psychology has shown brands can be very successful with a “If you have to ask, you can’t afford it” attitude.

@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.

@mattblaze@federate.social tbf they are bespoke, hand-made by little elves in Germany. Which is obscenely expensive… living wages and all

@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.

@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.