Mr. Puts' Thoughts

[bholmes@frii.com (Ben Holmes)]

He doesn't comment often and when he does it is usually some tech notes on a
lens that I don't own. This last post struck a chord with me that spawned
the following dribble.

I think he's right about the LUG having some potential "clout" whn it comes
to lobbying Leica Camera. LHSA, of which I know next to nothing, seems to be
more interested in what was that what is to be. This makes sense given their
name. I wonder how the LUG ranks in size when compared to other groups of
Leica buyers. I seem to recall quite a few folks here reporting purchase of
new gear.

As to the use of these cameras, he is correct again. These cameras (M's) are
designed with a certain type of photography in mind. How many Leica users
put their little treasures to the task for which they were built? Too few, I
suspect. I hear a constant roar about how fine the M is, how sharp the glass
is, how beautiful the glow, etc.. I see very little proof in the form of
work. Hans, Dan C., and a few others have put up images on the web - outside
of that there is little work being shown here for all of the passion which
surrounds these cameras. 

I challenge each of you to reflect on the work that you do produce with your
Leica's. Each of us is capable of making meaningful images, but when called
upon to justify using such expensive gear most wouldn't even consider that a
really fine picture would suffice as an answer. Instead, stories of
heritage, history and "Leica Lore" are offered up as if they are explanation
enough. First and foremost, photographers are communicators. Ask yourselves:
how long can the Leica legend remain believable without occasional,
astounding proof?

The End.

Regards,

Ben W. Holmes

Boulder, CO
USA

bholmes@frii.com