Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/12/31

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK
From: rcmphoto at yahoo.com (R. Clayton McKee)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 09:14:17 -0800 (PST)
References: <D9C01005-E718-47B4-B7DD-F25EA3716979@mac.com> <592833333.14716580.1356895625999.JavaMail.root@cds036> <CA+yJO1A+QxSzgW6PTb0fAqdd-Bfe4GqcJVNZhU7ENk=9zMM6PA@mail.gmail.com> <72E3BA90-2255-40F9-8D46-98DFC82A248B@gmail.com> <CAJ3Pgh4NDyw4MQoumRS5FgnVp9EMQCu=NSg8jaz-+XW0jLz+8w@mail.gmail.com>

I found myself nodding along with Adam now and again - as a businessman, 
he's sane.? The auto-everythings are MUCH easier and more profitable than 
the M's.? They give tolerable (commercially acceptable) results with much 
less time spent practicing and working at it...? 
By any rational standard, a 'professional' photographer in the modern sense 
goes that route.? It's easier to pay the rent and buy the groceries.? The 
Toyota Camery.? (Disclosure: I own several and pay the rent with them 
myself.? Beats hell out of a real job.) 

But then there are the irrationalists for whom photography or 
photojournalism isn't a profession (or even a job, necessarily), it's who we 
ARE.? 

And that's a completely different calculation, and a different market...

They build Ms for US, not the "profession."?? 


?
R. Clayton McKee
PhotoJournalist
from somewhere just south of somewhere else...


>________________________________
> From: Paul Roark <roark.paul at gmail.com>
>To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> 
>Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 10:42 AM
>Subject: Re: [Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK
> 
>As one who had/has a 5D2 and moved to the M9, I understand what Adam
>is saying.? I doubt Canon feels particularly threatened by the M9 for
>its main market.? However for those who are proficient in operating
>Leica rangefinders or for new Leica users like me who like to get
>medium if not large format performance from a relatively light,
>compact camera, the M9 simply blows the 5D2 out of the water.? At
>native ISO, that Canon sensor can't touch the M9's.? Nor can the Canon
>optics, and I have a boatload of "L" lenses.? But I do think he's
>right that the average shooter would prefer the Canon.? The average
>shooter in this group, however, is hardly average.
>
>Happy New Year LUGers.
>
>Paul
>www.PaulRoark.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>


Replies: Reply from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
Reply from ken at iisaka.com (Ken Iisaka) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
In reply to: Message from abridge at mac.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (TED GRANT) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
Message from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
Message from lluisripollquerol at gmail.com (Lluis Ripoll) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)
Message from roark.paul at gmail.com (Paul Roark) ([Leica] a "pro-hobbyist" evaluates an M9 . . . ICK)