Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › The New Yorker on Leica.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The New Yorker on Leica.

post #1 of 13
9/21/07 at 10:35pm
Thread Starter 
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...24fa_fact_lane

Anthony Lane on the Leica cult.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 13
9/22/07 at 5:43am
A very nice article. Thanks for the link.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 13
9/22/07 at 6:11pm
Fantastic.

Jon
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 13
9/22/07 at 8:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
Anthony Lane on the Leica cult.
Hold on, Homestyle... You read The New Yorker?
And you read Anthony Lane in The New Yorker?
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 13
9/23/07 at 1:43pm
Quote:
Whenever you buy a 35-mm. camera, you pay homage to Barnack, for it was his handheld invention that popularized the 24-mm.-by-36-mm. negative"”a perfect ratio of 2:3"”adapted from cine film. According to company lore, he held a strip of the new film between his hands and stretched his arms wide, the resulting length being just enough to contain thirty-six frames"”the standard number of images, ever since, on a roll of 35-mm. film. Well, maybe. Does this mean that, if Barnack had been more of an ape, we might have got forty?
Didn't know that - nice article, thx.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 13
9/23/07 at 3:57pm
I never got the whole lecia thing besides quality/ cool looks. then again i started on Canon's back when nikons seemingly dominated film SLR's.

Still the new lecia m8 is pretty cool but at 5k i cannot fathom picking it over the canon 5D. Does anyone have a m8? Seems when digitals took over Lecia fell far behind overall.

... Sometimes I wish digital never came about...
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 13
9/23/07 at 4:02pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post
Hold on, Homestyle... You read The New Yorker? And you read Anthony Lane in The New Yorker?
I window shop it for somethings interesting. Of course, I liked the insular stagnation of the Shawn years better.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 13
9/23/07 at 4:04pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serg View Post
I never got the whole lecia thing besides quality/ cool looks. then again i started on Canon's back when nikons seemingly dominated film SLR's.

Still the new lecia m8 is pretty cool but at 5k i cannot fathom picking it over the canon 5D. Does anyone have a m8? Seems when digitals took over Lecia fell far behind overall.

... Sometimes I wish digital never came about...

They're perfect cameras for stealth though of course, you could say that about a number of rangefinder cameras--Zeiss Contax; Nikon S-series.

But then Leica has been the only one making rangefinders since other firms abandoned the concept in the late '60s/'70s so I suppose people have naturally gravitated towards them as THE camera.

Their M-series--particularly the M3--however is justly lauded but I like the LTMs fine.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 13
9/23/07 at 8:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serg View Post
I never got the whole lecia thing besides quality/ cool looks. then again i started on Canon's back when nikons seemingly dominated film SLR's.

I wish I could afford an R9 with a Modul R (now discontinued) digital back, that way I could get the best of both worlds: a modern digital SLR (well, sans auto focus) coupled with a totally manual film camera and amazing lenses, and a fantastic build quality to boot.

Quote:
Still the new lecia m8 is pretty cool but at 5k i cannot fathom picking it over the canon 5D. Does anyone have a m8? Seems when digitals took over Lecia fell far behind overall.

Well, a Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III is $8K, so…

Quote:
... Sometimes I wish digital never came about...

Tell me about it.

Jon.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 13
9/23/07 at 9:49pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post
Hold on, Homestyle... You read The New Yorker?
And you read Anthony Lane in The New Yorker?

But, tangentially related, can you believe someone once called me "precocious" for criticizing the edition of The New Yorker they were reading? I mean, the chutzpah of that person, that recovering hippie with his inappropriate eyeglasses.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 13
9/24/07 at 5:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
But, tangentially related, can you believe someone once called me "precocious" for criticizing the edition of The New Yorker they were reading? I mean, the chutzpah of that person, that recovering hippie with his inappropriate eyeglasses.
How preposterous.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 13
9/24/07 at 6:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
But, tangentially related, can you believe someone once called me "precocious" for criticizing the edition of The New Yorker they were reading? I mean, the chutzpah of that person, that recovering hippie with his inappropriate eyeglasses.
The cheek of some people!
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 13
9/24/07 at 6:12am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post
How preposterous.

Never trust a man in faded Birkenstocks and Oakley-like frames that had outrageous beer bottle lenses; he clearly studied his mediocre magazine articles too much.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › The New Yorker on Leica.