Quote Originally Posted by Lee L
The Leica marque pushes some hot buttons because of expense, the people who hoard them rather than shoot them, and because of the snotty behavior of some who own them. I could name several other brands some of whose owners fall into that last category. Both Canon and Nikon intimate in their advertizing that you're not a real photographer unless you use their equipment.

I took the initial post as a factual representation of why one might choose a Leica, with a bit of humor thrown in. It comes on the heels of remarks in other threads about why the Leicas are not worth the money (to some folks), and I interpret that as an attempt to start a neutral new thread instead of a flame war.
Please note the part I took liberty to put in Italics.

I looked at those "other threads" - I assume it is the recent ones that are being referred to - and I see that I, myself, may be the sole voice of financial restrictions being a thumbs down for Leica.

I thought long and hard about posting in this thread, writing what I am about to write. I really, sincerely hope it is taken as an explanation and further elaboration of my initial position - NOT a confrontational move, etc.

I resent the comparison of what many of us choose to buying "421 Holgas". And this is perhaps were the conflicts usually arise - assumption that not purchasing a Leica puts one in the category of an absolute moron who is basically cutting off his or her nose to spite his or her face.

It is simply a matter of the prices of this equipment being so astronomical that most either flat out can not afford it (myself in this category) and others are very hard pressed to justify it - a case of paying exponentially more for an incremental, and often very small, improvement.
I personally love Leicas of all shape and iteration - I am also a doctor certified Porschephile (can't afford one of those either), and I can spot a suit tailored on a certain street in London from across a room. I know and respect the value of these things - to me, they are worth every penny for their unfaltering devotion to excellence which exceeds anything in their field, even if by a small margin. There is a reason why these names are legends - and a big kudos to them for earning that status.

But tell me this: I can not afford a Leica of any sort - the closest I can come is an old Leica SLR body... but no lens. Please advise me: should I just quit? Should I give up photography? Or at least not embarrass myself with my meagre failures until my piggy bank allows me to buy a Leica and so it "properly"? Have I been a giant moron for running around with my Lubitel SLR, when it was the only camera I had, and attempting to make the best picture I could using what I had?

Also - tell me one more thing: lets say I can buy that Leica SLR body (which really is not to other SLR's what the Leica RF's are to their ilk, excellent though I am sure they are). Now lets say I have enough money to buy a 50mm f2 lens, but just barely, maybe if I skimp on gorceries. Would I be better off doing that, or using that money to buy an excellent, reliable SLR from (you insert brand here) along with three or four lenses that will allow me to take the picture that the 50mm, no matter how miraculous it is, simply couldn't? Am I still an idiot converting Holgas to Leicas?

Owning a Leica is a pleasure and a luxury - not a necessity. One day, I really hope I can have one of these legendary cameras - but it will only be, and I mean ONLY, after I have no other needs to assign that money to. And frankly, if you need to know that you are holding x thousands of dollars (not that anyone will actually admit to this) in your hands to "rediscover the joy of photgraphy" then... nah... I stop here.

(hopefully, a future Leica owner)