Kater Karlo: ... and for an exhibition, you can take a photograph from martin liebscher as audience...http://www.martinliebscher.com/familie/royaltheatre.htm
That'd be the perfect complement indeed.
Johannes Zander: And what did he play?
Now that I come to think of it, it's a shame Aram Katchaturian never discovered the kazoo. Can you imagine how much broader the "Sabre Dance" would sound? It would add a further layer of interestingness to it.
I am aware the kazoo is regarded by many as a silly instrument, but there are wonderful compositions for it. I will never forget a concert by the Boston Symphony Orchestra (directed by the late, magisterial L. O. Yewlott) of A. Fuqua Soll's "Kazoo Concert no. 32", with Ms Debbie Lee Tate as soloist. It brought tears to my eyes. Especially the Adagio: it was so soulful, so introspective. One of my dearest and most enduring musical memories.Of couse there are more prestigious instruments, like harmonica and banjo, but the kazoo is able to convey the deepest emotions. Some bigoted so-called specialists may despise it, but there's definitely a future for the kazoo in orchestral works. If Shostakovitch were alive today, I have no doubt he'd wholeheartedly endorse it.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: What? No wood grip jokes? C'mon, people, don't let me down.
I will never let you down, Carl.
What? No wood grip jokes? C'mon, people, don't let me down.
paul simon king: I guess it's quite funny that some voted that they had it or already own itSilly but amusing nonetheless
helmut weber: A stupid tool for edonists! Not a camera!
darngooddesign: reading Helmut's comment 'a contrario', I assume it would be something like a smart toy for suffering people...
Mssimo: Does it use the new or old style Olympus EVF?
Actually I prefer SLR viewfinders over rangefinders. Yet some enjoy the naturalness of a rangefinder. I can't criticize them, though I understand what they mean everytime I peep into a Leica M viewfinder. The nice thing about photography is that it's a broad church in which nobody has the right to impose their views over everybody else - even if some want to evangelize the rest of us over convenience and modernity.
"35 hours of shooting over the course of 15 days just to capture. A further two months were required in post-production to stitch the images together, creating a 46 terabyte finished product".All this to produce a deeply uninteresting picture.
Brendon, what made you assume anyone is afraid of technology?The telemetric rangefinder is by its own right a technological prowess. It's not like all technology has to be based on electronics.And yes - I still find it ludicrous that people should want to buy an expensive camera with such a sophisticated viewing system and use it with something that is a digital rendering of the subjects. I admit the EVF may be handy in some situations - but hey!, this camera has live view.
princecody: The 246 shouldn't be more than $3,000 in reality.
Prince, as someone said before, Zeiss lenses are not that inexpensive. And I didn't say M bodies are built in Portugal: they're *assembled* in Portugal. The bodyshells and components are made in Germany then put together by hand in Vila Nova de Famalicão, Portugal. Which is not really that far from Germany - a mere 4000 km or so. It's not like they're made in China.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal
You could at least have spelled 'hedonists' correctly.
Prince, you are wrong. All M bodies are made in Germany and manually assembled in Portugal by highly skilled workers. The process of selecting glass for the lenses is in itself a high-cost one, let alone all the polishing the elements have to go through. QC complies to the highest possible standards of the photography industry. Add to it the use of materials such as solid brass and sapphire glass. The sensors are outsourced from a small belgian company named CMOSIS. Assembly lines are completely out of question when it comes to the M's. As production rates are fairly low, it all costs a lot of money. Even with the low taxes and under-EU average salaries paid in Portugal, producing a Leica M will always be costly - hence the high prices. In the end you'll have a high quality product which purchase many photographers regard as the accomplishment of a lifetime.
This camera is for those who used to shoot with a Leica M6 loaded with Kodak Tri-X and made the switch to digital.That is the ethos of the M Monochrom. If you fail to understand this, you'll miss the whole point of this camera and surely it is not for you.Having said that, I agree with what tinternaut wrote below about the camera's lifespan. Whereas the M6 was a mechanical camera build to last forever, the M Monochrom is a computer, albeit a luxurious and superbly well built one. I'm just not sure anyone will inherit one of these cameras. (Unless, of course, its owner happens to die in the next two or three years...) They're as prone to obsolescence as any other digital camera.
Sorry, Massimo, I fail to see your point. That's probably my fault, but I really can't see what a monkey taking pictures with a camera previously set by a photographer has to do with Leicas and EVF's. You seem to be in the same state of confusion as Anders.
Anders, I'm sorry but your reply doesn't make any sense. Were you trying to say something?
I wonder how Robert Capa, Cartier-Bresson, W. Eugene Smith, René Burri, Mary Ellen Mark and all that gang managed to get any decent photographs without an EVF on their Leicas...
justmeMN: No red dot, no Leica logo, no sale. :-) The purpose of buying a Leica is to show off the fact that you have an expensive camera. :-)
Starwolfy, those ladies will be like:Lady - Oh, what a loooooovely camera. Can you take a selfie with me?You - No, sorry, you're very beautiful and all that, but this is too serious a camera for selfies.Lady looks at you as if you'd escaped from a madhouse and walks away.Sad but true.
Buying a rangefinder camera and sticking an electronic viewfinder on it is ludicrous.