I have just got back from a job in a nearby town,I was sent there to meet a writer and get some photo's for her book about the local fishing industry,she had been told to look out for me.When I arrived at the harbour I left my bag in the car and started shooting with just my M6 and 35mm lens.After about 10 minutes a woman came up to me and asked if I knew any of the locals,I said I didn't,but was her to photograph them.She looked at me and then at the little camera around my neck and said "oh right,I'm her to meet a photographer,but he's a professional,you haven't seen a guy with proper camera gear have you?"

I had to get my bag of 'proper' gear to prove I was the pro' she was meeting!

-- Greg Moore (greg1962@hotmail.com), January 19, 2002

Answers

How'd you know she was the right person--did she have her dictionary with her? :-)

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), January 19, 2002.

The Leica logo doean't impress everyone. I had a client ask me once if my "LEE-SEE-A" was a good camera. (I have an R8.) Hmmm. Maybe a phony "NIKON" sticker would help. :)

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), January 19, 2002.

So true. Of all the people I know (outside of other photographers) only one individual looked at my Leica and knew what it was. He's 86 and had one about 40 years ago. I laugh every time I read about someone who slaps black tape all over the lablels on their Leicas for "security". The only people who'd rob you just because of the Leica name are other photographers and senior citizens.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 19, 2002.

Greg,

Your story reminds me of the tale about the photographer who was told by a lady friend upon viewing his book, "Lovely photos. You must have an excellent camera." Seathing, he held his tongue.

Several weeks later, he was invited to a dinner party at her home. After dinner, he commented, "Lovely dinner. You must have excellent pots and pans."

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), January 19, 2002.

"The only people who'd rob you just because of the Leica name are other photographers and senior citizens."

So true. For the typical thief, a Canon Rebel with 28-200 zoom would be a far more attractive target.

Greg, if you want to look professional, you need a handheld meter! One with a big LCD readout showing several incomprehensible numbers is most impressive.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), January 19, 2002.

I remember yeas ago a guy discovered one of the famous (at the time) Leica photographers taking industrial pictures in a factory with his Leica mounted on a large tripod. When he was asked about it the photographer said he mounted his Leica on the tripod because if he just walked around the plant snapping pictures with a hand held camera the owners would think he wasn't professional and that anybody could take the same pictures. Cheers!

-- Don (wgpinc@yahoo.com), January 19, 2002.

Supposedly a person came backstage after a Heifetz concert and told Heifetz "Your violin sounded wonderful tonight!" Heifetz walked over to the case, opened it just a crack, stuck his ear up to the opening and said "That's strange--I don't hear a thing."

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), January 19, 2002.

A few years ago a friend of mine's daughter's wedding was in the planning stages. My friend's wife decided to hire a co-worker of hers who moonlighted (moonlit?) as a photographer. When her husband expressed some trepidations she retorted in her most condescending voice: "Don't worry, he has a *really good camera*" FFWD to the wedding, here comes the "pro" with a 1970's Minolta SLR--this was in '97 or'98!--with a 50mm lens, and a no-brand on-camera flash. FFWD to the wedding album and, well, lets just say his results were "commensurate with his experience" and that of whoever was running the machine at Wal-Mart that afternoon. My friend's wife was in tears. "I can't believe my co-worker lied to me!" she sobbed, "He swore he had a *really good camera*!"

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 19, 2002.

Hello Greg,On reading both your post and Jay's,I recall a wedding some 15 years ago to which my wife and myself were invited to.Last minute I grabbed the M4 and small 'Blitz for possible grab night shots.The hired professional was in a sweat at the reception.. his newly acquired,untested elecronic SLR had packed it in.I abandoned my dessert to help this nice chap by photographing his reception informals..saved by the "unprofessional"looking little Leica.Regards.

-- Sheridan Zantis (albada60@hotmail.com), January 19, 2002.

A professional is one who gets paid for thier photographs. Up to the point till you hand over the finished print to the buyer, the Leica photographer has total control over the photograph, and part of this is experiencing folks from all walks of life with sorted backgrounds (and educations).

-- Patrick Earnest (ephotopat@aol.com), January 19, 2002.

You know...I have the Hasselblad outfit, the large format outfit, and the Leica outfit. But the biggest complement I can get about my Leica gear is when someone comes to me and says something like "What kinda camera is that?" or "So is that a good camera or what?".

For all the good that a Leica is, for all the perfection that a Leica is, for all the mastery that a Leica is, when I am asked such a question, I honestly do not feel I even have to respond. That makes me so HAPPY! A Leica dosen't have anything to prove. A Canon or Nikon has everything to prove. A Leica is secure and know what it is! Its great!

So the next time someone asks "What kinda camera is that?" or "So is that a good camera or what?" simply say thats the nicest thing you could have said to me. A professional/artist (wether paid or not) has nothing to prove!

-- Rob Schopke (schopke@attbi.com), January 20, 2002.

That is so true! Even before I owned a Leica, I knew about them. There is a legacy of quality in Leica. I wanted one for its great picture taking ability, and I even thought they looked very professional. Visiting the fine arts library at the state college just a few blocks from where I live, I would look at books and scour for Leica-made pictures. When I saw an antique M3 for sale at the local pawnshop, I suspected that it would not be for sale for very long. So, I traded a Mamyia Press camera with three lenses for this "user" camera, but it came with a collapsable 50mm Sumaron, and a 35mm with an eye piece adapter, and I started taking pictures liked I had dreamed of doing in college.

-- Pat Earnest (ephotopat@aol.com), January 20, 2002.

Sounds a little familiar. Votes regarding the origin of Leica I got in the past 12 months from non-photographers:
3 Russian
1 Check Republic/Chechoslovakia
1 Poland
1 Swiss.

Now even people who just take a few snapshots during their holidays know for a fact that all 'good' cameras are made in Japan...

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), January 21, 2002.

Greg: this is one of the funniest Leica threads I've ever read, thanks for posting it. Marco.

-- Marco Hidalgo (marco_hidalgo@hotmail.com), January 21, 2002.

First this whole thread is great and oh so true!i did a fashion shoot for a magazine,"ANTIQUE"* M3 and two lenses,35 Summicron,90 Elmarit. Suffice to say the Editor,the Co-Ordinator and Stylist on seeing all this equipment,film unexposed right pocket,needed tranquilizers. The photos were great but they NEVER called me again... Now I sometimes take an Umbrella and spare flash and set it up at jobs.Its never used as is the almost empty aluminum case.Everybody feels better and more secure. *I am not an Antique,Wiseguy.I was built in 66 and purchased early 67. Rats! My owner is distraught,antique Sir!?

-- jason gold (leeu72@hotmail.com), January 23, 2002.

That's funny... I've had the opposite experience.

About two years ago in the French Quarter of New Orleans, my beat up M4 got so much attention from "admirers," I had to put it away a few times.

-- Thomas M. Nutter (tmnphotos@erols.com), January 23, 2002.

I suppose it's human psychology to assume photography is equipment or technology driven. They think an expensive camera contains some sort of technological wizardry that assures them the ability to take great pictures.

I think it begins because most of us started our experience in photography with cheap equipment that was only capable of mediocre pictures at best. And then we see others with more expensive gear taking sharper and more accurately exposed pictures. Therefore, we assume, that the more money we spent on equipment, the better our pictures will be.

And how do we judge equipment to be 'expensive'? By how impressive or imposing they look, like a N*k*n F5 decked out with a 80-200 f/2.8 zoom. They see an M6 with it's antique physique and demure form and conclude that it must be cheap and therefore not capable of anything remarkable.

-- Kelvin Leung (kleung@alumni.calpoly.edu), January 26, 2002.