Is the ME ugly? - Page 3

Roger Hicks · 10-09-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by D.J.

Eh?
That's not what you wrote in AP this week.

"The Final Frame

The aesthetics of cameras transcend mere functionality, says Roger Hicks, which is why we should care what they look like"

OK, as a result of others' posts, I'm beginning to understand.

The question is, "Do you dislike the colour?", which I would have thought was a completely different question from "Is the camera ugly?" I mean, I recall a green Ferrari drophead with a yellow interior: a hideous colour combination, but still a very handsome car. THAT was why I didn't understand the question.

As for the colour of the M-E, I can't get excited about it. Anthracite/slate is fine by me. Some colours 'work' -- I like my olive drab Bessa R2 -- and some don't: who else remembers the gold-coloured Pentina?

Cheers,

R.

shadowgun · 10-09-2012

The question is still, is the camera UGLY?

jsrockit · 10-10-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by tekst

One thing I do like about it is the fact both black and chrome lenses would look good on it...

That's a good point.

robbeiflex · 10-10-2012

I like it. Both the colour scheme and the silver controls are to my liking, and it will look great with both silver and black lenses.

totifoto · 10-10-2012

I thought it looked kinda ugly until I saw one at work today. I think it would look better with a black shutter release button, shutter dial and flash shoe.

ramosa · 10-10-2012

Quite inconclusively, this survey shows that RFF members are somewhat inconclusive in regards to the looks of the new Leica ME. (Ha. Pretty much like someone suggested earlier in the thread.) Of 161 responses on the one Likert-like item, 28% responded "strongly disagree," with 32% indicating "disagree," 21% "agree," and 19% "strongly agree." Thus, almost 60% report that they think the ME is not ugly. Furthermore, with this convenience sample, the mean response was 2.32 (Standard Deviation=1.08), also suggesting the slight bias toward the camera being not ugly.

CK Dexter Haven · 10-10-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by rxmd

That's like saying Grace Kelly was butt-ugly when she painted her nails in the wrong colour.

+1 for "I don't understand what the fuss is about".

Uh, no.
It's not like this.
At all.

CK Dexter Haven · 10-10-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by ramosa

Quite inconclusively, this survey shows that RFF members are somewhat inconclusive in regards to the looks of the new Leica ME. (Ha. Pretty much like someone suggested earlier in the thread.) Of 161 responses on the one Likert-like item, 28% responded "strongly disagree," with 32% indicating "disagree," 21% "agree," and 19% "strongly agree." Thus, almost 60% report that they think the ME is not ugly. Furthermore, with this convenience sample, the mean response was 2.32 (Standard Deviation=1.08), also suggesting the slight bias toward the camera being not ugly.

The problem is, only 2.8% of people actually have empirically resolved Good Taste. So, the responses must be weighted toward that factor.

giellaleafapmu · 10-10-2012

Looks M-ish to me and much better than the panda nonsense of just few years ago.

GLF

ramosa · 10-10-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by CK Dexter Haven

The problem is, only 2.8% of people actually have empirically resolved Good Taste. So, the responses must be weighted toward that factor.

Love that. Indeed, quite inconclusive, as noted. Regardless, fun to roil the waters per ME looks. Now, if I could just figure out if I should upgrade from an M8 or not (which, perhaps ironically, has nothing to do with camera looks ... Instead all with image and process) ...

sebastel · 10-10-2012

i voted "strongly disagree", because i strongly disagree to the question.

not the camera can be ugly, or not ugly. it is only a camera!
it is the beholder's opinion of the camera being this or that. and isn't it idle and futile to discuss opinions?

well, then this forum is idle anyway, as it is mainly made of idle discussions of opinions.

yawn.
s.

umcelinho · 10-10-2012

I've seen some photos of the M-E apart from the official ones and noticed no cyan tint, just a darker gray M. I like it. I don't miss the preview lever as well.

slava · 10-11-2012

I really like the desing and colour of M-E but I'm really dissapointed in the lowres screen...

haempe · 10-11-2012

Well, ugly is a strong word...
I would prefer the M9P design.

leicashot · 10-11-2012

The M-E is a nice design, slightly more modern and something different without being too far removed from traditional design. I think it's fine but about $500-1000 overpriced. At $1500 below the new M and M9P, why would you? I do know that some dealers will be offering a special where they can buy the M-E with the Summicron 35/2 ASPH for about $7k, so not such a bad combo deal....for those not needing to shoot over ISO 640.

ramosa · 10-11-2012

7k for an ME and Cron 35asph: now that would be a good deal ....

djcphoto · 10-11-2012

Of course it's ugly....to those that can't afford it!

*that includes myself, btw*

froyd · 10-11-2012

I check this thread every day to really find out from the experts whether the camera is ugly or not. I hope we have a consensus soon because I'd like to see the matter resolved once and for all.

jtm6 · 10-11-2012

I saw one today in person. It is more of a neutral (no tint) dark grey. The color goes well with the red dot and without any lettering. Even the silver knobs look nice. I'd rather have an M9-P, but this looks special to me without being too far out there.

boomguy57 · 10-12-2012

Yes. How has a simple question begotten such a lengthy thread?

Pablito · 10-13-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowgun

The question is still, is the camera UGLY?

Yes, the color scheme is vulgar. Like when auto manufacturers try to doll up a cheap cars by putting gold or chrome accents on them. Vulgar! But nothing a can of spray paint wouldn't fix.

bwcolor · 10-13-2012

Most of us haven't seen the camera, so how can we vote? I guess that life is lived over the Internet. I think that a better question is why buy it? If you can pony up that much money, why not just save a bit more, or sell a few more items and get the 'M'?

gdi · 10-13-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by rxmd

That's like saying Grace Kelly was butt-ugly when she painted her nails in the wrong colour.

+1 for "I don't understand what the fuss is about".

More like she took colloidal silver and developed argyria.

Ronald M · 10-13-2012

Can`t vote as I have not seen one except on the net. It is ok I guess as long as it is not painted.

Anthracite on the R9 did not look anywhere close to this color.

Roger Hicks · 10-13-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pablito

Yes, the color scheme is vulgar. Like when auto manufacturers try to doll up a cheap cars by putting gold or chrome accents on them. Vulgar! But nothing a can of spray paint wouldn't fix.

How is slate grey more vulgar than black paint or chrome? I REALLY don't understand this. And, unlike many, I have seen the camera. Looks fine to me.

What next: is an olive drab M1 ugly? Or a Three Crowns IIIg? Grey USAF M2? MP Anthracite? De gustibus non disputandum.

As for those saying, "Why not spend a bit more on a...?" Well, that's easy to say if you're not planning on spending ANYTHING on a new Leica, but just standing on the sidelines. But if you're thinking about putting yoir hnd in your pocket, unless you're richer than most of us, a price differential of $1000 or more does give some pause for thought.

Cheers,

R.