It certainly isn't an attempt to beautify. You should see my camera now, I would post a picture of it if I had a second digicam. There's tapoe not only over the logo, but all over the prism (the flash is taped shut, not that I ever fired it ir care for), on the sides, back and bottom. Even the Pentax logo below the lcd is taped. The three buttons on the side of the top lcd (green button, drive mode, flash mode) are also taped, but functional of course.
One advantage: A couple of months ago, the little rubber cover on the cable release socket broke. In order to avoid dust inside the camera, I just cut a little piece of tape from the bottom plate and used it to cover the socket... I like my taped camera, j On 9/4/05, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The snakeskin is at least an attempt toe beautify, as is the > customizing of cars. By any stretch of the imagination, a piece of tape > is not an enhancement. I just don't get it. But if other like it, > that's okay. However, I've seen some of the rationales on the Leica > list, and they are indeed quite silly. > Paul > On Sep 3, 2005, at 10:25 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > Oh, c'mon Paul ... people customize their cars and I know you don't > > find > > that pretentious or abhorrent. In the fifties and sixties mild > > customizing > > was quite acceptable, and that hasn't changed to this day. Rodders > > would > > remove extraneous chrome trim, nose and deck their cars, maybe French > > the > > headlights. Not a whole lot different than a small square of black > > tape > > over a bright red logo. So what ... > > > > Is it just when a Leica user tapes his or her camera that you find the > > practice so obnoxious? A lot of Leica users found the red dot to be so > > "abhorrent" that Leica came out with a black dot. Would you find the > > user > > of a black dot to be pretentious? Would you find the user of a black > > tape > > Olympus to be as pretentious? Is a taped Leica any more obnoxious than > > Cesar's snakeskin covered LX - a camera that has found champions on > > this > > list and which has caused Cesar to receive a few good natured jibes - > > but I > > don't hear anyone (at least not openly) even suggesting the Cesar's > > pretentious or obnoxious. Do you find Cesar to be pretentious and > > obnoxious, and his choice of camera covering to be abhorrent? > > > > Long live gaffer tape! > > > > > > Shel > > > > > >> [Original Message] > >> From: Paul Stenquist > > > >> I agree. A camera is certainly not less noticeable because the logo is > >> covered with tape. I would guess a big-rep pro who is not getting free > >> cameras might cover the logo in order not to provide free advertising > >> for the maker. But an uncelebrated user -- even a highly skilled user > >> -- is of no real promotional value to the manufacturer. Among some > >> Leica users the black-out practice seems to be a pretension of sorts. > >> It's a way of calling attention to the value of their camera. That > >> alone is enough to make the practice abhorrent to me. But that's just > >> me. > > > > > > -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com photoblog at http://photoblog.jbuhler.com
