No, Eric Kim, Leica is not for losers — it’s for photographers who aspire
Aug 28, 2024
Adam Insights
Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, concerts, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.
Share:
Eric Kim has been a significant voice in the photography community for years, offering insights and critiques that have sparked both admiration and debate. Recently, however, his article titled “LEICA IS FOR LOOOOOSERS!” takes a particularly critical stance against Leica cameras, dismissing them as tools for insecure photographers who use them more for status than for serious photography. While Kim’s points are provocative, I believe they warrant a thorough examination—and, in many cases, a strong counterargument based on my own experience and perspective. Read the Full Article by Eric Kim here.
I want to make it clear that I hold a great deal of respect for Eric Kim. Over the years, I’ve followed many of his Leica use videos and content, finding valuable insights in his approach to street photography. His reasons for shooting in JPEG, for instance, have resonated with me, particularly his emphasis on simplifying the photographic process and focusing on composition and timing rather than getting bogged down in post-processing. While I may disagree with his recent stance on Leica, I still appreciate the contributions he’s made to the photography community and the thoughtful discussions his work continues to inspire.
“LEICA IS (definitely not) FOR LOOOOOSERS!”
Kim opens his article with a bold statement, “LEICA IS FOR LOOOOOSERS!” He asserts that Leica cameras are akin to luxury items like the Porsche 911, appealing primarily to insecure individuals who are more concerned with appearances than substance. Kim writes, “What I have personally discovered is that anybody who drives a Porsche 911 car, they are all insecure Shorty guys, who don’t really really have anything else going for them.”
In my opinion, this analogy is both flawed and dismissive. While it’s true that some individuals may use Leica cameras as status symbols, this is far from the norm among serious photographers. Leica has built its reputation over decades as a tool of choice for photographers who value craftsmanship, durability, and a connection to the history of photography. To reduce Leica ownership to a mere act of vanity overlooks the profound respect and appreciation many photographers have for these cameras.
The Myth of Insecurity
Kim goes on to argue that the photography industry is driven by insecurity, with photographers constantly trying to “prove themselves” to some authority figure. He mentions, “And after critically engaging with the whole photography world from age 21 to 36… what I have come to realize is that so much of the photography industry is based on insecurity.”
While it’s true that any creative field can be rife with insecurity, I find it misleading to single out Leica users as particularly prone to this. Photographers choose Leica for many reasons—ranging from the unparalleled build quality and lens compatibility to the unique shooting experience that Leica’s minimalist design offers. Photographers can choose any brand. Like a carpenter can choose any brand of tools they favour. In my view, it’s not about proving something to others; it’s about achieving a certain level of artistic expression and craftsmanship that Leica uniquely enables.
Leica’s Durability and Legacy
Kim claims, “The problem with any Leica camera — it is so fragile and weak!” From my perspective, this statement is not only inaccurate but also dismisses the long history of Leica cameras being used in some of the most demanding conditions imaginable. Leica’s M cameras, in particular, have been the go-to choice for war photographers and journalists for decades. The all-metal construction, coupled with the meticulous engineering that goes into each camera, makes Leica one of the most durable and reliable brands in the industry. Napalm Girl, one of the most powerful photographs of the 20th century was taken on a Leica M2 in the middle of an attack in the Vietnam War.
The historical context matters here. Leica cameras were the preferred tools for iconic photographers like Robert Capa and Henri Cartier-Bresson—not because they were “insecure,” but because they needed a camera that could withstand the rigors of war zones and harsh environments while delivering exceptional image quality. In my opinion, Kim’s dismissal of Leica’s toughness ignores this legacy and the ongoing trust that many professionals place in these cameras.
Leica’s Image Quality: Not Just Hype
Another point Kim makes is about the perceived obsolescence of digital Leica cameras. He argues, “The reason why purchasing any digital Leica is very foolish decision is that it will be outdated in a year or two; you’re automatically pissing down at least $2000-$3000 down the drain.”
I see this argument as failing to recognize the enduring value that Leica cameras and lenses hold. Unlike many other brands, where bodies and lenses quickly depreciate, Leica gear retains its value, and in some cases, even appreciates. The reason for this is simple: Leica lenses are among the best in the world, and the cameras themselves are built to last. The files produced by Leica’s latest digital cameras, such as the M11, are nothing short of phenomenal. The quality of the glass, the precision of the sensors, and the overall design contribute to images that have a distinctive character and clarity that Leica users treasure.
The Purist Experience
Kim criticizes the manual controls and minimalist design of Leica cameras, calling them “a gimmick.” He suggests that Leica’s appeal is more about romanticism and nostalgia than about practical photography. He writes, “Leica is trying to… prostitute the image the legacy or the concept of the romantic Henri Cartier-Bresson.” This statement I take a bit of issue with.
Henri Cartier-Bresson
Henri Cartier-Bresson is often regarded as the father of modern photojournalism and a pioneer of street photography. His work, characterized by its candid nature and keen eye for “the decisive moment,” captured the essence of life in a way that few others have matched. Cartier-Bresson co-founded the renowned Magnum Photos agency, which became a beacon for documentary photographers worldwide. His approach was minimalist—favoring a Leica rangefinder, often with a 50mm lens, to capture the fleeting moments of everyday life with precision and artistry. Cartier-Bresson’s legacy is not just in the iconic images he left behind, but also in how he elevated photography to a respected art form, influencing generations of photographers to see the world through a lens that seeks to reveal the extraordinary within the ordinary.
In my opinion, Kim misses the essence of what makes Leica special. The purist experience that Leica offers is not about nostalgia; it’s about engaging deeply with the process of photography. The manual controls force photographers to slow down, think more deliberately, and connect with their subject matter in a way that automated cameras often do not. This experience is valued by many serious photographers who seek more than just a picture—they seek to capture a moment with intention and precision.
Leica vs. Fujifilm: A Matter of Preference
Kim’s article is also a love letter to Fujifilm, which he praises as “superior in every single shape form and way.” He suggests that Fujifilm cameras are more robust and practical, implying that Leica cameras are outdated relics.
Fujifilm indeed makes excellent cameras, and they have a well-deserved following. However, the comparison between Fujifilm and Leica is not as clear-cut as Kim suggests. Each brand serves different purposes and appeals to different types of photographers. Fujifilm’s strength lies in its innovation, versatility, and user-friendly designs, while Leica’s appeal is rooted in its legacy, its unparalleled lens quality, and its focus on the essentials of photography. From my perspective, both brands have their place, and neither diminishes the value of the other.
Leica’s Enduring Appeal
Eric Kim’s critique of Leica cameras as tools for “losers” is provocative, but I believe it is ultimately unfounded. Leica cameras are not for everyone, and that’s okay. They are for photographers who appreciate the craftsmanship, durability, and purist experience that Leica offers. They are for those who value quality over quantity, and who seek a camera that will not only serve them well today but will continue to do so for many years to come.
In my opinion, Leica is not about following trends or proving oneself to others. It’s about a deep connection to the art of photography and a commitment to using the best tools available to capture the world in all its complexity and beauty. So no, Eric Kim—Leica is not for losers. Leica is for photographers who aspire to something greater.
About Adam Insights
Adam Insights is a Leica Street photographer, traveler, avid reviewer, marketer, and blogger. He is, by his own admission, a gear nut but doesnÔÇÖt buy gear just to test it or pixel peep. HeÔÇÖs only interested in the art that can be produced with the gear. And seeing what emotions can be brought out in those who see his photos. You’ll find more of Adam’s work on his website, Instagram, and Facebook, and be sure to subscribe to his YouTube channel. This article was also published here and shared with permission.
We love it when our readers get in touch with us to share their stories. This article was contributed to DIYP by a member of our community. If you would like to contribute an article, please contact us here.
Related Posts
Leica unveils its first rugged, waterproof camera, the Leica X-U (Typ 113)
Leica officially launches its new Leica Cine 1 4K triple-laser smart TV projector
An app developer used Kim Kardashian’s image without permission – Now she’s suing them for $10,000,000
Kim Kardashian sued for posting photo of herself to Instagram, hires personal photographer to share his photos from now on
Join the Discussion
DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.
21 responses to “No, Eric Kim, Leica is not for losers — it’s for photographers who aspire”
“I believe they warrant a thorough examination.”
They don’t. He’s just parroting nonsense so other people who ascribe to the same nonsense will interact with his content.
Trolls aren’t starving, don’t waste your energy feeding them.
I met him before in Saigon, he’s a self centred ******* in real life and if I remember correctly, his claims of being the no 1 street photographer on google search was due to SEO at that time. it was years ago. This kind of people are not welcomed in photography communities as there’s nothing constructive or inspirational to work with. Actually he’s not welcome anywhere.
Very well-reasoned! In today’s world where dizzying new technology is popping up around every corner of the photography world, Leica stands for a back-to-basics approach to the medium that emphasizes essence over extraneity. I only wish they were considerably more affordable.
The insecurity of this guy is so obvious, I almost feel bad for him. He’s like the MAGA of photography, contradicting himself in the same sentence, blowing himself up and trashing others simply to get publicity and getting people to sign up for his workshops and buy “books.” The bitterness is apparent as he slams galleries and book publishers because they want nothing to do with him. It really is amusing how jealous he is, talking about 911 owners as “insecure Shorty guys, who don’t really really have anything else going for them.”
Bro, no one grows up dreaming of owning a Toyota.
I feel bad for you.
There is something ironic about a guy saying Leicas are for insecure losers…meanwhile he’s weight lifting, calling himself a demigod & a sex machine, and bragging he’s making $200K. If someone is having fun with a leica, who cares? Life is too short.
Lately, the built quality of Fuji cameras is not the same. For example, I prefer the 100 V and sold my VI because the quality was not up to scratch. But I love shooting with my Xpro 2 while having the Q2 around my neck at the same time. I have started shooting like this recently and I am getting much more keepers while out on the street. With the rumor of Q3 with a 43mm lens with a pull-out screen this combo could change. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but for me, as I improved as a photographer Leica q2 was my personal reward for my achievements. I have only touched on manual focus with the Q2 but when I master that part the M 10R will be my next purchase. Some people on youtube say things for click bait
Exactly!
I am a long time Fuji user and really disappointed with its quality, especially when it was no longer “made in Japan “.
In fact, the built quality is the main reason I turned away from Xt 5 and grab the Q3.
Not a bit of regret since.
I am not saying Fuji is bad. But a full frame is a full frame, it beat APSC in every category.
This article feels like cope. The author goes on and on about Leica’s illustrious history and cites specifically “craftsmanship, durability, and a connection to the history of photography” as reasons to buy into Leica. However, he makes only one passing reference to any contemporary camera, relying instead on cherry-picked historical examples from the Vietnam War and of Cartier-Bresson. He cites the potential appreciation of Leica cameras in comparison to the depreciation of most others while ignoring the role that brand hype plays and just airily waves it away as if it’s not anything worth considering. He makes no connection from Leica’s history to today’s specimens and vaguely talks about “craftsmanship,” as if any contemporary leaves the factory w/ visible paint lines. Worst, when he talks abt “durability,” he refers only to items that, at youngest, lived through the Reagan administration. If anything, this article made me more sure that Leica is more of a status symbol than a unique tool of artistry.
With reference to historical cameras, the Chinese built Leica III copy sells for about twice the second hand price of the model on which it was based. The British made Reid III camera with Hobbs lens sells for considerably more than the Leica III on which it was based too. So historical reference is not a valid argument
this is the only quality comment here. Eric Kim is annoying, for sure, but this “rebuttal” only served to argue Kim’s general assertions more convincingly.
If anything Kim’s commentary makes him sound insecure…. So insecure I wondered if his intent was parody.
As both a Leica and Porsche owner I can honestly say my selection of those two brands is due to a combination of both their engineering superiority and heritage. I really enjoy creating with my camera and really enjoy driving my car. I really don’t care what anyone thinks of me.
First of all , I have no Idea who Eric Kim is? and really don’t care to.
I own a Lumix camera and I rent Leica lenses to use on it because, I have used Sony,Canon,Nikon and the quality of the glass is incomparable.
I can’t afford a Leica camera but I’m sure that if their camera bodies are as good as their lenses, enough said!
I never heard of this Eric Kim guy before but he is an example of what is wrong with this world: an opinionated idiot that has a following.
Plus, he is a sloppy writer.
Let’s also not forget how Leica managed to get many Jews out of Germany before the Holocaust, hiring them as technicians and sending them overseas to service cameras.
My personal experience with Leica cameras would bear out Eric Kim’s views. I have a Leica IIIf and an M3. The IIIf is now nearing 70 year old and it was still operational, however I thought it was about time it had a CLA. So, living in Hamburg, I decided to send it back to Leica at Wetzlar. Big mistake! After holding on to my camera for 4 months, they sent it back to me. First roll of film run through it and there were pinholes in the shutter curtains, so back to Wetzlar it went – for another two months. Happily on return everything worked correctly – for about a week after which the click stops on the overhauled lens stopped working. Since then it has been a bookend. The charge for the CLA was more than I paid for the camera in the first place too. So as far as I am concerned Leica is very overrated. I haven’t dared to send the M3 away for CLA as a result, also relegating it’s status to bookend.
I have a friend who always buys the latest version of the “best” brand. At the time I had a Panasonic Lumix LX-3 and he had the equivalent D-LUX. Why pay almost 50% more for the same camera? Both were built by Panasonic in China.
And the issues with the sensor on the Leica digital camera which requires a replacement at owners cost because of a poorly designed seal on the sensor beggars belief.
A blatant attempt at self publicity. Kim does what so many on social media do, comment without foundation on fact.
Sure, high profile brands get purchased by label chasers for reasons of status. Some get purchased because its a safe choice. Others decide it makes sense.
His comments about the 911, Leica and probably many other things only show he like the sound of his own voice.
Erik Kim wrote an article that is clickbait. Thousands of great photographers choose Leica—it’s not a fad, it’s not a foolish tool. Like other photographer /writers taking extreme views (think Ken) they gets readers, most if whom lose respect for the writer.
I’ve read a few articles of Kim’s and he is very opinionated and divisive. I’ve owned enough cameras over the years, Fuji and Ricoh included. Nikon and many others. However, regardless of price to my mind there is no better than Leica. The image colors and creamy in to out of focus look of a Leica image is second to non in the full frame format. I’ve got nothing against Fuji or Ricoh but there is no comparing them to Leica in a full frame format. I will however suggest that this does not so much hold true to the 2/3 sensor scenarios. But a Leica Q, M or SL format using Leica glass is very hard to beat. His article is clickbait.
Kim needs to retire from photo commentary.
Who is ERIC KIM (uppercase, yeah!) in the first place and why am I reading this? Google says it’s this guy: https://erickimphotography.com/ and from his homepage I get the impression that he likes to talk about photography (and photographers) rather than doing any relevant photography work himself.
Sure, you don’t need to be a cow to discuss milk, but there’s a taste to it when someone who contributes to “the community” (Where? What? How?) and makes his living with workshops bashes members of certain interest groups for the equipment they use.
There is no need to argue with this kid and neither do Leica users have to justify themselves. I admire Leica for their quality of craftsmanship, their consequent KISS minimalism and their excellent service. Not so much for the hefty price tag of the products and the decision to voluntarily cut features. The Fuji X100 does more for less, recommended one to a Leica film user who wanted to go digital a decade ago.
For HCB-like street photography I sure wouldn’t bring a Nikon Z9 with Z 50 mm 1:1.2 S Nikkor. That would indeed make me a loser, losing all my opportunities to be precise. Also, Leica is not for photographers “who aspire”. Oh please! Porsches are not cars for drivers “who aspire”. Most of them are not even able to operate a sports car anywhere near its limits. They just have the money and enjoy a nice piece of kit that just delivers up to its promise. And there’s nothing wrong about it.
No need to be jealous or even gross. Go, get a life – what was his name again?
There are no bad cameras. One of my favorites is the Kodak H35 which costs around 50 bucks.
My first camera was a Minolta X700. It was the camera I could afford. I lusted after a Nikon. Leica seemed like unobtainium. I have since had many Nikons, a Leica (which is in the main rotation), and many other cameras I never dreamed I could own. I love them all, but I wish I never sold my Minolta. I’ve never had a connection to a camera like I had with it.
I adore cameras and each one can do something special, but it really is the images they make that you should love the most.