I just received another Email newsletter from Erwin Puts. Apparently there has been some major mud slinging over at the LUG directed at Erwin and he has decided to kill his newsletter.

I haven't been over to LUG to check this out (I'm not a subscriber) but I think it's too bad. I, for one, will miss the newsletter!

-- Todd Phillips (toddvphillips@webtv.net), April 12, 2002

Answers

Mud slinging?!! AT LUG!!?? Involving Erwin??!!! I find this rumor VERY difficult to believe! :-)

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), April 12, 2002.

Whatever the reason, I will sure miss the newsletter. Does anybody know of a way to convince Ervin to bring it back?

-- Igor Osatuke (visionstudios@yahoo.com), April 12, 2002.

Erwin said that he got a 50mm f/2.8 for his M7, and some people started a thread about "god speaking" and "how many people are rushing to buy one now because Erwin got one?"

It was all quite childish.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), April 12, 2002.

Tod:

That is why most of us are here rather than at LUG. Sure, we have people who try to convince me that I get higher quality with a Leica than with a Hasselblad. They are rare. Mostly thoughftul people here. They only go to LUG for the same reason people stop to look at a fatal accident.

Then, of course, we have Alfie. ;<)

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), April 12, 2002.

Yes, I will miss it too. I sent him an email saying so. I mean, the sheer amount of information that guy has been propagating for free is incredible! How can people be so narrow-minded ? I don't even know the LUG address and from what I've heard about it everywhere, I don't miss it.

-- Stephane Bosman (stephane_bosman@yahoo.co.uk), April 12, 2002.

there's no excuse for the churlish behavior toward puts on the aptly named LUG. having said that, my feeling is that erwin, always a leica partisan, has become, more or less, an official leica spokesman. i do not see any evidence of balance or objectivity in his leica "reviews" over the past couple of years. indeed, the puff piece he wrote on the impossible to sell (leica is stuck with scores of units) null series leica that was tacked onto the end of his m7 review was rather shameless (is adorama still selling them for $999). it seems reasonable to infer that he did it to help leica move the camera. i think that a number of leics folks are a little peeved that he still holds himself out as independent. if he cares how he is perceived among leica collectors and users (at the LUG site, here, or elsewhere), he would do himself a lot of good by being a little more up-front about his relation to leica. if he doesn't care, that's fine too -- but in that case incidents like the recent one are probably inevitable. the only reason i care is because in the old days erwin puts actually wrote some useful pieces that contained pros and cons. these were helpful for leica to read and also helpful to me as a consumer.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), April 12, 2002.

Erwin objected to someone posting his recent comments about the Elmar 2.8/50 on LUG as "the word of the Lord". He called this "most inappropriate" and ended the newsletter in a gigantic huff. Poor Erwin. How dare someone say such a disgraceful thing. Off with his head. I shall miss his ponderous pontificating, at least what little I understood of it.

-- Christopher Goodwin (christopher.goodwin@gte.net), April 12, 2002.

Too bad about Erwin. I do appreciate his writings - Leica biased or not. If you use or collect Leicas, how can you not be eccentric, off and biased toward the brand? We are just not mainstream. So what? But it is truly sad the way some of us beat up on others. And I think that Erwin needs a thicker skin. Part of this is cultural. Most of the posters on the LUG are Americans, Canadians or those from the UK. Most of us believe that it is our God given right to trash everyone from our national leader to the common man on the street without rules - First Amendment stuff. I think that most other cultures have rules about who they trash - and trash they do - but there are rules. Of course political correctness is creeping in to impose rules on our culture too - but there are parts of my mind that those that would impose rules would be better advised not to invade.

-- Doug Landrum (dflandrum@earthlink.net), April 12, 2002.

I wrote a personal e-mail to Erwin pleading that he continue his good works. I hope many of you will do the same.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.netq), April 12, 2002.

i should have clarified -- i don't care how pro-leica puts is. but if he has a financial or other business connection to leica (free gear, free trips, secret info, etc.) i think his readers should know that. it's only fair if he intends to review the gear for the benefit of prospective purchasers.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), April 12, 2002.

Alas, the durn impoliteness of the LUG members is proved once again with the Erwin Puts issue. We seem to be too quick to judge and granted even though we know that he is human, his scientific background in optics certain kicks us in the buttocks.

Respect him and disagree with a critical eye not a passionate foolishness.

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), April 12, 2002.

"Most of the posters on the LUG are Americans, Canadians or those from the UK. Most of us believe that it is our God given right to trash everyone from our national leader to the common man on the street without rules - First Amendment stuff. Most of the posters on the LUG are Americans, Canadians or those from the UK. Most of us believe that it is our God given right to trash everyone from our national leader to the common man on the street without rules - First Amendment stuff. "

Hokum, Mr. Landrum.

Incivility, boorishness, and ingratitude have nothing at all to do with freedom of speech and thought or the utterance of truth. Let's not manufacture virtue out of vice.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), April 12, 2002.

Well, there's two ways to look at this one. A LUG member posted a message that didn't even mention Erwin by name, but whose allusion to "the Word of the Lord" was easily recognized by anyone getting Erwin's newsletter. Impertinent perhaps, but it doesn't even rate a 0.1 on the Richter scale of internet misbehaviour.

Erwin, on the other hand took umbrage as Erwin always does when someone disses him. In all his involvement with the net, he has never learned Lesson Number 1: No matter how well-intentioned you are or how good your information, someone will always take issue with you. It may be with your information, but it may be with you as a person. If you react to ad hominem posts, you lose. In this case he lost it, and we lose as a result.

Frankly, I'm beyond caring. This is the fourth or fifth time Erwin has pulled his boo hoo stunt, and it's getting old. We took good pictures without his help before, we'll take good pictures without his advice now. Sure he had some useful things to say - but so have we all, from time to time. If we have to refrain from criticizing someone just so they won't have a hissy fit, pick up their marbles and go home - well, sorry the world is plenty big enough to get along without their help. Thanks so much for playing, don't let the door hit you etc.

If Erwin isn't grown-up enough to tolerate a dig or two, I frankly couldn't care less what he decides to do with his precious newsletter. This behaviour proves to me that he's not "the Lord", he's a kid whose sandbox isn't quite big enough.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul@chefurka.com), April 12, 2002.

Mani, Mani, Mani,

First, as a sideline sitting reader of this forum, I venture out carefully only to post in the last few days. First, I agree with Paul, Erwin seems too sensitive.

I don't like to be dissed either.

But on the First Amendment to the United States Constitution I can weight in and be bold - the whole point of freedom of speech is to be able to be incivil, boorish, and ingracious.

My point is that some posters on the net - particularly those from the US, Canada, UK and the like - exercise their rights in breach of common courtesy. I believe that, just because the right to bad and hurtful speech exists and the means to express bad and hurtful speech exists (the semi anonimous Internet), the conduct may breach common courtesy.

I do not agree with in courteous speech but I will defend the right of those who engage in it to continue to do so. I will discourage the incourtesous speech by ignoring it - and hope the moderators have the time to delete the bad postings. In a forum like this, the hurtful and bad postings that receeive no response will die.

I trust that you and others will call me to task if I publish posts that offend - because I desire to be civil.

Peace to you and yours. Doug

-- Doug Landrum (dlandum@earthlink.net), April 12, 2002.

I have been following the LUG on and off for the past 5 years, and I agree with Paul in that this has to be at least the 5th or 6th time that Erwin has run home crying to his mother. Don't worry, he'll be back, as he has been every time. His thirst for attention is just too much for him to resist. Personally I find no value in his blabber... not only is it 100% meaningless in the real photographic world, but as a bonus it's also statistically irrelevant as he only tests one or two (if even) sample(s) of each lens. He also proclaims that the M6 is "every bit as well built" as the old M3 based on his brief observation, despite a well-known and respected tech's (DAG) claims to the contrary which are based on hands-on repair and maintenance experience spanning decades. On that last point, Erwin is also one heck of an apologist for the M6's shortcomings, effectively contradicting himself and shooting down his own credibility in the process.

What's equally entertaining is how every once in a while, when a new lens is introduced, you can sit down start counting how many LUG members say "Wow, new lens! But I won't buy it until I hear what Erwin says about it." I think this is where the "word of the Lord" bit comes in.

Good riddance.

-- Anon Terry (anonht@yahoo.com), April 13, 2002.

"But on the First Amendment to the United States Constitution I can weight in and be bold - the whole point of freedom of speech is to be able to be incivil, boorish, and ingracious. "

The relationship between the State and her people are guided by the Constitution, and speech is covered in the First Amendment. The relationship between people and people are guided by what your parents taught you. Posting on the LUG has very little to do with the government so the First Amendment is irrelevent to one's decision to exercise his incivility, boorishness and ingraciousness. So the government couldn't care less if you are a jerk and that you publically express your ignorance. The government only cares whether you pay your taxes on time.

-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), April 13, 2002.

I second what Paul Chefurka said verbatim.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), April 13, 2002.

It is still unfortunate that Erwin has pulled the plug... While some may not agree with this point or that, I think that we all learn a bit here or there that gets incorporated into our photographic psyche. Erwin has thin skin and this is a shame given the rough and tumble of the net. I wish I could prescribe a medication to thicken skin but this is not in the cards....

-- Albert Knapp MD (albertknappmd@mac.com), April 13, 2002.

Erwin does this every so often, he'll be back.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), April 13, 2002.

Hi Everyone,

I checked out Erwin's website and it is still there. I don't do LUG and am out of it as far as the current problems go. Erwin is a volunteer, an enthusiast and, therefore, not bound by the strictures of canned discourse that some paid writers are forced to follow. I think much--or, let me say most--of what has been levelled at Erwin has either been unfair or has had an unnecessary hard edge to it.

There are things worth fighting about; the relative virtues of camera equipment is not one of those things in my view.

That said, unfortunately in the ways of this mean old world anyone who somehow becomes an expert, by default or otherwise, is going to get heat. I think that honest disagreement cannot be faulted. Trashing someone's personality is a different matter. Particularly in a case like Erwin's where the man is doing what he is doing out of good will.

I for one appriciate Erwin's work for us. I've said so elsewhere. I've disagreed with him at times; but that's part of a necessary dialectic. I've generally found his work to be well reasoned and based on hard data.

What has always struck me is the amount of work that man puts into his reviews. Bench testing must involve a lot of hours and considerable expense.

I can imagine how the off-hand sneers must hurt.

Best,

Alex

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4-u.or.jp), April 13, 2002.

I frankly do not understand why Mr. Puts takes all this stuff so seriously. He should ignore alot of the posting and it would quickly go away.

-- Bob Haight (rhaigh5748@aol.com), April 13, 2002.

Better yet, if he responded with a sense of humor, it would take the sting out of the criticism.

-- Ken (kennyshipman@aol.com), April 13, 2002.

I agree that Erwin will be back. He seems to crave an audience, even if he doesn't take criticism well. What I find most annoying about him is his arrogant tone combined with mistakes or questionable assertions. He talks about things like "The Leica Philosophy," yet who knows what that is or where it comes from. The Leica board of directors? The Leica engineers? Erwin's imagination? Who can tell? His hard data is quite thin and unreliable, the rest of what he says is debatable, so why not match his tone with a few sharp jabs?

-- Masatoshi Yamamoto (masa@nifty.co.jp), April 14, 2002.

Doug,

Points very well taken! Peace be unto you too. Come to think of it, peace on Earth and goodwill to all :-)

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), April 14, 2002.

Do I REALLY need to point out, that it was I who single-handedly started the whole Elmar-M 50mm 1:2.8 thing? Obviously E.P. monitors this group, and has been swayed by the pure logic of my numerous examples (several of which reside in various threads right now), and arguments for the Elmar-M 50mm 1:2.8. This is really what pisses everyone off. I mean, what you are all thinking is how dare Edwin Puts put the Elmar-M 50mm 1:2.8 on the end of his camera! But we won't even go there. "Truth, you can't handle the truth!" (But of course, tomorrow he'l probably proclaim the Elmar-M crap, put the Lux 35mm Asph on the end of his camera, and then everyone will be happy.) Leitz M6, Elmar-M 50mm 1:2.8, B+W KR1.5 MRC, Fuji Sensia II 200, Polariod SprintScan4000

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), April 14, 2002.