Veblen goods aside, the problem that I saw with Leica, during my working life when there were no problems regarding purchase price as it all went against the business anyway, was that the M type of body wasn’t much good if you worked in a system where you really had to make the very most out if every square mm of available surface area. Rangefinder accuracy was never great, and that “advantage” of seeing through the viewfinder more than the lens could was, in fact, a negative, not a plus. On top of that, I was fond of longer lenses because they gave better perspective to faces. You had to be at about 5 1/2 ft away with a 135mm to get a pretty full frame. Hence, no distortion. Rangefinders are not renown for their long lens love.
There was the slr, but unlike Nikon - at least until after the pretty R6 model (afaik!) - Leica couldn't give the 100% coverage I wanted. But then, I think Minolta built their slr bodies for them. Which was perhaps no bad thing: didn’t David Hamilton build his success with Minoltas? Recent revisionary views on morality notwithstanding, he was one helluva good photographer, consistent and very capable of defining mood.
I can understand the desirability of some Veblen goods, their place in the social structure, but even with that accepted as no bad thing, mistakes can still be made. I think Leica just made one.
