Leicas in the Courthouse

Reader Nicholas Von Staden has spent several days assiduously researching whether it's actually true that courts restrict cameras to a shutter sound no louder than that of a Leica M film camera. (An issue that came up in the "Best Shutter Sound Ever" post.) He's sure he remembers the requirement in Florida because, when the rule came out, he recalls a number of court photographers wondering whether they'd be forced to buy Leicas. But he couldn't find any evidence for it. Nick also remembers that he had to go to judges' chambers several times to have his cameras approved for their noise levels.

He thinks the rule has been removed in some States and from some documents due to changing technology.

Finally he found the proof he sought—in a document called "Supreme Court Etiquette for Media" from the Vermont State Supreme Court. Under "Special Rules for Cameras and Recording Equipment," it says:

• Not more than one still photographer, utilizing not more than two still cameras with not more than two lenses for each camera and related equipment for print purposes shall be permitted in any court proceeding. Such cameras shall produce no greater sound than a 35mm Leica "M" Series rangefinder camera.

So that's it, then—proof that it's no myth.

Mike
(Thanks to Nicholas Von Staden)

UPDATE: PetaPixel has taken our ball and run with it.

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP links

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Mark: "Having been an Official Court Reporter in New York State Supreme Court for 32 years, both in the City and then its suburbs and then the Chief Court Reporter, I lived through the experiment for a few years when they allowed cameras in the courtrooms. While they allowed one pool television camera and one pool reporter, the administrators wouldn't know the difference between a Leica and a Canon shutter sound any more than they'd know the difference between a judicial robe and a graduation gown.

"On a side note, the chief judge just proposed allowing them back."

Comments

[Dan Gorman]

So is each judge issued a Leica M to keep in chambers? Just for comparison purposes, of course . . .

Further proof that I went into the wrong line of work!

[Ken Ford]

"Such cameras shall produce no greater sound than a 35mm Leica "M" Series rangefinder camera."

So, would I be booted for showing up with an M and Visoflex? ;o)

[Jeff]

Good thing the Vermont legislature and judiciary don't follow the Leica forum discussions, which often debate shutter sound comparisons between film M's (by model), an M8, an M8.2 (with upgraded M8 shutter), an M9, or the new M (240). And with digital M's, it's not the just the shutter release sound; rather it's the sound of the re-cock motor that disturbs.

[Manuel]

So if I took an Olympus Pen, with its conspicuous 'Tchack!' shutter sound, to a Vermont court, would I get arrested for contempt of court?
And are there officers metering the volume of the cameras' shutter sound at the entrance of the court?
Do Vermont judges all have Leica Ms, in order to compare shutter sound? And what about the digital Ms?
America's judicial system is strange...

[Doug C]

Forced to buy Leicas? Sorry that just sounds too whiney. Back then Leicas were not terribly expensive and if you didn't want to get involved, just give it up.
I recall a day or two spent photographing the California State Senate with probably two Leicas and maybe exactly four lenses.
The press guys were all offended that I got to walk the whole floor and they were kept behind the railings.
But for for crying out loud, if you looked how they were dressed and how they worked (in your face) compared with my deference, they should have been able to figure it out.
The Leicas were only part of it, but I feel I did not interfere, and they would have.
I would have welcomed the excuse to buy Leicas almost as much as I welcomed the excuse to use the ones I had owned for many years.
And I still have them, and though I am too cheap to buy a digital M body, I do love using the lenses on my NEX. It's a slow combination, but I work slowly so it suits me.

[Neely Fallon]

Soon to be replaced by the shutter leaf sound, or near lack thereof acoustically, produced by a Fuji X100/100s. Fuji being the new Leica. ;-)

[Dennis Ng]

2 lens? Why?

[Mark Alan Miller]

I knew my Nikon V1 was a good purchase. With the electronic shutter selected it is quieter than a Leica and should be welcome in courtrooms. The lower cameras in the Nikon 1 line rely entirely on the global shutter, though the V1 is also fitted with a mechanical shutter, which I prefer for the sound. The only advantage of the mechanical shutter is a higher flash sync speed. The global shutter allows for faster bursts. Image quality is the same either way.

[n r von staden]

My Nikon FM was the best for the judge to hear....but heaven help you if you left the winder on any of the Nikons...remo packs to high speed motordrives. It was really what mood/which one the judge was.

[`/1nc3nt]

Inductive proof:
According to county's regulation. You can't drive over 30 miles per hour in Beverly Hills using a vehicle louder than a Porsche Carrera. So, people to buy Porsches in Beverly Hills.

Nice.