I really want a Leica!!!!

cambsno

cambsno

Suspended / Banned
Messages
20,999
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
I would describe myself as a Nikon fan - 3rd DSLR in 4 years - and wouldn't look anywhere else for when I upgrade again. BUT I keep lusting after a Leica. Why? I know nothing about them really, aside from the fact there is one thats twice the price (or more) of the Panny LX5 but the same camera. I keep looking at old Leicas (60s ones) as well as the modern ones and just really want one... anyone else have a totally irrational lust like this?
 
yep

i want a CAMERA lol

well i have got a bridge but desperate to get a dslr.
saying that im no good with the one i got so i can be twice as bad with the dslr lol
 
Yep......Nikkor 80-400 VR.........even though a few different reviews say it isn't one of their best...........I still lust for it........

I have a Russian Zorki film camera............but like you would abso bloody lutely LOVE :love: A Leica :thumbs:

Or twice as good Matty. self belief matey.
 
Last edited:
towershot said:
Yep......Nikkor 80-400 VR.........even though a few different reviews say it isn't one of their best...........I still lust for it........

I have a Russian Zorki film camera............but like you would abso bloody lutely LOVE :love: A Leica :thumbs:

Or twice as good Matty. self belief matey.
Click to expand...

yeah i was only kidding

will get there one day, at the moment im just pointing me camera at anything and everything tryin to get a feel for it and tryin to spot a picture which i find is the hardest part. me little girl reckons she gonna show me how its done tomorrow lol and she is only 7
 
Matty, getting a DSLR really does help you improve technique!
 
towershot said:
Yep......Nikkor 80-400 VR.........even though a few different reviews say it isn't one of their best...........I still lust for it........
Click to expand...

Try one before you buy. It's not a bad lens, no speed demon, but fine for most jobs....


...but at 400mm it's probably one of the most ugly lenses around and fit the hood and you have a lens that makes Cher off of X-factor look like a stunner!!! :D
 
yep, wanted a leica for decades but cant see it ever happening.
 
Yep, so I bought a D-Lux-4. OK so it's a compact but it's a blindingly good little camera and comes everywhere with me. :)
 
I was like that once.
So I bought a Leica. Then I bought another.
Then I bought a digital camera.
Then I sold the better of the two Leicas (and most of my other film kit) for more than I paid for it...

The first one now collects dust on the shelf along with all the other obsolete cameras I owned...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I suppose I'm a Nikon fan too, although I usually shoot a Canon 30D for reasons that don't matter in this context. The Nikons are both film cameras, F2 and FM, and are still my favourites in many ways.

I've always wanted a Leica, preferably an M3. It's probably because I like the simplicity and superb engineering of them, not for any esoteric reasons. You can buy them for less than a mid range DSLR and I might get one eventually. Just can't afford it right now.

I do own Leica binoculars which are probably overkill and completely unnecessary for me, but I thoroughly enjoy using them and that's a good enough reason to have them.
 
cambsno said:
I would describe myself as a Nikon fan - 3rd DSLR in 4 years - and wouldn't look anywhere else for when I upgrade again. BUT I keep lusting after a Leica. Why?
Click to expand...

Because you want the best.
Nikon make the best Digital and Film SLR's, Leica the best Rangefinder.....simplez



although I gotta say, Nikons RF's aren't exactly poo

:D
 
Daryl said:
Digital Leica M8... maybe next Crimbo...... (sigh)
Click to expand...

Quite a few problems with the M8 from what I've read on the web. The M9 is meant to be better, but when I tried on at the Leica store in Mayfair I was less than impressed.

Whilst it's no doubt beautifully engineered, it took an age to put an image on the rear screen after pressing the playback button. Terribly slow. The much vaunted menus were nice but again slow to navigate. Unacceptable for such a hugely expensive piece of kit.

The wee little fixed lens compact (cant remember the name) felt horribly plasticy and nasty.
 
Thinking of flogging my D90 & 18-200 lens then either replacing my LX2 for a LX5 or a D-Lux 5.

Lots of reviews say very little difference between the LX5 & D-Lux 5, possibly the same camera, but know what your'e saying.
 
You won't want to see this again then... CLICKY

Get it quick, before the VAT rise

:naughty:
 
Last edited:
I'd quite fancy an M9 + a Noctilux, wouldn't bother with a film Leica in the digital age, but they do look lovely.
 
I'd love an M9 :drool:
 
specialman said:
Try one before you buy. It's not a bad lens, no speed demon, but fine for most jobs....


...but at 400mm it's probably one of the most ugly lenses around and fit the hood and you have a lens that makes Cher off of X-factor look like a stunner!!! :D
Click to expand...

I have the 70-300 and to be honest am happy with the results..........but you know what they say about size...........:naughty: and that extra 100 keeps calling me :bonk:
 
Leicas are actually amazingly cheap. Provided you don't damage it and you buy shrewdly you can pick one up today and sell it in a years time and get back the same as you paid for it. With interest rates as they are atm if you have the cash in a bank account you may as well buy the leica. At least that way instead of just not getting any interest at all you at least have a leica in your hand

That's how I justified mine anyway :thumbs:
 
I really like rangefinders, so I mainly shoot with a Leica M4-P (which can be had relatively cheaply) and an Epson R-D1 which is a digital rangeinder. I just find them much more natural to use, very fast/high quality lenses and intuative manual controls. I love developing my own film from the Leica and can use the Epson body for digital stuff which has an amazing low light performance.

They are indeed very different systems to DSLRs.They may not be to your taste, but at the end of the day if you find a good used one you can sell it on without losing anything (sometimes you can gain money like Arkandy did) so why note give one a whirl?

ped
 
Last edited:
I wanted a Voigtlander Bessa R3a and got one. Now I want lots of lovely lenses to go on it to replace the Jupiter which was all I could afford at the time.
Leica's are great yes but overpriced IMHO, the Voigtlander has a lovely, clear 1:1 viewfinder and looks sexy as hell.

Andy
 
I also really like the bessas (the R-D1 is basically a digital bessa) but I do really like the feel and quality of the Leica body, it's just very elegant and well designed. Definitely true to say some prices are somewhat inflated though as some people buy them as luxury items... mine is a daily user, all worn away on the corners and thoroughly abused - it's never missed a beat!

ped
 
gus607 said:
Thinking of flogging my D90 & 18-200 lens then either replacing my LX2 for a LX5 or a D-Lux 5.

Lots of reviews say very little difference between the LX5 & D-Lux 5, possibly the same camera, but know what your'e saying.
Click to expand...

You might want to hang fire and have a look at the new fuji when it comes out, looks better on paper than the LX's
 
iancandler said:
You might want to hang fire and have a look at the new fuji when it comes out, looks better on paper than the LX's
Click to expand...

The problem with that Fuji is that it does not have Leica written on it.

Just like everything that has gone before which didn't have Leica witten on it (and was therefore not used by Cartier-Bresson) even though they were sometimes better cameras, eg Contax. Epson is not a sexy name, so they tried Voigtlander, which was a Cosina underneath. Didn't work.

The word Leica has magical properties, and can send sane men mad to spend incredible amounts of money on a camera that was made redundant in 1959 :gag:
 
Why do some people get so agitated about Leica?

If you really want one, just buy it. They're not rare, or even difficult to find, and most of the film rangefinder bodies sell for about the same price as a mid level DSLR. If it's worth it you, it's not overpriced. If you're not interested, don't buy one.
 
HoppyUK,I sort of agree, but I don't think you can put a price on feel and quality - of course several other camera manufacturers offer products in the same vein but they aren't always much cheaper.

I love the quality and feel of the Leica and although I use loads of other cameras, some film, some digital, there's something about the film workflow that I find very satisfying. Believe me, I'll enjoy shooting with anything, home-made cameras to top of the line digital SLRs, and the Leica M system really is a great, well thought out tool. I couldn't give a monkeys that Cartier-Bresson used one and I have a general dislike of 'street photography' too, and I wouldn't ever spend over a grand on one, but they are so simple to load, easy to use, well made and reliable that I have a really fun time using them.

ped
 
MartynK said:
Why do some people get so agitated about Leica?

If you really want one, just buy it. They're not rare, or even difficult to find, and most of the film rangefinder bodies sell for about the same price as a mid level DSLR. If it's worth it you, it's not overpriced. If you're not interested, don't buy one.
Click to expand...

AGain, agreed, though this place would be boring otherwise, eh!
 
When my joints are so shot that I can no longer carry my DSLR kit around then I shall sell up and buy an M9 or whatever its successor may be.
 
I really must be missing something, regardless of how well made or who used them, what's the appeal of a range finder? I ask as some one who's never used one.
 
maninsuitcase said:
I really must be missing something, regardless of how well made or who used them, what's the appeal of a range finder? I ask as some one who's never used one.
Click to expand...

Usually smaller than SLR cameras, and easier to focus in low light and faster to focus overall (IMO). The main benefit for me is that wide angle lenses are relatively cheaper than wide SLR lenses and many of the lenses available in M mount are optically top notch. I also like the viewfinder which shows framelines and extra scene around the framelines so that you can see what's happening outside of the frame before taking the shot, meaning you can anticipate things. This sounds small but it's really natural, and helps composition I think with moving subjects especially. With the R-D1 the viewfinder is 1:1 so you can have both eyes open, even.

They also have disadvantages compared to SLRs but at the end of the day they are all good fun and tools for a job. When I carry a rangefinder I don't feel like the 'guy with a big camera' either which is quite nice. Like I say I take mine everywhere and have taken pictures with it I would never have done with anything else.

Oh, and because many Leica cameras (or many other rangefinders, for that matter, like my Braun Paxette) are all mechanical, I think they are interesting as objects - I love anything mechanical, like watches, and like the 'bare bones' experience of shooting with them. I really like simple effective mechanics (though this is true of many SLRs, too) Probably a bit sad I know. :bonk:

ped
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top