I really want a Leica!!!!

Sounds like its very much a "feel" thing, maybe I need to get hold of one for a day or 2 to see what it's all about. From what your saying it sounds very interesting. Ta.
 
ped said:
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...
Click to expand...

I love the 'feel' of my Leica M6, but I really hate trying to use it for anything other than considered subjects.
The much-vaunted 'ease' of rangefinder use is 'anything but' in my experience.
Anyone who's tried to change films on an M-series camera in anger will vouch for this - you need three hands at the best of times...

The worst problem for me is that you don't see a stopped-open image when looking through the viewfinder - everything in the scene appears in equal focus. This for me makes it very difficult to asess what's in-focus as the whole parallax rangefinder method is inherently 'creaky'. In many situations I've found I'm unable to see the 'ghost' image superimposed on the main image and have no idea other than using the lens distance scale if I'm even in the same ballpark, let alone correctly focussed or not.

Compared to using even a basic SLR it's a trial that only purists seem to enjoy.

As to cost - my Summicron 35mm f/2 is over ten times the price ($3,000) of my Nikkor manual-focus 35mm f/2 ($200 second-hand) or my AF-D Nikkor 35mm f/2 ($350 new) and produces images on 400iso 35mm B&W film that are almost indistinguishable.
 
Arkady2 said:
I love the 'feel' of my Leica M6, but I really hate trying to use it for anything other than considered subjects.
The much-vaunted 'ease' of rangefinder use is 'anything but' in my experience.
Anyone who's tried to change films on an M-series camera in anger will vouch for this - you need three hands at the best of times...

The worst problem for me is that you don't see a stopped-open image when looking through the viewfinder - everything in the scene appears in equal focus. This for me makes it very difficult to asess what's in-focus as the whole parallax rangefinder method is inherently 'creaky'. In many situations I've found I'm unable to see the 'ghost' image superimposed on the main image and have no idea other than using the lens distance scale if I'm even in the same ballpark, let alone correctly focussed or not.

Compared to using even a basic SLR it's a trial that only purists seem to enjoy.

As to cost - my Summicron 35mm f/2 is over ten times the price ($3,000) of my Nikkor manual-focus 35mm f/2 ($200 second-hand) or my AF-D Nikkor 35mm f/2 ($350 new) and produces images on 400iso 35mm B&W film that are almost indistinguishable.
Click to expand...

Interesting, and you are not alone. I find rangefinders very easy to use and have never had a problem seeing the ghost image compared to a split prism for example in an SLR in similar lighting conditions.

RE the expense - true some are extremely expensive and I too think that a lot of that is due to the idea of Leica cameras becoming 'luxury goods' but my M4-P was about £500 and my Voigtlander lens which I use on my R-D1 and my Leica was about £350. There are lots of good priced bodies out there and there are only tiny differences in the models, largely the framelines available (I got the M4-P because I use it with a 28mm lens and it has the right framelines)

I don't know how anyone could describe loading a Leica M as difficult, though. It literally takes 10 seconds and doesn't involve any fiddling or guiding the film into sprockets etc at all. There are several videos on youtube to show how quick it is, although with a little practice.

Different strokes for different folks - for me, checking out a rangefinder was a logical step in my photography hobby. For all it's quirks, It's good fun at the end of the day, and some of my fave images have come out of it's funky idiosyncratic and very possibly outdated and thoroughly surpassed system. Make of that what you will, but hearing and feeling the smooth gears engage as I roll the film forward is as tactile an experience as developing the completed roll, and one which makes me want to shoot more often. I can't say my DSLR is so satisfying to use, though like I said earlier, often it's the only sensible choice to use. But when had being sensible been fun, especially as photography is a hobby for me. I dare say that if photography was my lifeline I wouldn't use a rangefinder and only use it for 'personal' projects and enjoyment, but if photography was my business I'm sure I would use my spare time differently!

ped
 
Last edited:
Heres a quick tip (sorry if you already know it!)

To make focusing very quick and easy, always start with lens at infinity, then rotate barrel so ghost image comes from left to right to meet the normal image. I am pretty quick now, and even tried practicing with different ranges. With my Paxette the viewfinder is literally about as clear as the UK's education poplicy but I'm still in sharp focus where I want to be in no time.

ped
 
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? 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?
Click to expand...

So my advice would be get one and try it. You'll never know otherwise. What's the worst that could happen! (now I have given similar advice before with fairly disasterour consiquences so well done for hesitating)

ped
 
Sorry, one more thing! Some people think the quiet shutter is a massive boon; I guess it is quite quiet (more of a puff and a wheeze if it's a long exposure) but I don't really see how it's an advantage worth writing home about. My Epson is actually quite a loud click; if anything I find it quite satisfying.
 
I think it's more to do with the lack of a ground-screen surround: I can judge how far out an SLR is by the amount of blur I see and when the image comes into focus, it 'snaps' in and out very noticably. Not so with my Leica - with that I have learned to 'wing-it' - I use the position of the focus-lever on the lens as an indicator as to what distance the lens is focussed at and select an f/-stop that allows for DoF to take up the slack... Not at all precise, but it works 9/10 of the time and it's the 'time-honoured' technique beloved of several allegedly iconic RF-users, apparently: it's more esoteric and you have to have more of an instinct for it, I guess...but I hate it.

I just get frustrated and go back to my F3 instead. It has almost the same 'feel' (brass gears and all) and all the advantages with none of the percieved disadvantages...


All of the above applies only to my hobby-shooting.
Work will and always will be conducted on DSLR cameras.
 
ped said:
Interesting, and you are not alone. I find rangefinders very easy to use and have never had a problem seeing the ghost image compared to a split prism for example in an SLR in similar lighting conditions.

RE the expense - true some are extremely expensive and I too think that a lot of that is due to the idea of Leica cameras becoming 'luxury goods' but my M4-P was about £500 and my Voigtlander lens which I use on my R-D1 and my Leica was about £350. There are lots of good priced bodies out there and there are only tiny differences in the models, largely the framelines available (I got the M4-P because I use it with a 28mm lens and it has the right framelines)

I don't know how anyone could describe loading a Leica M as difficult, though. It literally takes 10 seconds and doesn't involve any fiddling or guiding the film into sprockets etc at all. There are several videos on youtube to show how quick it is, although with a little practice.

Different strokes for different folks - for me, checking out a rangefinder was a logical step in my photography hobby. For all it's quirks, It's good fun at the end of the day, and some of my fave images have come out of it's funky idiosyncratic and very possibly outdated and thoroughly surpassed system. Make of that what you will, but hearing and feeling the smooth gears engage as I roll the film forward is as tactile an experience as developing the completed roll, and one which makes me want to shoot more often. I can't say my DSLR is so satisfying to use, though like I said earlier, often it's the only sensible choice to use. But when had being sensible been fun, especially as photography is a hobby for me. I dare say that if photography was my lifeline I wouldn't use a rangefinder and only use it for 'personal' projects and enjoyment, but if photography was my business I'm sure I would use my spare time differently!

ped
Click to expand...

What I like and respect about your replies Ped, is your honest admission of the Leica's shortcomings, and owning up to enjoying using one for other than purely photographic reasons.

And that is just fine by me. Best of luck to you :)

What annoys me about many Leica discussions are owner's claims that the wacky rangefinder focusing is actually better, that not being able to use longer lenses or shoot macro is somehow life-improving, that the lenses are just in a different league, and that the price is reasonable because it's no more than a Nikon D3 or something.... :thinking:

But please, leave out the gold plated, snakeskin and diamante special editions :gag:
 
Thanks Hoppy

I also frequent 'Rangefinderforum' and there is quite often a feeling that some photographers see themselves as world travelling reporters of the human condition armed with film and a rangefinder in barren hostile lands which sometimes gets a bit much. There certaily is a fanatacism over them, and like you said, people get a bit caught up in it all. There's a brilliant animation to illustrate my points which I'll add here later today (the site is blocked at work!)

Cheers
ped
 
ped said:
Thanks Hoppy

I also frequent 'Rangefinderforum' and there is quite often a feeling that some photographers see themselves as world travelling reporters of the human condition armed with film and a rangefinder in barren hostile lands which sometimes gets a bit much. There certaily is a fanatacism over them, and like you said, people get a bit caught up in it all. There's a brilliant animation to illustrate my points which I'll add here later today (the site is blocked at work!)

Cheers
ped
Click to expand...

Haha! Brilliant! Looking forward to the link :D
 
Some of the jokes are about things I see on RFF (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/) but they make a good point - there is a lot of elitism and smoke/mirrors around these 'tools' we call Leica M cameras!

I still say get one, try it, and if you don't like it, attack it with emery paper and sell it as a:

'L@@@@K - VINTAGE well used and nicely worn AS USED BY CARTIER BRESSON'

On eBay! Extra points if you cover the logos and writing with black tape and spend evenings feeding your leather strap (vintage and 'distressed' of course!)

ped
 
Last edited:
EVERYONE keeps banging on about Leica.

Post me an image from a Leica and an identical image from a similar or high end say Cannon or Nikon or whatever camera and I bet you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the pics.

Prove me wrong.

Bet you cannot.
 
I think Leicas market is a camera for people that just want to be thought of as another tourist with out the "I'm photographer" look the comes with holding a D3X,

Thing is the Sony NEX with an adapter seems to offer something similar for a fraction of the cost.

Stuart
 
onikami said:
EVERYONE keeps banging on about Leica.

Post me an image from a Leica and an identical image from a similar or high end say Cannon or Nikon or whatever camera and I bet you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the pics.

Prove me wrong.

Bet you cannot.
Click to expand...

You probably cant. It's all about the handling, ease of use and the feel. Also people say the lenses are great but like you I am not too concerned with such minescule differences.

If you are talking the difference between a FILM Leica and a DIGITAL Canon/Nikon, however, then the differences will be more identifiable, but again, for me at least, shooting film is more about the tangible feel and satisfaction to working with an analog medium and I still feel I can get better results when I shoot film. That, though, is a personal remark and one that comes from a self confessed digital lover alike.

ped
 
Last edited:
stu_the_flat said:
I think Leicas market is a camera for people that just want to be thought of as another tourist with out the "I'm photographer" look the comes with holding a D3X,

Thing is the Sony NEX with an adapter seems to offer something similar for a fraction of the cost.

Stuart
Click to expand...

The NEX system and the similar 4/3 systems don't have the same feel of an all mechanical leica, so I don't know how similar they are in anything but size.

The Fuji X100 is more like it, though the lens is not removeable. Looks like a nice camera though, with a good viewfinder.

ped
 
Just buy a old 35mm something or other paint the chrome black, paint a red dot, job done.

simples:)
 
I can say I'm sort of a Leica fan so I'm a little suspect to talk about.

What I can say is that I see Leica cameras as precision machines, with great built quality.

The lenses are amazing and I love to use them with my 5D Mark II.


For now I have one D-Lux 4 Titanium and one Leica X1. These two are different as they are compact cameras but I can assure that it's hard to get the same image quality and ISO results with other cameras in this segment.

They are almost art works so you are paying that too...

But as I like Leica I assume I like Contax cameras and Zeiss lenses... It's a matter of taste...
 
Interesting debate.

I started with screw mount leicas over 50 years ago. I've owned and used 3b,3c,3g, m2,M3,M4,M5&M6 together with a wide range of lenses.

Also used 'flex,flex SL, R3.R4 and R8.

M series great cameras to use. Can you tell which pictures you took with an M series Leica; sometimes and sometimes not.

Did some assignments in India and the M6 was brilliant, however I suspect a ContaxG2 or similar rangefinder quiet compact design would work as well.

Most of my work now is done with Nikon D3x and I love it. Do I miss the Leicas:NO, (most of the time!)
 
custodian said:
Interesting debate.

I started with screw mount leicas over 50 years ago. I've owned and used 3b,3c,3g, m2,M3,M4,M5&M6 together with a wide range of lenses.

Also used 'flex,flex SL, R3.R4 and R8.

M series great cameras to use. Can you tell which pictures you took with an M series Leica; sometimes and sometimes not.

Did some assignments in India and the M6 was brilliant, however I suspect a ContaxG2 or similar rangefinder quiet compact design would work as well.

Most of my work now is done with Nikon D3x and I love it. Do I miss the Leicas:NO, (most of the time!)
Click to expand...

Brilliant.

Lots of people have opinions on Leica cameras, and a small fraction of them have actually used one. I wonder if the OP has bought one yet - if he does, and doesn't like it, well that's the itch scratched and nothing ventured, nothing gained!

ped
 
Anyone who doesn't understand the attraction of a rangefinder has probably never used one. They're whisper quiet compared to any DSLR and simply don't attract the same attention when you're trying to go unnoticed.

The Leica is a fabled legendary thing with roots going right back to the start of 35mm photogarphy, representing totally uncompromising design and engineering - just pick one up and you can't fail to be impressed with it. They also come with the finest optics you're ever gong to find, although you could easily blow the kids inheritence on just a small selection of lenses for one.

The problem with Leica is they failed to adapt to a changiing world, churning out redesigned versions of the same basic camera with their M Series range and retaining a film loading system which is totally antiquated. They only added an aperture priority option as late as the M7, by which time they were in deep doodoo and struggling to survive, put to shame by the likes of the Contax G1 and G2, showing the way to go for modern rangefinder cameras incorporating modern technology and equally good lenses.

Leica brought out the M8 because they finally realised they had to get with the programme if they wanted to survive in the digital revolution and that camera wasn't without it's problems. Whether it and the later M9 are worth the price tag compared to a digital DSLR is another matter. If you're getting it for low profile usage and whisper quietness, then you'll no doubt think it is. If you're getting one just because you want one you wont be worrying about the price and you'll get one regardless of what anyone else thinks anyway.

Would I have a Leica? Hell yes - it would be an M7 for me, but whether I'd actually want to use it is another matter.
 
Last edited:
I'm very tempted to get a M9 for my street photography work. Why? Well, life is too short not to really. :)
 
ped said:
The NEX system and the similar 4/3 systems don't have the same feel of an all mechanical leica, so I don't know how similar they are in anything but size.

The Fuji X100 is more like it, though the lens is not removeable. Looks like a nice camera though, with a good viewfinder.

ped
Click to expand...


There's a rumour doing the rounds that Nikon's mirrorless mft competitor will be based on the X100 chassis, but without the fixed lens.....
 
I mentioned earlier how the Leica M film loading system is the best and most simple system I have ever tried. I don't know how anyone can call it difficult or 'totally antiquated'

See here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jNhaOFiXBQ

EDIT - This is true of my camera, an M4P, and models on from that, so may be different on earlier M1/2 models (pretty sure M3 is the same)

Literally that simple!
ped
 
Last edited:
gnom said:
I'm very tempted to get a M9 for my street photography work. Why? Well, life is too short not to really. :)
Click to expand...

that's what i thought when I got my commission at work last year, so I did. :D

I love:
- the size, weight and look of it. Non geeks think it's an old camera and it gets much less attention than my canon 1d mk2
- the pictures it takes. Fantastic at low ISO. Awesome, flawless lenses with a very active 2nd hand market - my 90mm 2.8 is older than me
- using it. I drive a landrover, ride a fixed gear bike (so just 1 gear), mainly used primes on my SLR and like simple stuff. Not having a million different modes is a good thing, I think.

Not so keen on:
- high ISO isnt as good as it should be for the price compared to even mid-range current SLRs
- it's not as quiet as you might think, and has crashed a couple of times
- having to take the baseplate off to get the card or battery out
- having to attach a separate viewfinder for anything wider than 28mm

And I'm learning to love:
- focussing for myself (I've even started metering manually)
- I know it's insured, but cant get used to a body & 2 lenses being worth twice my car!!

is it worth it? no. Do i regret buying it? a little bit. Will I sell it? no. Just need to use it more :)
 
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? 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?
Click to expand...

I wasn't lusting after a Leica, I was just fed up with carrying my 7D & 24-70 and all the other stuff around. I also want to enjoying the shooting. Using a recent DSLR is like shooting a PC with a lens and a pentaprism. There was always another setting or hidden menu option that I wish I had remembered. I want to be connected to my camera in a way that I can't be with a little point an shoot and I can't be with my 7D. I also want great IQ.
So I bought an M8 last Friday and a CV35mm f1.4.

I love it! Focussing is slow, anyone who says it isn't hasn't used a decent SLR with good glass. My 7D can focus in the dark when I can't see, the M8 can't do that. A Leica can't hold focus on a moving 3 year old. High ISO is awful. It's slow. It's also incredibly noisy. The shutter on an M8 sounds like the shower door slamming. My 7D is quieter and faster.

That being said, I love the images coming out if the M8. I walk to work and back with it shooting every chance I get, it's fun, it doesn't frighten my 3yo daughter, it's light. Just get one!!!
 
ped said:
I mentioned earlier how the Leica M film loading system is the best and most simple system I have ever tried. I don't know how anyone can call it difficult or 'totally antiquated'

See here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jNhaOFiXBQ

EDIT - This is true of my camera, an M4P, and models on from that, so may be different on earlier M1/2 models (pretty sure M3 is the same)

Literally that simple!
ped
Click to expand...

It is 'simple' but you need two hands. Sometimes that's not possible, especiially if you have other cameras draped around you.
Try doing that procedure while running or hiding behind a wall or lying-down - I have. That bottom-plate will always fall out of your grip (or teeth - I used to hold it in my mouth and try not to dribble on it) and land in a puddle just when you really need to be moving fast again.
I used two M6 bodies alongside my Canon SLRs back in the '80's and early '90's and having to change films in the Leica's was something I always hated, especially when using motorised bodies as some PJ's did.

For considered work, they're unsurpassed, even now - those M6 bodies are better-made than any of the modern cameras I own, but for fast work? Nope.
 
If you want a Leica, go get one. Unless you get a digital one or abuse a film one, you can sell it on a year later for as much as you paid for it (or even make a profit). Only you can decide if a rangefinder is for you. Personally I only use my SLR for digital work now (catalogue shoots, digital stock for my design work), everything else is shot on film with my M4, Hexar AF (which is what a truly modern M would be aside from the fixed lens) and Rolleiflex. I feel that it may just be down to the medium rather than the gear, but my film cameras are just 'better' to use.
 
cobra_lite said:
It is 'simple' but you need two hands. Sometimes that's not possible, especiially if you have other cameras draped around you.
Try doing that procedure while running or hiding behind a wall or lying-down - I have. That bottom-plate will always fall out of your grip (or teeth - I used to hold it in my mouth and try not to dribble on it) and land in a puddle just when you really need to be moving fast again.
I used two M6 bodies alongside my Canon SLRs back in the '80's and early '90's and having to change films in the Leica's was something I always hated, especially when using motorised bodies as some PJ's did.

For considered work, they're unsurpassed, even now - those M6 bodies are better-made than any of the modern cameras I own, but for fast work? Nope.
Click to expand...

OK well I accept that, but I can't imagine swapping a memory card or battery is much less fiddly if you are in some sort of warzone environment, but then again I could be wrong!

Cheers
ped
 
FruitFlakes said:
If you want a Leica, go get one. Unless you get a digital one or abuse a film one, you can sell it on a year later for as much as you paid for it (or even make a profit). Only you can decide if a rangefinder is for you. Personally I only use my SLR for digital work now (catalogue shoots, digital stock for my design work), everything else is shot on film with my M4, Hexar AF (which is what a truly modern M would be aside from the fixed lens) and Rolleiflex. I feel that it may just be down to the medium rather than the gear, but my film cameras are just 'better' to use.
Click to expand...

Interesting, sort of the same for me.

I think B+W is much better on film. Colour, however, for me, is shot with my R-D1 digital rangefinder.

You can't beat proper film B+W, I don't think.
 
ped said:
OK well I accept that, but I can't imagine swapping a memory card or battery is much less fiddly if you are in some sort of warzone environment, but then again I could be wrong!

Cheers
ped
Click to expand...

Really? On my 7d I open the flap, eject the card and stick the new one in. On my Contax G2, which is about as advanced as film loading gets with 35mm film, I still have to pull the leader out far enough to reach the red line and then close the back whilst hoping the film doesn't curl back. And I would have to do that 9 times for every change of CF card in my 7d! ;)
 
menthel said:
Really? On my 7d I open the flap, eject the card and stick the new one in. On my Contax G2, which is about as advanced as film loading gets with 35mm film, I still have to pull the leader out far enough to reach the red line and then close the back whilst hoping the film doesn't curl back. And I would have to do that 9 times for every change of CF card in my 7d! ;)
Click to expand...

OK in the interest of not letting this become a long drawn out affair, I know that changing film is more fiddly than changing a battery or whatever. I'm saying that the times where this would be a problem for me are perhaps 0.00001% and if I was in a situation where that speed mattered I doubt taking photos would be high on my priority list.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top