What should I do...a predicament between systems and ability

[Peter Branch]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My guess is that Bocaburger wasn't talking about switching the camera off, but negotiating his way through the host of menu items that he doesn't want or need. And I also guess that he wasn't targeting the SL either, but just explaining why the M cameras continue to work so well for him, and he makes a very valid and valuable point, and I have a lot of sympathy with that view.

 

The point you raise is of some significance but oversimplifying its presentation does not help with its understanding.

I'm well aware of the legions of loyal Leica M owners and fans, I was one of their number for >50 years.

 

The Leica SL can be a bit daunting at first - it's very different to the Leica M - but a little thought reveals that all the "unwanted" settings can be set once and then be forgotten.

The ones that matter to the particular user can easily be placed in the Favourites Menu which is very easy to access.

 

The Leica M has some, but not many, advantages over the SL, they are well known and rehearsed repeatedly on this forum.

 

A conversation with an influential Leica manager at the beginning of this year made it very clear to me that Leica do not regard the "M Line", as he called it, as being the future.

"We will continue to support it." were his precise words.  

[Peter H]

The point you raise is of some significance but oversimplifying its presentation does not help with its understanding.

I'm well aware of the legions of loyal Leica M owners and fans, I was one of their number for >50 years.

 

The Leica SL can be a bit daunting at first - it's very different to the Leica M - but a little thought reveals that all the "unwanted" settings can be set once and then be forgotten.

The ones that matter to the particular user can easily be placed in the Favourites Menu which is very easy to access.

 

The Leica M has some, but not many, advantages over the SL, they are well known and rehearsed repeatedly on this forum.

 

A conversation with an influential Leica manager at the beginning of this year made it very clear to me that Leica do not regard the "M Line", as he called it, as being the future.

"We will continue to support it." were his precise words.  

 

 

All of this is perfectly fair but I don't think it is a counter to the simple but important point that Bocaburger was making.

 

Customers still have a choice and if the direct intuitive simplicity of the M appeals to them, Leica's vision for the future doesn't need to inhibit their choice today.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Giulio Zanni]

A conversation with an influential Leica manager at the beginning of this year made it very clear to me that Leica do not regard the "M Line", as he called it, as being the future.

"We will continue to support it." were his precise words.

To me the M currently is the backbone of Leica. What else??? The SL just came out with a couple of native lenses and the S is a niche product which strife to compete with impressive digital backs. I don't know what Leica has up on its sleeves but the only unique product that they have is the M and its long tradition of lenses.

Edited September 14, 2016 by Giulio Zanni

[Echo63]

Hi Guys,

Posted a few months ago regarding the decision between the M240 and M262.

 

 

I am in a bit of a predicament looking for some advice...

 

 

I have spent a considerable amount of money and time on my photography education. I haven't been to school for it or anything like that but I started with a digital slr and was taught on that for a while. Once I picked up the basics I decided it was time for something a bit different so I went in the direction of a micro 4/3. I still have my Olympus and love it. But I got a Leica Q when they were released and have really enjoyed it. It put the Leica bug in my ear and the camera of them all that I've always had dreams of is an M.

 

 

Here's the predicament...I consider myself to be a good photographer but not great obviously. I am lucky enough to have the means to buy into an M system setup. I'm worried however that even with pictures I think are ok on the M they in actual fact might not be if that makes sense. I have seen other members photos and they blow mine away. So my question is. Is it a worthwhile investment if I'm really willing to spend the time learning and getting better. Or is is definitely a camera for advanced-professional?

 

 

Thanks for reading!

Use the camera you want to use, the one that makes you want to pick it up and go out to take pictures - that is all that matters.

 

I have seen people with top of the line Canon gear, 1D bodies and L lenses - who had no idea, and couldnt take a decent photo - they move from one bit of gear to the next, chasing the new bit of magic to inprove their photos, when the main problem is the couple of inches behind the camera.

By the same token, i have seen a few people who love photography, learn everything they can, have a cheap, battered old entry level camera that they know back to front, who take incredible pics.

 

The M is going to be very unforgiving if you dont learn to use it

The metering works, but you need to know how it sees and when to ignore what it is saying.

The focus is very accurate, and can be fast if you learn how to prefocus, zone focus or estimate distance and focus by feel.

Practice is the key to better photos - regardless of the camera in your hands

[bencoyote]

Use the camera you want to use, the one that makes you want to pick it up and go out to take pictures - that is all that matters.

 

I have seen people with top of the line Canon gear, 1D bodies and L lenses - who had no idea, and couldnt take a decent photo - they move from one bit of gear to the next, chasing the new bit of magic to inprove their photos, when the main problem is the couple of inches behind the camera.

By the same token, i have seen a few people who love photography, learn everything they can, have a cheap, battered old entry level camera that they know back to front, who take incredible pics.

 

The M is going to be very unforgiving if you dont learn to use it

The metering works, but you need to know how it sees and when to ignore what it is saying.

The focus is very accurate, and can be fast if you learn how to prefocus, zone focus or estimate distance and focus by feel.

Practice is the key to better photos - regardless of the camera in your hands

 

I'm going to say that I totally agree with you completely that gear doesn't make the photographer.

I'm also going to agree that the M can be very unforgiving and you have some accurate points.

 

However, I think that there is a little bit of magic in the M platform as a camera. The best way that I have found to express what I think that the magic is that the M inclines photographers toward a process which develops them as photographers. There are some easily identifiable factors like learning to shoot with standard or wide prime lenses. Slowing down and composing shots vs. machine gun shooting. As you point out the relative weakness of the meter and the manual controls. However, I'd say that the magic of the M platform is that it is more than these particular things, it is an emergent property that is stronger than its component parts.

 

So I would say, that more than other cameras, the M can incline you to develop the skills that will ultimately result in you becoming a better photographer -- if you let it. I think that is the magic of the M. I think that is why there are so many good photographers that use the M. In many cases along the way, the M helped make them better photographers.

[Echo63]

However, I think that there is a little bit of magic in the M platform as a camera. The best way that I have found to express what I think that the magic is that the M inclines photographers toward a process which develops them as photographers. There are some easily identifiable factors like learning to shoot with standard or wide prime lenses. Slowing down and composing shots vs. machine gun shooting. As you point out the relative weakness of the meter and the manual controls. However, I'd say that the magic of the M platform is that it is more than these particular things, it is an emergent property that is stronger than its component parts.

 

So I would say, that more than other cameras, the M can incline you to develop the skills that will ultimately result in you becoming a better photographer -- if you let it. I think that is the magic of the M. I think that is why there are so many good photographers that use the M. In many cases along the way, the M helped make them better photographers.

I agree with you too - there is some magic there, and i think it is because of the "faults" i mentioned - working around them, how the meter sees, not knowing the exact framing, not being able to see the DOF pushes you to learn them so they are instinctive.

 

Its kind of like driving a classic sports car, vs a modern supercar.

Yes the supercar may get you there faster, but it is nice to cruise with the top down, wind in your hair, having to double clutch back through the gears for a corner instead of just clicking a flappy paddle.

Sometimes you learn along the journey

[dpitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...

A conversation with an influential Leica manager at the beginning of this year made it very clear to me that Leica do not regard the "M Line", as he called it, as being the future.

"We will continue to support it." were his precise words.

I am not sure even Leica realises what kind of product they made with their M line. In the 70's the rangefinder production line was shut down for about a year... and restarted again because of global protest and demand for rangefinders. I think something similar might happen if they try to shut it down again. In the end Leica would not even have survived the 90's if it was not for the M.

[Tailwagger]

Count me in the camp that a well loved M will aid you in becoming a better photographer... or cure you of any desire to be one. One thing to consider beyond personal shooting style is any predilections for focal length. In general you need to favor working within the usable range of RF, between 28 to 135mm or accept the limitations of the M's live view/EVF... something that coming from a contemporary M4/3s might feel a little too primitive.

 

From your initial post and my own personal experience, I'd advise giving it a go. You'll always wonder otherwise and its likely that curiosity and desire will win out eventually anyway. When it does, chances are you'll regret the time and images lost had you simply gone with an M sooner rather than later.  I know I do.

[jaapv]

A conversation with an influential Leica manager at the beginning of this year made it very clear to me that Leica do not regard the "M Line", as he called it, as being the future.

"We will continue to support it." were his precise words.  

Good enough for me. Apart from incremental keeping up with technology, the 240 is close  to the ultimate DRF.

[RDK]

In my opinion, the M is a wonderful camera, regardless of your ability.

It is a camera that is easy to use, will make you want to take pictures, and rewards you with beautiful results when you do.

I bought mine 6 months ago and my only regret is I didnt buy a Lieca many years ago.

[pico]

  I'm worried however that even with pictures I think are ok on the M they in actual fact might not be if that makes sense.

 

It makes no sense whatsoever. The pictures suck or they don't. It has nothing to do with the camera. The quality of a picture has no relationship with the quality of the camera.

 

 

.

Edited September 19, 2016 by pico

[Exodies]

It makes no sense whatsoever. The pictures suck or they don't. It has nothing to do with the camera. The quality of a picture has no relationship with the quality of the camera.

 

 

.

Do the two "quality" in your last sentence have the same meaning?

[Herr Barnack]

Hi Guys,

Posted a few months ago regarding the decision between the M240 and M262.

 

 

I am in a bit of a predicament looking for some advice...

 

 

I have spent a considerable amount of money and time on my photography education. I haven't been to school for it or anything like that but I started with a digital slr and was taught on that for a while. Once I picked up the basics I decided it was time for something a bit different so I went in the direction of a micro 4/3. I still have my Olympus and love it. But I got a Leica Q when they were released and have really enjoyed it. It put the Leica bug in my ear and the camera of them all that I've always had dreams of is an M.

 

 

Here's the predicament...I consider myself to be a good photographer but not great obviously. I am lucky enough to have the means to buy into an M system setup. I'm worried however that even with pictures I think are ok on the M they in actual fact might not be if that makes sense. I have seen other members photos and they blow mine away. So my question is. Is it a worthwhile investment if I'm really willing to spend the time learning and getting better. Or is is definitely a camera for advanced-professional?

 

 

Thanks for reading!

 

@marsbars,

 

You are a self taught photographer with no formal education in photography.  Here is another self taught photographer with no formal education in photography:  https://pro.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=CMS3&VF=MAGO31_10_VForm&ERID=24KL53ZOQY When he was still in high school, Constantine Manos started with a used Leica M as I recall; there is no line in the sand that a person must cross first before they are "justified" in using an M camera. 

 

Quite the contrary, in fact.  When I look back to 13 years ago, my images were less than great - very much so.  I got a film MP anyway.  Why?  Because I was obsessed with image making; it was all I thought about, all I wanted to do.  The MP and my two lenses drove me to commit to my photography, to the work needed to elevate the quality and content of my images.  Owning and using a legendary camera like the M is inspiring.  The M has a formidable history and reputation that makes photographers of all skill levels endeavor to live up to that reputation in both the quality and the content of their work. 

 

 

...I have seen other members photos and they blow mine away...

 

The thing is this:  There was a day when those members made images that were no farther along than yours - and they still do.  People post only their best work here; we don't see the turds that they produce.  All of us produce far more photographic turds than diamonds.  It's just part of the process. 

 

Every photographer has seen images made by other people that blow theirs away, people like Ansel Adams, Clyde Butcher, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Constantine Manos, Steve McCurry, Alex Webb and others.  Looking at those images, letting yourself become sad and thinking, "my images will NEVER be that good" is the worst kind of poison a photographer can spoon feed themselves; don't do it!  We all need to look at those images and use them to stoke the photographic fire that burns in our belly.  We need to use them as inspiration and as a source of motivation to improve our own images. 

 

Henri Cartier-Bresson once said, “As far as I am concerned, taking photographs is a means of understanding which cannot be separated from other means of visual expression. It is a way of shouting, of freeing oneself, not of proving or asserting one’s own originality. It is a way of life.”  That is exactly what photography is for those of us who want more than just nice snapshots of our vacation or family reunion.  Photography is a way of life; it is a journey, not a destination.  Seeing your work improve takes years, not weeks.  Most people have no patience for that kind of journey; they want it now without the work and commitment.  To that outlook I would reply:  People in hell want ice water. 

 

Only you can decide of you are into that journey - the photographic life - and whether you are that committed to image making.  If you are, get an M - you won't regret it.  You have to pay for it only once and it's your money.  At the end of the day, no one else gets to decide if you are "justified" in investing in an M camera and lenses when it's your money and your journey.

Edited September 19, 2016 by Carlos Danger

[pico]

Do the two "quality" in your last sentence have the same meaning?

 

Oh no, I'm having a ZAMM flashback!

Edited September 19, 2016 by pico

[Exodies]

I was thinking the quality of the picture is the quality of the function of the camera while the other quality is that of the form of the camera. Once you have subtracted the performance of the photographer and the nature of the scene of course.

(I probably don't need to add, which is why I will, that I am a great fan of tautology).

Edited September 19, 2016 by Exodies

[pico]

(I probably don't need to add, which is why I will, that I am a great fan of tautology).

 

Aristotle: "To say of that which is, that it is, is true. To say of that which is, that it is not, is false. To say of that which is not, that it is, is false. To say of that which is not, that it is not, is true."

[Jeff S]

I wonder what Aristotle would make of today's ubiquitous phrase "it is what it is".  Here's one take...  https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mindbloggling/201405/the-hidden-meaning-it-is-what-it-is

 

Jeff

[jaapv]

Sheesh - how to make a simple thing overly complicated - it takes two psychologists, I suppose. "It is what it is" means acceptance - that is all...

[robert_parker]

Hi Marsbars !!

 

I think if you have got to the point of asking the question, then the way to answer it is to buy an M and let loose.

 

If you don't happen to like it, you'll be able to sell it for a good sum and if, as I suspect it enchants you, you will never regret having taken the plunge.

 

As said earlier, this camera will always have something waiting for you, just beyond the horizon of your skills, to encourage you forward, no matter how expert or skilful you become.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Gregm61]

Hi Guys,

 

I have spent a considerable amount of money and time on my photography education. I haven't been to school for it or anything like that but I started with a digital slr and was taught on that for a while. Once I picked up the basics I decided it was time for something a bit different so I went in the direction of a micro 4/3. I still have my Olympus and love it. But I got a Leica Q when they were released and have really enjoyed it. It put the Leica bug in my ear and the camera of them all that I've always had dreams of is an M.

 

 

Here's the predicament...I consider myself to be a good photographer but not great obviously. I am lucky enough to have the means to buy into an M system setup. I'm worried however that even with pictures I think are ok on the M they in actual fact might not be if that makes sense. I have seen other members photos and they blow mine away. So my question is. Is it a worthwhile investment if I'm really willing to spend the time learning and getting better. Or is is definitely a camera for advanced-professional?

 

If you've got the means and desire, by all means get one. Until you've at least tried it, you'll always wonder.

 

I purchased a new M262 earlier this year and a set of M lenses. Love it. Took it on a trip in May to see my daughter and really liked the 28-50mm prime combination.

 

I just returned from a trip to Wyoming for Fall colors, wildlife, etc., and the Leica stayed home, taking instead my Olympus E-M1 outfit, including the three f2.8 zooms (7-14, 12-40 and 40-150mm) and I just pre-ordered the upcoming 12-100mm f4.

 

I've waffled back & forth between the two systems, at times preferring one over the other. No doubt I'll be picking up the new E-M1 Mark II when it's available later this year.

 

The Leica M is a good second system to own. It's different enough to keep things interesting and is an easy carry if you don't have a need to cover as much ground optically as the zooms provide. I definitely would not have a M system as my only option.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Gregm61