Mystic Posted January 31, 2009 Share #1 Posted January 31, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) hey, my name is Daniel, im 20 and i love to take photos . normally i work with my digital Nikon D2x and the Fuji S5 Pro but i really like the leica cameras too. its something special and its very interesting for me to see which quality i can reach with a slide or b/w film. so i had a Leica R4 which i sold to get another camera. probably a R8 but im not sure because the M system is a lure to me but otherwise the handling is completely different. my question goes to all Leica M photographer: why did u prefer a M camera instead of a R? or is there someone who has got the some problem - M or R system? best regards daniel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 31, 2009 Posted January 31, 2009 Hi Mystic, Take a look here Hi im new and i got a question. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
kenneth Posted February 1, 2009 Share #2 Posted February 1, 2009 May I slightly re address the question back to you. Why do you want a leica M system camera? What do you think it will give that other cameras wont? Because a Leica M body and optics are a major financial outlay it might be worth ask yourself the above questions. To answer your question directly. I chose a Leica M system because of it's backwards compatibility. it's compactness, it's unobtrusiveness, it's build quality unmatched in the industry, it's robustness and last but not least, it's optics. Daniel I hope this helps Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
enboe Posted February 1, 2009 Share #3 Posted February 1, 2009 They are completely different experiences. The rangefinder is best for what I call conversational photography. You shoot at ranges close enough to speak to the subject without shouting. The cameras are smaller and lighter, and tend not to get the paparazzi response that a DSLR does. On the other hand, they are not as flexible in all situations. Macro and long telephoto work are much easier with a DSLR. You may consider renting an M for a weekend and seeing if you like the experience. I would recommend an M6, M7, or MP if you buy, and if you find a clean one second hand, you should be able to get 60-65% of your money back out of it, much better than a DSLR. Have fun. Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted February 1, 2009 Share #4 Posted February 1, 2009 I chose a Leica M because a compact rangefinder -- Olympus -- was my first serious camera and I liked the handling. That was a while ago (mid 70s). I have also used SLRs. Both are excellent, but I like the compact size of the Leica M, its outstanding optics and build quality, and also I find can focus more accurately using a rangefinder, especially with wideangle lenses. I find the M ideal for scenics, architecture, travel and people. Of course, I wouldn't recommend it for macro, sports, or wildlife photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 1, 2009 Share #5 Posted February 1, 2009 ...why did u prefer a M camera instead of a R?or is there someone who has got the some problem - M or R system?... I don't prefer the M system, i like both. Ms are rangefinders. Completely different beasts to reflex cameras. You don't see the world on a screen, which is a somewhat virtual experience. An SLR or a DSLR is like a periscope or a TV set. With an RF or a DRF you view the world in person, so to speak, you're more an actor than an observer. Difficult to explain. My best advice is don't buy an M right now. Too expensive for a try. Borrow one previously or buy a Voigtlander Bessa. You'll probably need a couple of weeks of months to make sure if RFs are your cup of tea. Happy snaps! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andit Posted February 1, 2009 Share #6 Posted February 1, 2009 Hi Daniel, Welcome to the forum, we hope that we will see a lot more of you here. A rangefinder camera does work completely different to a SLR. It depends a great deal on what you want to photograph. If you're doing mostly landscapes, travel photography or general street photography then the rangefinder is more suited to that kind of work. On the other hand, wildlife, sports, bird life and macro work are more suited to a SLR. I mostly do landscape, technical/product photography and still life/abstract work. The M system is so much more compact - the body and the lenses are much smaller than the SLR equivalent. One other thing that I must point out here is that the M system is still pretty much manual photography. No Autofocus, no full program automatic, the camera can not tell you the time right now in Bora Bora or schedule your meetings and appointments for you. However, working manual makes you think about composition, exposure, depth of field and how you want to portray the subject. It gives you full control. The look through the viewfinder is far superior to any SLR. It is clear, bright and you see what is outside of the frame that you are currently working with. You can focus the camera in light levels far lower than what autofocus can. Also there is no mirror blackout. It is a complete change of mindset - that I happen to like. Also, I worked with manual camera's many years ago and just got lazy with auto focus and auto everything. I tend to agree with what lct said above. Even if you get a Kodak Retina somewhere or a Zeiss Ikon - get an old, used, film rangefinder. Run a couple of rolls of film through and see if you like this kind of photography. Once you are certain, then get your Leica M system. In terms of Leica, I know that I sound nostalgic here, there is just something about an image made with a Leica. It has a look that is so distinct and unique - you can not explain it in words. My explanation for this is that Leica lenses and camera's are hand made - it is the feeling, the care, the attention and the "love" for the product that these people put into their work that you find again in the image. I know that in real world terms this is a load of BS, but that is my explanation. Andreas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobPS Posted February 1, 2009 Share #7 Posted February 1, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi Daniel, I'm new here too, just got my first M last december. My reason in getting an M was simple: I've been using SLR for a long time and dslr the past two years (no leica R though) and I want to try something different, I want to try the "rangefinder experience". So I bought an M6, It's quite a different experience and turns out I really love taking pictures with my M6. As a bonus its size is small, not that much smaller than my FM2N or minolta SLR, but compared to my canon dslr with a 24-70 lens attached (which stays on the camera 90% of the time), the M6 and 50 cron is small and light. Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystic Posted February 1, 2009 Author Share #8 Posted February 1, 2009 good evening, first of all i got to thank you for your answers it was very interesting for me to read and there were some very important points. the suggestion that i buy a "cheap" RF camera to see what its really like isnt bad but the problem is that most of these cameras havent got an exposure meter and thats a thing i dont want to miss. of course there are situation were u just use the manual mode to create your "own" picture but i need a small evidence to see which time i got with this and that aperture. then: why im interested in a Leica M camera: they are nice and small, i really like the handlings and the quality and the way it works - simple and nearly without electronic stuff. photography preferences: avalible light, macro, landscape, architekture, sometimes sports and people/street Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 1, 2009 Share #9 Posted February 1, 2009 ...the suggestion that i buy a "cheap" RF camera to see what its really like isnt bad but the problem is that most of these cameras havent got an exposure meter and thats a thing i dont want to miss... Most current ones do have a meter. See Voigtlander Bessa R4M / R4A Intro. I would give the same advice to my son but i would not forbid him to purchase a Leica... if it were with his own money of course. (BTW i don't work for Cosina or Cameraquest and i don't own a Bessa myself. Only Leicas and Epsons as far as RFs) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguewave Posted February 2, 2009 Share #10 Posted February 2, 2009 Daniel. I don't think an internal meter is a plus. The M2 & M3 (both of which I own & use) are excellent. All you need is a small hand held meter like the Gossen Digisix, which I always carry in my pocket. It's very accurate, educational and easy to use. I shoot both film & digital with Leica M's & R's. The principle difference is that the M's are almost silent, very non threatening and discreet. That doesn't mean you get better pictures, just different ones. One camera you might explore is the Leica CL. I use mine in the New York subways all the time. The body is so small. I can hide it in my hand & it has a very accurate meter. The 40mm f2 Summicron is superb. Just a thought. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 2, 2009 Share #11 Posted February 2, 2009 good evening, first of all i got to thank you for your answers it was very interesting for me to read and there were some very important points.the suggestion that i buy a "cheap" RF camera to see what its really like isnt bad but the problem is that most of these cameras havent got an exposure meter and thats a thing i dont want to miss. of course there are situation were u just use the manual mode to create your "own" picture but i need a small evidence to see which time i got with this and that aperture. then: why im interested in a Leica M camera: they are nice and small, i really like the handlings and the quality and the way it works - simple and nearly without electronic stuff. photography preferences: avalible light, macro, landscape, architekture, sometimes sports and people/street As the previous poster said, meter is not a must expecially if your "first and cheap" RF is a sort of test: if and when you'll finally resolve to have a Leica, you can decide if you want it metered or not (I used for > 20 years an unmetered M4, with small Gossen in my pocket). Of the 6 photo preferences you quote 2 are definitely pro/RF (available light, people/street); landscape and architecture are someway neutral between RF and SLR, even if, in interiors, RF allows handeld photo more often than SLR; macro is not the reign of RF, but Leica passionate (me included) have always done macro with proper, and excellent, old Leitz accessories: in this forum you can find many very good macro taken with M cameras; sports... well, it depends on which... I'm only a casual sport shooter, and have always thought that it's the reign of telezooms... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystic Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted February 6, 2009 @ Ict, Voigtlander Bessa R4 is probably a nice camera but just "for a try" its to expensive, before i would buy that camera i would spend some more € and buy a Leica M6. and my problem is that i really dont want to work with an external exposure meter, im sure the Gossen Digisix works pretty good but i dont want to put away my camera just to check out how good or bad the light situation is in this area. i tried that with a Leica M3 but....., the pictures were great, no doubt about that. but i couldnt work as good/free/smooth as always. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 6, 2009 Share #13 Posted February 6, 2009 @ Ict, Voigtlander Bessa R4 is probably a nice camera but just "for a try" its to expensive, before i would buy that camera i would spend some more € and buy a Leica M6. and my problem is that i really dont want to work with an external exposure meter... Both M6 and Bessas have a built-in meter so this could be the way to go if you set aside the Leica CL & Minolta CLE i refer to below. Just taking a look at eBay, the cheapest M6 with professional warranty i've found out in Europe is 860 EUR here : http://tinyurl.com/b38n9u. Or a new Voigtlander Bessa R3A can be had for 549 EUR here : http://tinyurl.com/dc3urv I've dealt with both sellers they are trusty IMHO Otherwise what about smaller bodies like the Leica CL or the Minola CLE? The CL has a manual built-in meter and the CLE is automatic (aperture priority). The CL works normally with 40 and 90mm lenses, the CLE with 28, 40 and 90mm. This CLE looks good but i don't read German so i don't know if it is warrantied by the seller : http://tinyurl.com/bq9cxq Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystic Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share #14 Posted February 6, 2009 the Leica CL is a good and cheap(er) alternative. i have to think about that. this camera has nearly everything i need. but at the other side there is the massive Leica R8 which i really like, too. im not sure which system i should buy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andit Posted February 6, 2009 Share #15 Posted February 6, 2009 Hi Daniel, While the R8 is not as compact as an M camera, it is a very capable machine that you can do all styles of photography with (including sports, wildlife, bird life and macro). This would probably be a better bet for you at the moment. Andreas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 6, 2009 Share #16 Posted February 6, 2009 If you like Reflex cameras, some s/h Leica R lenses are rather cheap nowadays, at least cheaper than their M counterparts, and earlier bodies like R4s to R7 are not bulky at all. Here's my R4s which should cost less than 300 EUR nowadays. But you won't learn to use a rangefinder with it needless to say. Happy snaps! Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/75757-hi-im-new-and-i-got-a-question/?do=findComment&comment=801689'>More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted February 6, 2009 Share #17 Posted February 6, 2009 and my problem is that i really dont want to work with an external exposure meter, im sure the Gossen Digisix works pretty good but i dont want to put away my camera just to check out how good or bad the light situation is in this area. Eh, I am not buying that, I have two M3's, an M6 and an MP-3 and I use a Digisix with all of them, I shoot slide film too. So the question is why would you have to put the camera away to check the light? That seems odd... By the way, there is no such thing as bad light, there is just light and it is up to the craftsman at hand to make the most of it. You will almost always get more accurate readings with an incident meter.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystic Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share #18 Posted February 6, 2009 Here's my R4s which should cost less than 300 EUR nowadays. But you won't learn to use a rangefinder with it needless to say. Happy snaps! hi , the R4 is a very nice camera no doubt about that. i owned it too, i just sold it because i wanted to buy the R8 because of some features and handling too ( i like big SLR cameras ) but somehow im really interested in RF cameras. its not the size that matters, its about quality and probalby im interested in a new "kind of camera" thats why i like the Leica M series . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystic Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share #19 Posted February 6, 2009 Eh, I am not buying that, I have two M3's, an M6 and an MP-3 and I use a Digisix with all of them, I shoot slide film too. So the question is why would you have to put the camera away to check the light? That seems odd... By the way, there is no such thing as bad light, there is just light and it is up to the craftsman at hand to make the most of it. You will almost always get more accurate readings with an incident meter.. im not sure how it handles because i never worked with something like this. i just mean: -you got more gadgets -you have to juggle around with more things -you have to take your eyes away from the camera to see what the "gadget" tells you im accustomed to see with time or aperture i can use in that situation with taking a look at other things, do you know what i mean? btw you can give me your M6 or MP for free :D best regards Daniel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andit Posted February 6, 2009 Share #20 Posted February 6, 2009 Hi Daniel, It's really not that difficult shooting with a lightmeter. I often used a Gossen VarioSix, especially when working with medium format stuff. Once you take a reading, you set the aperture and shutter speed. You can then happily photograph many shots. Only once you change location or there is a sudden change of light (such as when the sun moves behind clouds) do you need to meter again. It sounds complicated, but is very simple - I often used to meter by hand while using my EOS 1N - in that way I knew that the camera was giving me the right readings. Andreas PS: After a while you get really good at estimating exposure settings. Even on the M8, I often find that I over ride the settings that the camera gives me, simply because I want to expose the image differently to what the camera thinks. I find that the camera often sets exposure to take the shadows into account - problem is you loose the highlights. It's easy to recover the details that are hidden in the shadows, but once details are blown out, they are gone. In effect I'm used to working with incident light readings (that is the actual amount of light falling onto the subject), whereas all camera's take reflected readings (the amount of light that the subject reflects back towards the camera). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.