Pindy Posted November 22, 2009 Share #1 Posted November 22, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Battling some feelings at this moment and wondering if any of you were SLR/DSLR people who gave up the SLR for an M system. It's obvious that you cannot replace everything an SLR does with a RF, so don't think I'm asking about the relative merits—I'm not. I just was hoping a few of you had a story of no longer needing a reflex camera once you discovered the M did what you needed. I'm having a complete SLR backlash right now and trying to figure my way through it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted November 22, 2009 Share #2 Posted November 22, 2009 No. I used to use an OM2 system and replaced that with a R system I also use an M system alongside the SLR. You don't have to stop using one system if you buy into another. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
underground Posted November 22, 2009 Share #3 Posted November 22, 2009 No. But I use my M's more often. My older kids use my SLR/DSLR equipment all the time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clook Posted November 22, 2009 Share #4 Posted November 22, 2009 I'm running with both at the minute. (M8 & M8.2 along with Nikon D200 &D300) Last weekend I shot a studio portrait job with the M8's followed by a pony club event with the Nikon's. I've also been 'hunting' all week with the M8's for location shots locally that I need for a calendar very soon, shooting mostly infra-red, which I can't do using the Nikons. If I hadn't bought into the M cameras I would probably have upgraded at least one DSLR to a D3 with glass but now I've no notion at all to upgrade the DSLR kit. I would love to say I can do without the DSLR's but I would have had to turn down the pony club job, and that's just looking back over the past week. Having said that If I had had another portrait job...well you know what I mean, I'm trying to stay versatile. I by far prefer the M8's, but you didn't want to get into the merits of either so I'll stop there! Hope this is of help. All the best. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted November 22, 2009 Share #5 Posted November 22, 2009 Yes - back in 1969 when I part-exchanged a Minolta SR-1 for a IIc and never regretted it. But most of the time since then I've used both Leicas and SLRs, and I wouldn't want to be without either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juergen Posted November 22, 2009 Share #6 Posted November 22, 2009 Yes, I did, back in the mid 90s. Meanwhile I am using an SLR again, digital and not from Leica, alongside the Ms. Juergen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 22, 2009 Share #7 Posted November 22, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...I just was hoping a few of you had a story of no longer needing a reflex camera once you discovered the M did what you needed... To the point where i don't need macro or telephoto any more? No sorry this never happened to me. I've always used both reflex and rangefinders cameras since my first M (4) and Canon (ftb) and i still use dSLRs to shoot moving subjects when i can. Shot this one in burst mode between 2 (slowly ) moving cars. Could be better for sure but i was happy to catch her charming smile. Canon 5D, Apo-Telyt 180/3.4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted November 22, 2009 Share #8 Posted November 22, 2009 I use my Nikon so scarcely, that I'm now thinking of selling it (which I've never thought would be the case ...). As I've acquired a Panasonic G1, the telephoto and occasional macro is covered, and the G1 is an almost perfect fit for the M in terms of footprint. Cheers Ivo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 22, 2009 Share #9 Posted November 22, 2009 The G1 is just another sort of SLR no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted November 22, 2009 Share #10 Posted November 22, 2009 Yes I did. The only SLRs I now have is a Pentax ME Super I bought in the late 80s, and a Leica R8. Since I only have a 50mm lens for either of them I'll be using by M8 in preference. I haven't used an SLR for about two and a half years. Obviously that's a personal thing, but from the very first moment I picked up an M around eleven years ago I've had no real desire to use an SLR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted November 22, 2009 Share #11 Posted November 22, 2009 No, I would never give up my SLR. After reading so much praise on the Leica M on this forum I decided to get the M7 back in 2003. Simply a Great camera for Static and Low light shots, but I prefer my Leica R's for everything else. Would I buy another M, only if I am unable to buy SLR's, as I consider all my best photographic shots were taken with Reflex cameras. So why do I still keep my M7, when I need to shoot hand held in low light and no time to set the tripod up. Ken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted November 22, 2009 Share #12 Posted November 22, 2009 Excellent shot LCT. It's a pity I cannot use my 21-35mm and 28-90mm on the 5D-2, however I have been offered the use of the Canon 7D over a free weekend when I have the chance. Well done. Ken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted November 22, 2009 Share #13 Posted November 22, 2009 I did have to sell all my DSLR gear to justify the purchase of M8. I just found that rangefinder photography suited me better and that in any case the quality of the Leica optics could not be bettered. That said I tried using a cheap Nikon FE for a few weeks recently and I immediately noticed the difference between the gentle action of a rangefinder shutter and the thwump of a mirror box moving out of the way. Too much vibration for low light shots so I got a M7 instead. LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 22, 2009 Share #14 Posted November 22, 2009 Hi Ken, thanks. 1.0x magnification and 100% coverage, i would dream of the 7D finder in a small full frame camera. Would remind me of my R4s. The R10 could have done this easily i guess but Leica preferred looking for new clients among Arab cheikhs, Russian oligarks and pro studio photogs i'm afraid. So much the better for them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christer Posted November 22, 2009 Share #15 Posted November 22, 2009 I have just sold my two Nikon F100s with 24, 50 and 85mm lenses. They did not do anything for me that a RF can't do; I am not into macro or telephoto. They were just clumsy and plasticy, but the (film) negatives were OK,even good. I did not find AF to be better than manual focus. Well sometimes it was faster, but other times it did not focus properly. Also I am trying to cut down on equipment and two M7s (one with TMX and one with TMXY) and 35mm, 50mm lenses will cover 90% of the tasks. My 90mm covers another 9%. The rest I do not worry about. BTW i have used SLRs for decades, since the OM1 came out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveYork Posted November 22, 2009 Share #16 Posted November 22, 2009 In the old days, a Leica was a Leitz rangefinder and a Leicaflex was the Leitz SLR. But until very recently, Leica was the name of the company that made both SLRs and rangefinders. So your question should be: Did you give up an SLR for a Leica M? Ms are great, but they don't do everything. There's a place for both. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angora Posted November 22, 2009 Share #17 Posted November 22, 2009 In the old days, a Leica was a Leitz rangefinder and a Leicaflex was the Leitz SLR. But until very recently, Leica was the name of the company that made both SLRs and rangefinders. So your question should be: Did you give up an SLR for a Leica M? Ms are great, but they don't do everything. There's a place for both. Word. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccis Posted November 22, 2009 Share #18 Posted November 22, 2009 Yes, I used to be a Canon guy and gave it up for a Leica M. I was never a telephoto/macro user (my longest lens was an 85mm) and for my style and the way I work the switch was a no-brainer. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted November 22, 2009 Share #19 Posted November 22, 2009 I use my Nikon so scarcely, that I'm now thinking of selling it (which I've never thought would be the case ...).Ivo I did just this a couple of weeks ago. I bought my first Leica 6 years ago and didn't use my F3HP+MD-4+lenses since. So I sold them all and got surprisingly good prices. No regrets but I do have my Exakta IIa+Biotar and Fuji dSLR to compensate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest henri klein Posted November 22, 2009 Share #20 Posted November 22, 2009 ... you cannot replace everything an SLR does with a RF... you cannot -and shall not intend to- replace anything an slr does with a rf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.