UliWer Posted July 14, 2010 Share #21 Posted July 14, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...Its the basics of photography implemented in a seamless clean manner. Though when you look at it a little bit closer, you might find out that the rangefinder is the much more complicated and even absurd concept. With an SLR you look into the viewfinder and the camera enables you to look though the lens. Lens, camera and eye are integrated tools. A rangefinder can be handled and looked through even if the lens is covered by a cap or without any lens. What you see is not the same what the lens sees. You have to guess and adjust to get an approximate idea what the photo will show you. The lens has it's own point of view, which seems to be useless in the photographic procedure. Each lens for a rangefinder seems to wear a stamp saying: "The human eye is not allowed to look though me!" It's just the camera which gets a chance to share what the lens sees for a fracture of a second. At the same time the eye looks out of the window. The collapsible lens is the true symbol for the symbiotic relationship between lens and and a rangefinder body. The lens says: "Leave me alone, I want to rest in the lap of my cam." The rangefinder lens is more like a cat than like an optical tool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 14, 2010 Posted July 14, 2010 Hi UliWer, Take a look here M9 users (M8 too): Is it the glass or the camera that attracts you? . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gib_robinson Posted July 15, 2010 Share #22 Posted July 15, 2010 It's the whole package. Yes the glass is superb and if it wasn't, I would never have bought an M in the first place; but the body is also unique. DRF photography is simply different from DSLR photography -- size, weight, unobtrusiveness are part of it but looking at the world through a RF is a very different experience from a DSLR. I stay more connected to what's around me. I have to do more work to frame an image using a RF but it engages me more. And, of course, certain types of photography require working "in the middle of things" without the distraction of a BIG camera. In those situations, really fine, fast glass plus the habits that go with field focusing and manual exposure on a small camera are all crucial. I don't know of any substitute for the M system. I should add that I found the M8 less satisfying than my M9 but quite a bit. I like working with wider lenses and a FF sensor allows that easily. --Gib Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sm23221 Posted July 15, 2010 Share #23 Posted July 15, 2010 It's not the glass or camera alone, but rather both together. Compact and simple, it delivers landscape images like no other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PasMichiel Posted July 15, 2010 Share #24 Posted July 15, 2010 The fast lenses; the simple compact body; The simple settings for digital picture making. Even when you're used to a M4-2 or M6 the M8 is like a glove that fit. Don't have to think about the technical stuff and just make pictures. I love it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nafpie Posted July 15, 2010 Share #25 Posted July 15, 2010 It's not the glass or camera alone, but rather both together. Compact and simple, it delivers [...] images like no other. Well said. Thank you! Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted July 15, 2010 Share #26 Posted July 15, 2010 It's the fantastic compact glass coupled with a minimalistic camera concept and design. Everything "reduced to the max". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pintpot Posted July 15, 2010 Share #27 Posted July 15, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) . Everything "reduced to the max". Having used Leica before (111a & 111f) this is what I wanted, I've got a Sony DSLR kit - nice camera, do I use all the extra features - no - don't need them! I don't have to worry about enything on my M8 - i just have to take the photos! Tony:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
esquire53 Posted July 15, 2010 Share #28 Posted July 15, 2010 Having used Leica before ...... isn't the same for most of us, we had the glass from our good old M analog days and couldn't wait for the M digital; got the intermediate M8 but only were happy with the full frame we now have or want ... I think the question can only be answered by new Leica users, glass or camera ... (by the way, the shape of the M6 is still better than the M9 ...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PasMichiel Posted July 15, 2010 Share #29 Posted July 15, 2010 isn't the same for most of us, we had the glass from our good old M analog days and couldn't wait for the M digital; got the intermediate M8 but only were happy with the full frame we now have or want ...I think the question can only be answered by new Leica users, glass or camera ... (by the way, the shape of the M6 is still better than the M9 ...) Maybe it's the retro-look too? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted July 15, 2010 Share #30 Posted July 15, 2010 The size of the RF system is the main thing for me. Professional Canon / Nikon / Minolta / Zeiss etc glass is super good too. It's when you put together excellent Leica glass AND the small format RF body, you get the killer combination... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted July 15, 2010 Share #31 Posted July 15, 2010 Maybe it's the retro-look too? or the wonderfully convenient 17th century bottom plate?---))) peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elansprint72 Posted July 15, 2010 Share #32 Posted July 15, 2010 Anyone here take photographs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PasMichiel Posted July 16, 2010 Share #33 Posted July 16, 2010 Anyone here take photographs? How many do you need . I have 15 years of digitalized rolls of film and a lot op directories of digital pictures. So it's 22950 analog and 1500 digital pictures made by Leica (CL, R4, R5, R8, M4-2, M6 and M8). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdannn Posted July 16, 2010 Share #34 Posted July 16, 2010 Simply stated: GLASS first. Analog controls second. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted August 10, 2010 Share #35 Posted August 10, 2010 I came to the M-system because of the combination of camera and lenses. For me it is not so much about 'Leica' as it is about the combination of superb image quality, unobtrusiveness and glass. I love my Zeiss lenses, but my Summicron 50 has a special something that none of the Zeiss' or Voigtlanders have. I am getting an Elmarit 28 and a Summarit 75, and I am really looking forward to them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theendlesshouse Posted August 10, 2010 Share #36 Posted August 10, 2010 deleted off topic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyFoto Posted August 10, 2010 Share #37 Posted August 10, 2010 For me its the system as a whole. My M8.2 is part of a M system. I still happily use mechanical film M cameras which continue to just feel right in many circumstances. The M8.2 is a rewarding compliment to those solid mechanical machines, despite the need to swop filters and the crop factor - truth is I enjoy the crop factor. The common factor is indeed the glass. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted August 10, 2010 Share #38 Posted August 10, 2010 Body first and foremost. Size, weight, manual split-image focusing, relatively quiet sound, minimal camera shake. The glass is - whatever fits on an M mount at a reasonable price. As it happens, I'd loaded up on used Leitz-Canada glass before most of the C/V or ZM lenses appeared on the market. Otherwise I might well have chosen those at the time. I do have a preference for the contrast, color, consistent handling, and "drawing" of the Mandler Leitz lenses - within the universe of "cheapish glass that fits on an M body." But the key element in picking any lens is still "fits on an M body." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted August 10, 2010 Share #39 Posted August 10, 2010 Leica's choice is best quality up to ISO 1600, hence a CCD sensor. Would they have chosen for noiseless processed high-ISO it would be CMos. Which high-end CCD outperforms the M9 sensor? In fact which high-end sensor do you mean? the D3x sensor outperforms the M9 sensor in every possible respect, including low iso noise, high and medium iso noise, dynamic range, color accuracy etc. no need to go into denial mode. nevertheless, i use the M9 more often than the D3x. it is the lenses and the weight factor. peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted August 11, 2010 Share #40 Posted August 11, 2010 The Leica M body is just comfortable to me... so body first, lenses second. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.