A Leica is an instrument, not a tool

[StephenPatterson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had a very enjoyable time at Steve Huff's LA workshop last weekend. The group consisted of about 60% Leica owners (mainly M9s) and 40% micro 4/3rd guys. Several of the Leica owners were fairly new to rangefinders, and many of the 4/3rd guys expressed an interest in owning an M9. There were also some extremely talented Leica shooters in attendance, our own Ohnri (Bill) being a prime example. His images from Dubai with the 21 Summilux and Noctilux, as well as his cage boxing photos, took everyone's breath away.

 

In my conversations with both new owners and those who planned to soon acquire a Leica M I was amazed at the lack of understanding about the learning curve of the Leica. This was especially true when discussing the rangefinder operation and focus technique. I explained how I practiced focusing by estimating range, then setting the focus on my lens, and then bringing the rangefinder to my eye to gauge my accuracy. This seemed to surprise many. When I then went on to explain that the real test was being able to focus without looking at the lens scale, but just by positioning the focus tab, most seemed genuinely shocked that such a thing was even possible.

 

I finally explained that learning to use a Leica is very similar to learning a musical instrument. Your muscle memory, and developing a "feel" or "relationship" with your instrument is a key part of the process. Learning the subtle nuances of different Leica lenses is really no different than learning the differences between the violin and viola, or piano and harpsichord; they may be similar, but are actually quite different.

 

In flying we always said, "there is no substitute for time in the seat". It didn't matter how "natural" a pilot was, it seldom trumped experience. What has this to do with Leica? Simply that those of us here who are new should adopt a long term strategy to master this instrument we call the Leica M. The reward is a new way of seeing and a lifetime of memorable images.

 

Enjoy!!!!

[pico]

[... snip interesting material ...]In flying we always said, "there is no substitute for time in the seat". It didn't matter how "natural" a pilot was, it seldom trumped experience. What has this to do with Leica? Simply that those of us here who are new should adopt a long term strategy to master this instrument we call the Leica M. The reward is a new way of seeing and a lifetime of memorable images.

 

You are a better man than I am. I could not fly by the seat. I only flew in the right seat on MU2s (short and long) and on our Lear jet I could only peek inside the pilot's cabin. Flying at night they could get into a turn that swear I could not feel. And on the Voodoo simulator I was completely lost without the instruments. My almost-twin brother experienced the same and quit flying saying, "I could get disoriented too easily and got a bad feeling so I quit."

 

You were right about Leica focusing. I had to relearn it - in fact, still relearning after losing feeling after a hand trauma.

 

Sounds like you had a great time. Thanks for sharing it.

.

[bill]

Word.

 

This should be made a sticky.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[zlatkob]

I finally explained that learning to use a Leica is very similar to learning a musical instrument. Your muscle memory, and developing a "feel" or "relationship" with your instrument is a key part of the process. Learning the subtle nuances of different Leica lenses is really no different than learning the differences between the violin and viola, or piano and harpsichord; they may be similar, but are actually quite different.

I completely agree! I feel the same way about the Leica. But I feel the same way about my Canons too, except for the part about rangefinder operation. Very much like practicing a musical instrument.

[StephenPatterson]

I completely agree! I feel the same way about the Leica. But I feel the same way about my Canons too, except for the part about rangefinder operation. Very much like practicing a musical instrument.

 

Well I suppose that's true, except a Leica is a Stradivarius and a Canon is, well...a Cannon.

 

Boom...

 

(what did you expect on a Leica forum???)

[zlatkob]

True!

[Double Negative]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Straight up, Stephen!

[01af]

... I then went on to explain that the real test was being able to focus without looking at the lens scale, but just by positioning the focus tab ...

Due to absurdly steep focusing pitch, this is hardly possible anymore with many of the newer lenses—the worst offender in this regard being the Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph. It's like making a violin where the distance between the strings is cut in half—with the rationale, 'this way you can move your finger from one string to another quicker' ... doh. And too many clueless users believe this a good thing, so Leica probably won't reconsider this folly anytime soon

[jeverettfine]

Developing an intuitive feel for exposure is much the same process. It has gotten to the point where I can estimate exposure within 1/2 stop most times and really don't need to consult my meter much. Couple this with having a "feel" for focus etc and you become ONE with your camera. This removes the burden of "thinking" about the technical aspects of photography and allows you to concentrate on seeing and anticipating the photograph: capturing the decisive moment.

I also play mandolin and accordion and agree that learning and playing a musical instrument is very very similar.

[250swb]

I also play mandolin and accordion and agree that learning and playing a musical instrument is very very similar.

 

Who was it that said in an ironic moment 'Every newbie who buys a camera is a photographer, and every newbie who buys a clarinet.... well, they own a clarinet'?

 

In terms of the general discussion I suppose you could say that a rangefinder takes more time to get used to, but that is a very narrow view. Some people grew up using a rangefinder camera and the learning curve is irrelevant, some people can just get it if they have used other more complicated cameras, like a large format setup, some people are just clever. And put a Canon 5d MkII in front of me and it would take me as long to understand it enough to discuss the finer points as it would take a novice to get to grips with a Leica M. The point is if you have a new camera in front of you that you can use it will all of a sudden start to make sense. But talking theoretically about a Leica M is both pointless and baffling for an audience, especially if you try to make it sound like some voodoo rite in just getting the damned thing focused.

 

Steve

[Double Negative]

Developing an intuitive feel for exposure is much the same process. It has gotten to the point where I can estimate exposure within 1/2 stop most times and really don't need to consult my meter much...

 

Got that right! My first RF was my dad's Voigtländer Dynamatic II, which, as luck would have it - had a b0rked meter. I learned to guesstimate exposure right quick! Before long I nailed every photo on a roll.

[StephenPatterson]

I learned exposure on a Yashica Electro 35. The Japanese were nice to put a SUN and CLOUD on the lens barrel so a 13 year old could figure out exposure!!!

 

As for a dSRL like a Canon or Nikon being an instrument I believe my musical analogy still applies; The Leica is a Stradivarius and the dSLRs are Synthesized Keyboards. The Strad is learned more by feel and muscle memory, whereas the synthesizer is learned more by programming and pressing buttons. Both can produce stunning results, but the process is much different.

[Jeff S]

Not to get picky, but one shouldn't diminish the skill and artistry often required with the use of many tools, e.g., fine carpentry, etc. I respect and understand the instrument analogy, but I've seen some pretty poor carpenters (and other laborers / craftsmen), and some who work magic with the same tools. The camera doesn't produce the 'music' any more than the chisel produces the best violin. It's still about the user and the end result.

 

Jeff

[philipus]

When I worked in a camera shop in Visby in my late teens I saw a black M6 for the first time. Damn nice, I thought, but way out of my reach.

 

Instead I became a Canon photographer, starting with the entry EOS 850. Over the years I've used most of their film SLRs. I really enjoyed those cameras, so much so that I skipped the digital train in favour of a scanner. By the time the 5DmkII came out I had a full set of L lenses and thought that perhaps I should give digital a go since it was full frame; there really was no other option for me since I grew up photographically with 24x36. So I bought the mkII.

 

Then last summer, after just two years as a digital photographer, I went back to film and it's all Ken Rockwell's fault.

 

I've actually forgotten why I ended up on his site but I happened upon a page about the M3 and was amazed how simple a camera it seemed. I took out my mkII and realised that while I know how to use all of its functions, I use almost exclusively aperture priority. And I've used aperture priority since i loaded my first film all those years ago.

 

Reading up on the various M models, I thought that the M3 would be a good starting point. Needless to say, since I bought it six months I have experienced - actually, enjoyed - the learning curve spoken of earlier! I'm not there yet that I can focus without using the rangefinder. And sure, not using a meter, I have underexposed shots on occasion or even often depending on the situation; in particular, evening shots are tricky, I find. But my metering is improving by the roll.

 

I came across this old article in the Washington Post by Frank Van Riper and his experience with the M6. He writes that "the rangefinder Leica M6 is a camera one steps up to as a photographer, not steps into as an amateur."

 

He makes a very valid point (though I would humbly suggest the M3 and any other meter-less camera provides an even higher step).

 

Only when one realises that the camera is just a way to capture what you see - the instrument for one's artistic expression (and I realise that I'm running the risk of sounding pompous so I'll stop right there) - and not the reason why you're photographing, are you ready for the challenge that a rangefinder can offer.

 

That is how it was for me. As I read more about the Leicas I came to the conclusion that I had for a number of years ceased to develop as a photographer. And so I switched, just like that.

 

In my experience no other camera has ever allowed me to focus on the image in the same remarkably unimpeded manner. And the freedom of not needing to buy, let alone charge, a battery is incredible. It feels a bit like sailing. The wind is all you need.

[zlatkob]

As for a dSRL like a Canon or Nikon being an instrument I believe my musical analogy still applies; The Leica is a Stradivarius and the dSLRs are Synthesized Keyboards. The Strad is learned more by feel and muscle memory, whereas the synthesizer is learned more by programming and pressing buttons. Both can produce stunning results, but the process is much different.

 

I think you're overstating this difference. It is true regarding manual focus, as manual focus is a necessity for the Leica M, while it is usually a secondary option for the DSLR (depending on the lens). It's also true that DSLRs have a great many options, the result of giving them the ability to do too much (to play too many "sounds", so to speak).

 

However, basic adjustments (aperture, shutter speed) can be just as manual on the DSLR as on a Leica, and, consequently, the feel and muscle memory can be just as vital. With practice, one's fingers learn exactly what to do, efficiently and automatically, just as on a Leica. Metering can be just as manual on a DSLR. The feel for specific lenses can be just as well-learned with a DSLR. And while autofocus is auto, it's not just a button press; the application of autofocus techniques requires learning and practice for true mastery.

 

I think the programming aspect of DSLRs is also overstated. One person's "programming" (bad) is another person's "customization" (good), as in customization to my preferences or customization for my specific photographic assignment. Most of this programming is done in a "set it and forget it" way. In other words, you setup your camera as you like it, and then shoot away without further deliberation. It's not so different than setting the color space and shutter release preferences on the M9, or installing some mod on it (a special strap or soft release or grip) and then forgetting about it because there's no further need to think about it.

 

With frequent practice, any repeatedly used button presses on a DSLR become very 2nd nature. I think that one reason people have so much awkwardness with DSLRs is that they don't practice. They may own a camera for years, but only use it lightly and infrequently, thus never acquiring the mastery and efficiency that comes with frequent practice.

[StephenPatterson]

I think you're overstating this difference...

 

You are, of course, absolutely correct...but it's still a fun thread.

[NZDavid]

One of the main attractions for me of the M is its simplicity and direct manual control. I find it much easier than squinting at an LCD and wading through menus and pressing numerous buttons, but of course, as always, YMMV. Same for exposure as for focus. Being familiar with the f/16 rule I have a rough idea of what the exposure should be first -- set it, then just use the meter to tweak it. Sometimes I don't believe the meter, especially in our ultra bright light, but it is usually pretty accurate. With a fully auto camera you trust and hope.

[giordano]

With a fully auto camera you trust and hope.

 

With a DSLR in fully auto mode, real photographers look at the settings the camera has chosen, and change them if they don't agree. No more trust and hope than when using a Leica.

[Guest Randle P. McMurphy]

Well I suppose that's true, except a Leica is a Stradivarius and a Canon is, well...a Cannon.

 

Well I Suppose I really want to take some Pictures and not to fiddle around.

So I better take my *****

 

(what did you expect on a Leica forum???)

 

A deep Bow to Solms every Morning and a thick Wallet.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[RoySmith]

This is a fascinating thread, thank-you Stephen for starting it. It has caused me to stop and think about the use of different types of cameras. The practice and philosophy of using a Leica M is certainly different than using a DSLR. Even though the M9 is digital, using it is analog, whereas using my 5D (which I use for sports primarily) is digital, ie when selecting autofocus mode - exposure etc. Using the 5D is like programming a computer.