Looking for a camera

[AnthonyG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dear Leica Enthousiasts,

 

Let me introduce myself, my name is Anthony, I'm a student who's isn't a hobby-photographer (as-in it's not my ultimate passion), but I do appreciate a good photo.

 

Recently, I made the remark that my grandfather's dia's are so sharp and my dad responded that he used a good camera that he sold back. I asked the brand and he responded "Leica".

 

So I started looking for a Leica, learned quite a few things, but to be honnest, I haven't got a clue what is the right camera for me. Most importantly, how to keep the budget low.

 

I have some idea about what camera's Leica made, but I don't know how they compare.

And the other problem I have, are the lenses, I'm really a noob in that area.

 

I was hoping to get set for a camera+lens for arround €500-600, but I don't know if that's realistic.

 

I'm planning to use my camera just for taking pictures on holidays, of friends, home, cars... (quite polyvalent)

 

Can you help me out or give me some advice?

 

Thanks in advance,

Anthony

[sandro]

Hello Anthony,

did you decide whether you want to use film or digital? Looking for a camera to occasionally use on trips and holidays within your budget you might look for a secondhand film point and shoot camera. The Leica Z2X for instance can be bought for less than your budget. Has a fixed nice zoom lens.

Start with de decision film or digital and take it from there.

Lex

[Stealth3kpl]

With your budget, I would suggest a voigtlander rangefinder with a voigt 35mm f2.5 color skopar lens. An excellent combination for leica-esque experience. The lens is the important thing. There are some excellent old Leica lenses on the secondhand market e.g. 35mm Summaron, 50mm Elmar, but they may take you out of your budget.

 

Alternatively, consider the older Leica screw system:

http://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/product_info.php?cPath=47_50&products_id=3713

http://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/product_info.php?cPath=47_51&products_id=4600

Pete

[delander †]

There are many very fine film cameras on the used market at very attractive prices. I would go for Nikon, Pentax, Canon even Contax etc and you will easily keep within your budget including a good lens. These are single lens reflex cameras not rangefinders but they should suit your purpose.

 

Jeff

[Stealth3kpl]

I think the Olympus OM-1n with the Zuiko lenses are an excellent choice. Typical Ebay prices are £50 for body +/- 50mm f1.8, and £50-£70 for prime lenses.

They're superb.

Pete

[AnthonyG]

Hello Anthony,

did you decide whether you want to use film or digital? Looking for a camera to occasionally use on trips and holidays within your budget you might look for a secondhand film point and shoot camera. The Leica Z2X for instance can be bought for less than your budget. Has a fixed nice zoom lens.

Start with de decision film or digital and take it from there.

Lex

 

Sorry forgot to mention it.

Yes I want a film camera, I allready have (a) digital camera(s). And I allready use disposable camera's from time to time.

 

Although it has to function, it has to look the part too. (Like a (sollid) classic rangefinder camera) That Z2X isn't that pretty imo.

[xalo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you wish to go for Leica other than compact (I like my Mini II, 32mm AF lens), the uper edge of your budget could perhaps get you a light and compact Leica CL with a Summicron C 40mm f/2 lens - checked, from a dealer (shop or online).

Best,

Alexander

 

P.S.: Just reading your last post, Anthony: years ago I bought a not very pretty M3 for about 400 EUR. Add to this an older Elmar 50 f/3,5 (M-version) and you may still be within the budget.

[too old to care]

Anthony, I bought my first 35mm camera back in the 60's. It was a Pentax Spotmatic. Later I bought a Pentax K1000 when the Spotmatic died in the 80's. I also purchased a bunch of K mount lenses for the Pentax.

 

A few years ago I put the K1000 away when I bought a Pentax digital camera, but recently got it back out to shoot some B&W with a macro lens. I forgot how nice the Pentax manual film cameras are.

 

The K1000 can be had for very little money, as well as any number of other Pentax bodies. The lenses are also very inexpensive and most of the primes are good quality. I would be careful with the zooms though, some are known to be somewhat soft at the edges.

 

Nice thing too, the lenses from any Pentax film camera will work quite well on Pentax digital cameras. However, best to stay with those with a KA mount for ease of use.

 

I hope you enjoy shooting film as much as the rest of us.

 

Wayne

[earleygallery]

Sorry forgot to mention it.

Yes I want a film camera, I allready have (a) digital camera(s). And I allready use disposable camera's from time to time.

 

Although it has to function, it has to look the part too. (Like a (sollid) classic rangefinder camera) That Z2X isn't that pretty imo.

 

Hi,

 

I'm not sure what is most important to you. Image quality, something easy to use, or just that you want an 'old fashioned' camera for a bit of fun.

 

If it's the latter then look for a nice 'Barnack' Leica such as a lllc or lllf with a 5cm f3.5 Elmar lens. You should find that within your budget. Buy from a dealer so you have some warranty, and he can show you how to use it and how to load film correctly (you have to trim the leader).

 

The Barnack Leica's have quite a following and many of us use them. Also the Elmar is a legendary lens which Leica built its reputation upon. Your grandfather was probably using just that kind of set.

 

If you want good quality images and a camera that's more current (SLR, built in metering etc) then you have a massive choice - a Nikon FM or FE, Pentax MX, Olympus OM would all be excellent choices, or one of the later Nikon or Canon autofocus cameras. Too many choices to really tell you what you should buy!

[AnthonyG]

Hi,

I'm not sure what is most important to you. Image quality, something easy to use, or just that you want an 'old fashioned' camera for a bit of fun.

Easy to use isn't a real requirement. Image quality is and I prefer an old fashioned rangefinder.

 

 

Hi,

If it's the latter then look for a nice 'Barnack' Leica such as a lllc or lllf with a 5cm f3.5 Elmar lens. You should find that within your budget. Buy from a dealer so you have some warranty, and he can show you how to use it and how to load film correctly (you have to trim the leader).

 

The Barnack Leica's have quite a following and many of us use them. Also the Elmar is a legendary lens which Leica built its reputation upon. Your grandfather was probably using just that kind of set.

 

If you want good quality images and a camera that's more current (SLR, built in metering etc) then you have a massive choice - a Nikon FM or FE, Pentax MX, Olympus OM would all be excellent choices, or one of the later Nikon or Canon autofocus cameras. Too many choices to really tell you what you should buy!

 

My grandfather had a Leica in the 60's, I think it was an M-series.

 

And if I up my budget (to 800), what would get me an M-series?

I was thinking, that if it's a Leica, in the end I can always sell it without a loss.

[250swb]

A Leica CL and lens would be within your 600 Euro budget, but I think you would be pushing it with an M Leica, you would pay that for the body alone.

 

So if not a Leica an Olympus OM outfit would be a good buy, and a Nikon F2 or F3 and three or four lenses would also be within budget, both systems capable of heavy use and with excellent lenses.

 

Steve

[normclarke]

I obtained an M4-2 last year for about £300 but it needed a bit of fettling to bring it back to spec which I duly carried out. These are the unloved of the M range and are probably the cheapest of the M bodies. This is the second M4-2 that I have owned, I have found them to be my favorite M camera, does all I need. As good as an M2 and newer, the rangefinder prism uses a synthetic resin which is unlikely to suffer from balsam failure and internally it is built to a higher standard than many would have you believe. Later models had a small lens removed from the frame line assembly to brighten the image that didn't help the propensity to flare that became a problem for later models (M4P-M6). They are mostly come in black chrome, chrome and gold are collector fodder.

 

Best,

 

normclarke.

[Messsucherkamera]

If you want an M camera and lens, you should be able to acquire a used camera and lens within the price range you have quoted.

 

Look for an M body rated at around 8 to 8+, sometimes referred to as good user bodies. They will have some cosmetic wear but will be fully functional.

 

As for lenses, look for a 50mm f/2.8 Elmar, the 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit or one of the older Summicrons. You may have to shop long and hard but there are lenses out there that will fit your budget or come close to it.

[AnthonyG]

I just read something that Minolta and Leica have a connection.

 

I happen to have 2 minolta lenses (an MD Rokkor 45mm 1:2 and a simular one).

I doubt it, but can those be used on a Leica? If so, on what types?

[ganzosrevenge]

If you are open to entering the SLR domain of Leica (the Leicaflex / R line), the Leicaflex Standard (1964-1968), the Leicaflex SL (1968-1974), and even the R3 through R5 (1977 to 1992, combined) come to mind as completely viable options for a camera body that can be had on the cheap. It's not unheard of for a Leicaflex SL body in good working order to go for little more than 200 Euros. (Mine, when translated from $ to E was about 210E). This leaves about 340 Euros (if we avg 290E + 390E) for you to play with. Now, this won't get you a Summilux, or an APO, or a ROM lens, but this amount *SHOULD* be more than sufficient to get a very nicely kept / maintained period-correct 50mm f/2 summicron. If you stretch to 800E, you may even be able to get a set of lenses (35, 50, 90) within your budget as well.

 

On the other hand, for your 500 to 600E, unless you're willing to scrounge about for an ugly (but potentially usable) 40mm / CL combo, you are going to have a hard time finding both an M-body and an M-mount lens within your threshold. The reason - among other reasons - is that the M-line is so expensive is its legend, and its photographic reputation, which includes Bresson and Winogrand, among others. The R-line never had such a reputation, although its lenses are also par-excellence. M3's on ebay, keh, and other places where Leicas are sold typically begin in the $800 to $1000 range for a user, and pretty much go vertical from there depending on variation, pedigree, serial #'s (extreme high and extreme low command more), commemoratives (Olympics, 50 Jahre, special editions), and even color variations (chrome, black paint, black chrome). R's also have these variations, but even with these variations do not command such an elevated premium (unless it's a complete set, a one-off, or a gold-plated one).

 

And the reason for this is the R-line never really caught on... amongst collectors they're sought for the completist who wants EVERY variation known to man, amongst shooters the Leicaflexes from 1964-1976 are considered some of the largest and brightest viewfinders ever, but the failure in Leica's original plan was they tried to compete against the Japanese without "learning to play their game". The Japanese in the late 1950s had figured out how to not only perfect the SLR for mass consumption (the Nikon F), but how to use modular parts where possible, as well as find areas where small "cut corners" were permissible if it meant being more competitive than the Germans. When the Leicaflex DID come out in 1964, it was an engineering marvel, but a marketing failure. It was more than double the price of the Nikon F, lacked a modern metering (TTL) system, and professionals who had to buy their own cameras could get 2 to 3 F's for the price of one Leica. Eventually the Leicaflexes fell to the wayside as Leica and Minolta struck a deal in the mid 70s, and the effects were felt all the way to the Leica R7 of 1992 to 1997. (Over 20 years).

 

 

Small note: Keep in mind the following:

• Leicaflex Standard: Uses 1-cam lenses, but can use 2 or 3-cam. No 3rd-Cam or ROM-Cam
  
• Leicaflex SL / SL2: Uses 2-cam or 3-cam lenses, but can use 1-cam in stop-down mode. Don't use 3rd-Cam or ROM-cam
  
• Leica R3 - R7. 3-Cam is fine, 3rd Cam is fine, ROM-Cam is fine
  
• Leica R8 - R9 3-Cam is Fine, 3rd Cam is fine, ROM-Cam is fine,
  

(As we can see, 3-cam is universally compatible)

 

However, that is not to say that in our modern world, owning a Leicaflex is a failure waiting to happen. Kept in good working order, the solidity of this camera is unparalleled by any other SLR (barring a contarex or an alpa, MAYBE... but neither of these two brands even make 35mm, and I can count on one hand how many people service these two brands, combined) and because it lacks the repute of its rangefinder counterpart, they can be easily had as a body / lens for under 600E. But at the end of the day, it's still a Leica, it still has that signature, and it'll be yours without breaking the bank, or your spending limit.

 

LeicaShop Vintage Cameras | Leica | Leica Reflexkameras | Leicaflex Standard chrom | german

LeicaShop Vintage Cameras | Leica | Leica Reflexkameras | Leicaflex SL chrom | german

No connection to these sites, but they have pre-assembled kits within your budget.

 

I also like (have shopped with them in the past)

Cameras | Tamarkin Camera

Lenses | Tamarkin Camera

 

 

Personally, I'd rather have the camera and a lens or two of the "less-noted" R-line, then just an M-body... and potentially a poorly kept M at that.

 

Jason

[spydrxx]

Anthony - As much as I love Leicas and love to recommend them, I'd strongly advise you to start out with a used Olympus OM2n with a 50mm f1.8 lens. You can use it in the auto mode and then switch to manual as you go down the learning curve. You will be amazed at the sharpness of this kit, and it is cheap....easily less than $100 USD including shipping. Down the road, when you have more $, and still want a film camera, think about a rangefinder Leica...it will be quite a bit more expensive than the Oly, and unless you are doing really large enlargements, you probably won't see the difference...as it will be highly dependent on your learning about lighting, contrast and film development. I love my Leica gear & lenses, but use my SLRs much more often. I used to use Leica SLRs, but switched to others which, IMHO, provided equal contrast and resolution at lower cost. Whatever you choose, enjoy, and have fun learning. The durability of the Leica gear and high consistent quality of the lenses, is something you can come to appreciate over time...I've owned some of my Leica gear for over 50 years and with some minor repairs, it works as well as the day it was manufactured.

[tobey bilek]

The mystique of Leica lenses is more to do with tonal rendition than sharpness. New pro grade Nikon lenses are as sharp or sharper than older Leica lenses at all stops. New lenses are about equal, but the image quality is less different than it used to be. All this providing you buy the Pro grade prime lenses.

[philipus]

If I were you I'd go for a Leica CL with the brilliant 40mm Summicron.

 

The Dutch dealer Delfshaven has two in stock it seems.

 

fotohandeldelfshaven.nl

 

And another Dutch dealer Den Boer has one for 575.

 

The Barnacks are wonderful too (I have a Leica II from 1931 which runs like clockwork) but are not as easy to operate. The CL has a meter.

 

You're unlikely to get another M mount camera and body within your budget methinks.

 

cheerio

Philip

[chrism]

Anthony,

I have been re-living my youth with used, cheap cameras that I couldn't afford when they were current. An Olympus OM-1 or OM-2, a Pentax K1000, MX or ME Super, and a Nikon FM3a will thrill you and cost very little. Medium format film cameras can be had cheaply (I have acquired and used a Bronica RF645, a Fuji GA645, and a Bessa III) and provide even better quality. All of the above will be a fraction of the cost of a Leica, but if you dare to risk catching the Leica bug, there are more expensive M3s and M4s out there. The problem is that the lenses are holding their value, and will cost you more than the camera body. If you want to try the rangefinder experience at the lowest entry cost I guess a used Bessa R3 or R4 will be the cheapest body and a Cosina-Voigtlander lens will match it well. But be warned: you will soon be spending all disposable income on Leica bodies and lenses!

 

Chris

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[AnthonyG]

I have holiday now so I took my search back up, I'm now activly folowing some camera's on ebay to see what they're going for and noticed this one. It's finished, but what your thoughts on it?

http://www.benl.ebay.be/itm/190699664075?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649&autorefresh=true

 

I have the impression an Elmar F2.8 is a more useable all-rounder lens than a summicron 2/50mm?

 

 

And another question.

The 'screw' on the back of a leica is to set the iso right?

Now, if you have a iso 400 film, how do you set it up with this camera?(an M3, seems to stop at 200)

Or this one (where for ex. 200 and 400 seem to be missing from the scale)