Hello again (a reprise)

[Cadfael_tex]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I got on here about four years ago and asked about Leica (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/53658-hello-question.html)

 

I got busy with work and family, got an inexpensive Nikon D40 and the two kit lenses (55-200 and 18-55), and never got a Leica.

 

I'm facing medical retirement now for a bad back and am hoping I can focus on photography again. Before I get any more lenses for my Nikon system, I thought I'd revisit Leica. This was reinforced (or maybe re-activated) by Ken Rockwell singing the praises of the M3 and M9P.

 

That brings me back to a couple of questions:

1. Knowing if I can adapt/enjoy a rangefinder?

2. Deciding if Leica glass is worth the premium over Nikon? (An what kind of answers do I expect on a Leica forum )

 

I still shoot a little bit of film now and then but mostly digital now on my D40. Is there a relatively inexpensive way to answer these two questions before I save up and invest in a Leica system (M8 or M9)?

 

TIA,

Tony

[jaapv]

Yes. Buy an M3/2/4/6 and a vintage/Voigtlander/Zeiss lens and burn some film.

[Jeff S]

Or consider renting to experiment.

 

Jeff

[TomB_tx]

Buying a film M is inexpensive because the used prices are quite stable, and demand remains good; so selling if you don't take to rangefinders would be easy, with little financial risk.

While Voigtlander may not hold value like a Leica lens, they are so much cheaper it is still a good way to try the system. I'd avoid the newer ultra-speed models. Although Rockwell didn't like it, the 35 1.4 Nokton can be very nice. I prefer mine to my '69 Summicron 35 at f2.0. But if you go the M3 route stick with a 50mm due to the finder. (I find 35 is my instinctive normal lens, so my M3 sees little use.)

[tollie]

The d40 has its limits but the real limitation are the kit zoom lenses you have.

 

I think it might be worth your while to buy a solid nikon prime like the f1.8 35mm Nikor and see what you can do with it. I think its available for less than $200 US. This will give you a 50mm equivalent on the cropped d40 sensor.

 

You can see what real image quality is about.

 

Now rangefinder photography returns me to the essentials of image making and is such a pleasure for me. With that said an entry kit with a used body and either used leica lenses or new voightlander will set you back at least 3K... likely more.

 

Their is a difference in IQ but with a sharp fast lens on the Nikon not as much as you may think.

 

my 2cents.

[wda]

Tony, why not locate a good Leica dealer, explain your need and see how he can help you via a loan/rental/purchase to allow you to resolve your dilemma?

[Cadfael_tex]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmm, the only Leica dealer I see in KC doesn't show Leica camera's on their website. Looks like I could almost buy a film version for what I could rent one for a few days. Which would be a better representation for me?

 

As far as the kit lenses on the D40, they really aren't too bad though a fast good prime is on my wish list.

[myshkine]

Tony - using a Leica rangefinder is a real joy, but you have to feel the passion, if I may say so. Not only you must be interested in photography, you should also be interested in your camera, learning to use it and understanding how it behaves under different circumstances and with different focal lengths. Also, I think that most of the LFI users are Leica enthusiasts, which means that they will devote a lot of their time to anything that is even remotely associated to the Leica brand. Owing a Leica is not just about photography, it is also about mechanical interest in camera bodies and lenses as well. I do not mean to discourage you, on the contrary. If you feel that particular urge to own a Leica (or more than one if possible) that most of us experience, then go straight to a Leica deler and buy one, film or digital, new or used doesn't matter, you will enjoy it immensely.

[earleygallery]

Hello again, I see I contributed to your original question. My advice still stands!

 

No one has asked what type of photography you are into. If you regularly use the full range of your kit lenses you might be too limited by an M camera.

[Cadfael_tex]

Hello again, I see I contributed to your original question. My advice still stands!

 

No one has asked what type of photography you are into. If you regularly use the full range of your kit lenses you might be too limited by an M camera.

 

I've noticed that I rarely use the 55-200. I plan to keep the D40 regardless so I can always drag it out when I want the length. Mostly I've been shooting landscapes and pics of the family. I've taken a few pics of birds lately but I've been waiting till the come to my feeder.

 

My biggest evolution is that as much as I love film it's gotten so difficult to find someone to develop it well. I thought about getting into developing black and white (and still may) but digital just makes things so darn convenient.

 

Thanks for all the replies so far. I think my plan is to start saving up for an M8 or M9 and see if I can find a way to get my hands on one (local dealer or rental) in the interim.

[Messsucherkamera]

1. Knowing if I can adapt/enjoy a rangefinder?

2. Deciding if Leica glass is worth the premium over Nikon? (An what kind of answers do I expect on a Leica forum )

 

TIA,

Tony

When I acquired my first M camera, I had no experience with rangefinder cameras - I had used Nikon SLRs for years and a Hasselblad 501c. I decided to take a leap of faith and invest in an MP body and a 50mm Summilux. I have never regretted doing so. Today the 'blad and lenses are a distant memory, replaced by my Leica M kit (I still own the Nikon gear, though).

 

Years ago, a coworker at the camera shop where I worked traded in all his Nikon gear and invested in Leica - an M6 body, 35 and 50mm Summicrons and a 90/2.8; I asked him why. "The lenses" was his reply. I asked if Leica lenses were really that much better than Nikon. I 'll never forget his reply: "The difference is like night and day."

 

Not long after I got my MP and 50 'lux, I inadvertently got some of my Leica chromes (on Fuji Velvia 50) accidentally mixed in with my Nikon based chromes (same film) . In the process of editing my Nikon chromes, I came across a handful of Leica images.

 

The difference was mind blowing - I was absolutely floored.

 

For those who doubt the superiority of Leica lenses to any other 35mm glass, I recommend this test: Expose a roll of E6 film with your favorite SLR and another roll of the same E6 with your Leica lenses at the same apertures - then compare the results.

 

Yes, M camera lenses are expensive. Guilty as charged. Whether or not they are worth the cost to you is another matter entirely. The answer to that question will vary from person to person, based on a myriad of variables.

[Cadfael_tex]

When I acquired my first M camera, I had no experience with rangefinder cameras - I had used Nikon SLRs for years and a Hasselblad 501c. I decided to take a leap of faith and invest in an MP body and a 50mm Summilux. I have never regretted doing so. Today the 'blad and lenses are a distant memory, replaced by my Leica M kit (I still own the Nikon gear, though).

 

Years ago, a coworker at the camera shop where I worked traded in all his Nikon gear and invested in Leica - an M6 body, 35 and 50mm Summicrons and a 90/2.8; I asked him why. "The lenses" was his reply. I asked if Leica lenses were really that much better than Nikon. I 'll never forget his reply: "The difference is like night and day."

 

Not long after I got my MP and 50 'lux, I inadvertently got some of my Leica chromes (on Fuji Velvia 50) accidentally mixed in with my Nikon based chromes (same film) . In the process of editing my Nikon chromes, I came across a handful of Leica images.

 

The difference was mind blowing - I was absolutely floored.

 

For those who doubt the superiority of Leica lenses to any other 35mm glass, I recommend this test: Expose a roll of E6 film with your favorite SLR and another roll of the same E6 with your Leica lenses at the same apertures - then compare the results.

 

Yes, M camera lenses are expensive. Guilty as charged. Whether or not they are worth the cost to you is another matter entirely. The answer to that question will vary from person to person, based on a myriad of variables.

 

I've been on another non-brand related forum looking at pictures. Invariably when I see one that is deeply compelling it is a Leica.

[MarkP]

The d40 has its limits but the real limitation are the kit zoom lenses you have.

 

I think it might be worth your while to buy a solid nikon prime like the f1.8 35mm Nikor and see what you can do with it. I think its available for less than $200 US. This will give you a 50mm equivalent on the cropped d40 sensor.

 

You can see what real image quality is about.

 

Or a Nikon-mount Zeiss or Voigtlander prime is another option

 

Otherwise I fully agree with the advice suggesting you start with a film M-Leica especially if you don'6t know whether you will see the world through a RF.

[Messsucherkamera]

I've been on another non-brand related forum looking at pictures. Invariably when I see one that is deeply compelling it is a Leica.

 

I think that speaks of the commitment most Leica photographers have for the art of photography. For most of us, it is somewhere between a labor of love and an unbridled passion.

 

For a person who is not a wealthy photographic dilletante to willingly endure the level of economic bloodletting required to acquire Leica M cameras and lenses (new kit, at least), there is a love of photography and the M camera system present that borders on obsession.

 

Not that there's anything wrong with that (to quote Jerry Seinfeld).

 

Without obsession there is no art, no greatness. There is only the frustration produced by shallow effort which inevitably produces pedestrian results.

 

YMMV.

[Cadfael_tex]

I definitely think that the level of commitment to photography that the average Leica user has does have something to do with it. But I also think that the glass (etc) has an impact

 

I'm slogging through a bokeh thread over at RFF. The Leica bokeh looks great; the jupiter lenses look pretty good as well, the canon bokeh for the most part is jarring, and the nikon bokeh is just kinda there for the most part. Those are generalizations but seem to be true to my eye.

 

I spent some time looking at my photos from the D40 this afternoon. Most of them were framed as I liked but didn't strike me. I looked and the slow glass I have for it (the two kit lenses) definitely effected what I wanted to do. I guess I could get fast Nikon glass but I'm not sure that's the answer for me. I'll see how I do with the roll of film I have in the F2 because I do have some pretty decent glass on it; but it weighs a ton.

[jamesk8752]

 

I think that speaks of the commitment most Leica photographers have for the art of photography. For most of us, it is somewhere between a labor of love and an unbridled passion.

 

For a person who is not a wealthy photographic dilletante to willingly endure the level of economic bloodletting required to acquire Leica M cameras and lenses (new kit, at least), there is a love of photography and the M camera system present that borders on obsession.

 

Not that there's anything wrong with that (to quote Jerry Seinfeld).

 

Without obsession there is no art, no greatness. There is only the frustration produced by shallow effort which inevitably produces pedestrian results.

 

YMMV.

 

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

[jamesk8752]

 

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

 

Sorry, I have no idea why or how I sent the above reply to this thread. Must be gremlins in my iPad...

 

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

[Cadfael_tex]

Sorry, I have no idea why or how I sent the above reply to this thread. Must be gremlins in my iPad...

 

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

 

I just took it as a technical issue Lord knows what I do with my iPhone and iPad sometimes trying to do things my fingers think otherwise (or brain). Still, it is much harder to pocket dial with an iPad