What makes Leica Special?

[Cadfael_tex]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Simple question, how complex is the answer?

[bpalme]

Some of the lenses mainly. These lenses have such rich color and contrast it's really hard to duplicate the look with other systems:

35mm Summilux ASPH , 50 Summilux ASPH, Noctilux, 28mm Summicron.

And I'm sure plenty of others... but for me my other system somehow seems a little flat and boring side by side. A lot of it really depends on what you are shooting though. While shooting landscapes at mid/small apertures my 28mm Summicron can be about the same as the best lenses from the other manufacturers. Wide open with people it has beautiful skin tones and sharpness that I love. Which reminds me .. One of Leicas strong points is these lenses are incredible sharp at the largest apertures. Plenty of lenses are super sharp at the mid apertures but struggle wide open. Some are not sharp on the edges. Distortion and flare is one of Leicas' strong points. Build quality is outstanding and will last decades with proper care. Small lenses that cover a fullframe film or sensor. These modern lenses are a personal preference though. Many people like the look of the older lenses.

You ask how complex the answer is... well it's something I think one has to experience vs. comparing 100% crops on the internet.

The other part of the equation for me anyway is the M camera. When I owned autofocus cameras it seemed like I missed a lot of shots for missed focus. I'm not saying it was the cameras fault.. they say it's a poor carpenter that blames his tools... but If given a second to focus I always nail the focus with an M. It takes a little practice and get's harder with moving subjects but it is fun and works. When you are in a crowed place it's not easy to pin point a focus spot with an autofocus camera. With an M you can focus on a persons eye in a crowd.

It is the smallest and lightest fullframe digital camera made.

In a nutshell that's what does it for me. Now having said that it has plenty of drawbacks like no live view(seen as a good thing to some, but not me). You mention Leica and not specifically rangefinders but that's about all that interested me. If you want a camera that can do it all this is not a good system. You would be best off with a DSLR..super high ISO, macro, long zooms.. fast autofocus and video. It seems most people around here have both systems. I guess I could go on and on but these are just some of my thoughts.

[erl]

I always wondered what was really inside Pandora's Box.

Sometime after getting my first Leica, I realized "this is it!"

There is more 'inside' a Leica than you can ever dream of.

'Open' it and the dreams fly out.

[TomB_tx]

I'd say simplicity. They have always made tools for photographers, not gadgets that cram in new features to appeal to the latest fads. That's why the M9 appealed to me when no other digital camera did (or still does). With my hands trained to work lenses and bodies with manual controls in their traditional locations, the M works just like my cameras have for 50 years. Plus, the craftsmanship still feels right as well as works properly: the mechanisms are a joy to operate.

This is one discussion where I agree with Ken Rockwell: the M focus method, shutter speed and aperture control are so simple once you use them constantly, why make them different and automated? I'd even prefer a manual shutter cocking, like the film Ms, but that's not a big deal.

The quality is also as good as you can get. My 40-50 yr old lenses are still as good as I could want. I don't mind using Zeiss & VC as well, so I'm less enamored with the "glass" than most; but it is still nice to carry a single camera and 35mm lens and be able to crop to 100% if needed and people don't notice (not that it's good practice - but simplifies the gear I carry).

Back in the 70s I used many different cameras, and liked them all. Today all the others are overly gadgetized - except for Leica.

[pico]

Simple question, how complex is the answer?

 

The true answer is never complex.

 

Leica once made the simple, entirely mechanical rangefinder cameras. The M4 was the last quality film camera. Then, their M7 is their penultimate transition: a camera which uses electronics that fit into the Leica mold (the M6 was transitional), then Leica moved into the digital age with the M9 (the M8 was transitional). Leica is still a wave-front making progress and virtually obsoleting models before the moment, whatever moment you choose.

 

I've read thousands of posts from users and very many are from fondlers, those who post "I love my ******", as well as those who speak to the tactile qualities of a Leica M. None of those folks produce remarkable photos. (I do not produce remarkable photos but I am not a fondler. My talent is simply not there.)

 

So, what makes a Leica special is some very real quality, some very real compactness, simplicity, all that supported artificially with the vast majority of Leica enthusiasts who are simply proud owners of over-priced gear they cannot master.

.

[algrove]

I always wondered what was really inside Pandora's Box.

Sometime after getting my first Leica, I realized "this is it!"

There is more 'inside' a Leica than you can ever dream of.

'Open' it and the dreams fly out.

 

+1, very well put. Thanks.

[wildlightphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Simple question, how complex is the answer?

 

WRT to the M Leicas there as many different answers as there are people using them, for example:

 

compact size

big performance

rangefinder viewing

manual focus

sensory feedback

uncluttered ergonomic design

no mirror slap

pedigree

exclusivity

 

all play a role to varying degrees. It's up to you to decide with of these (and additional) factors matter to you, to what degree, and if they're "worth it".

[erl]

A further thought, on my earlier one.

 

My Leica allows me to fantasize about being 'Dr Who'.

It is my Tardis! Plain and functional on the outside, but contains unbelievable possibilities inside.

[NZDavid]

Quality and performance concentrated into a compact easy-to-handle package that keeps on performing even as the world changes around it.

 

There are very few products that have changed so little in basic form over such a long period.

[richam]

“I have the simplest tastes. I am always satisfied with the best.”

― Oscar Wilde

[lars_bergquist]

Is the question "what makes the Leica brand special?" or "What makes the Leica M special?"

 

The brand: Really first class optics. Good to excellent build quality. An approach to the user interface that is based on a consciousness of the essentials (yes, that's a Leica slogan) and that produces uncluttered, spare designs for intuitive operation – but demands a certain level of understanding, and a certain willingness to learn the basics, in the user. All very unfashionable.

 

The M: The combined rangefinder concept. You can concentrate on the subject, instead of an image of the subject on a screen optical or electronic. At the same time, the coincidence rangefinder allows you to exactly determine the spot where to lodge the plane of maximum focus, with a certainty that nor AF system permits – because with AF you are not part of the process. It's as obsolete as a hand axe. Who wants to use a hand axe when there are chain saws? Well … you know the reasons. And the hand axe, unchanged in principle since the Neolithic, and in design since the Iron Age, will still be there when chain saws have been obsoleted by laser cutters or whatever.

 

The old man from the Oskarian Age

[Cadfael_tex]

Is the question "what makes the Leica brand special?" or "What makes the Leica M special?"

 

...snip

 

Interesting point I was considering in the back of my head. How much does the 'specialness' apply to the point and shoots and other non-M Leicas?

[Gerard]

What makes a Leica special? The photographer who uses one.

[lars_bergquist]

Interesting point I was considering in the back of my head. How much does the 'specialness' apply to the point and shoots and other non-M Leicas?

 

It applies in full to the cameras that Leica have designed themselves: The Ms, the S2 and the Xes. With the 'Panaleicas' it's mainly the lenses which, though not Leica made, are Leica designed.

 

The core of the Leica approach has always been that bloody-minded concentration on the essentials. In my somewhat younger days I did a bit of long-range backpacking days away from blacktop roads and electric power. I soon learned that the key to it was to get rid of the 'nice-to-haves' and cut the pack down to the bare necessities. And when you had just the bare necessities, weigh them and replace them with lighter ones! That spelled the difference between painfully lumbering along, and joyfully traversing the landscape. And legend says that the frail Oskar Barnack got fed up with lugging a 13x18cm camera, glass plates in cassettes and a tripod on his hill country hikes … so he designed the Ur-Leica.

 

The old man from the Oskarian Age

[lars_bergquist]

What makes a Leica special? The photographer who uses one.

 

What's special about Leica is that the camera attracts the kind of photographers who use it. It attracts special photographers.

 

The special old man of the Oskarian Age

[lct]

Difficult to apply to R stuff all that. The R8 & R9 were not that compact compared to their competitors, they did not even make less noise than modern DSLRs. As for M cams, most comments above could apply to other rangefinders from modest Bessas to Zeiss Ikon or R-D1 cameras. What makes Zeiss special as well? In both cases and to various extents: lenses, manual operation and price. Anything else?

[IWC Doppel]

Design, quality, image characteristics,simplicity and real world functionality,ergonomics, ownership.

[farnz]

They allow me to properly express myself with minimal interference.

 

Pete.

[BJDrew]

Simple question, how complex is the answer?

 

For many, whether he or she is willing to admit it, the 'specialness' of Leica stems from how special THIER Leica becomes in a personal and emotional way.

 

Through branding, design, exclusivity and user experience, somehow one develops a strong, emotional and possibly a touch irrational love for their Leica. It makes YOU feel special.

 

This is followed by a series of symptoms... Loss of objectivity, thinning of the wallet, fear of reflex cameras.

 

I know this... I have these symptoms and my Leicas are special to me as well.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[bocaburger]

The answers I would give to that question have changed over the years, primarily because the M Leica has remained fairly static in terms of features and ergonomics, while the rest of the cameras underwent drastic changes.

 

At the time I first got into Leica I had been using a Pentax Spotmatic. There wasn't much difference in size between them, the Pentax was relatively quiet compared to a Nikon, and the Super-Takumar optics were highly regarded (the prevailing thinking was that going up to medium format was a much greater step in IQ compared to buying even the best and most-expensive optics available for the tiny 35mm negative). But the Pentax finder was dingy compared with the Leica, and even with the instant-return mirror, there was blackout at the moment of exposure, so in a dynamic situation one never knew for certain if he got the shot he wanted,until the film was developed.

 

Into the seventies, other makers began to load their cameras with all sorts of electronics, making them more and more battery-dependent and less and less intuitive. At the same time, even the fixed-lens rangefinder cameras disappeared, leaving Leica the sole remnant of that once-popular design.

 

By the eighties, SLR bodies began to mushroom in size, as did the lenses, which now had AF mechanisms in addition. Early AF was more of a gimmick than a useful feature, and without batteries, or in case of a single electronic glitch, these cameras were rendered doorstops, which made carrying a backup a virtual necessity...along with carrying the owner's manual unless one happened to be blessed with total recall. By contrast, only the lightmeter in an M6 was battery-powered, and otherwise it functioned in the same familiar way as my M4 had done. At that point in time, traveling with an SLR kit became a non-starter for me, and represented the point at which the size of a Leica kit and its simple interface were the reasons I preferred it to any other.

 

Once I made the decision to go digital (or maybe I should say, the decision was made for me, as my trusted local color lab went out of business and I wasn't about to mail my travel films away for processing), my objection to battery dependency and electronics was rendered moot. Very capable SLRs today are small (eg. Canon T3i, Nikon D7000) and remarkably quiet (maybe even quieter, or at least lower-pitched than my M9). Mirrorless cameras like the new Oly OMD are even smaller, and virtually silent. AF is now very fast, more so for me than aligning a rangefinder, and the AF can be limited to just the central sensor for lock-and-recompose technique, similar to what is required with a rangefinder. Today, Leica's new lenses are out of the price range I'm willing to commit to photography, which is only one of my hobbies. Fortuitously, the resale value of my current lenses have appreciated to the point of covering the depreciation on my M8 and M9, and probably an M10 as well. It's odd if not mind-boggling to me to cite ROI as an advantage for a camera system, but at the moment it happens to be true for Leica lenses.

 

So what makes Leica special to me (in addition to the monetary appreciation that is) today? It's a camera that hasn't obsoleted the experience I've gained and the reflexes I've been honing over 45 years. It's a relative constant in a world that seems to change by the minute, rarely for the better, and mainly for the sake of enriching of a few geeks at the helm of slick multinational corporations. There's something comfortingly familiar about having my hands on a Leica and my eye to the finder, especially as the world I see through it becomes increasingly unrecognizable.