How to (eventually) afford the best Leica you can get

[Ruhayat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This blog post set me thinking:

One Year with the Leica Summilux 50mm f/1.4 Asph | Stephen Cosh Street Photography

 

Following the death of my mum more than a week ago and my dad a year before that, I'm currently paring down my gear to the necessities, and I would like to end up with a single camera and lens combo by year's end. The trouble is I know GAS will kick in after a while, and the acquisition cycle will simply restart. So how do you maintain the discipline?

 

Also, unlike some Leica owners, I am not especially prosperous with a hefty disposable income each month or even each year - ever since quitting the corporate sector to set up on my own (lucrative annual bonuses are not really common when you're the owner of a small design studio). So how do people like me afford the lovely toys Leica keeps dangling before our eyes?

 

This concept might just kill those two birds in a single blow: you set aside a small sum every month for a year, and then use all that money to buy the best lens you can get for your M. You use just that single lens for a year while again saving up monthly, then sell off that lens (with perhaps even a small profit!), added to the money saved for the second year, and you buy another lens and again use just that for that year. Rinse and repeat.

 

Do this for enough years and eventually you'd probably be able to own a Noctilux. Not to mention experience some of the best lenses Leica has to offer along the way. Great idea, eh.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[CalArts 99]

Perhaps one way of looking at it is whether the actual owning and using of the Leica products is more important than the final photograph itself.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's very easy to get caught up in the physical gear itself than in what the final result is all about. And that's assuming the final result is about the photographic image. For some, the 'final result' is the owning and using of the equipment and with the physical act of photographing but not so much about the image itself (and that's okay, too.)

 

But if it's really all about the image, then the equipment shouldn't matter that much. A photograph made with a Summicron versus a Summilux will not make or break it (or made with a Zeiss, CV, Nikkor, or Canon, etc..) Most well known artists don't talk much about the equipment and often don't own a whole lot of lenses and cameras. Their emphasis has been on the final image and what they are doing and why they are doing it. It's sometimes worth reading what they say about their medium since it mostly has to do with the images themselves and not about the tools used.

 

Anyway, I could say quite a bit about all this but I'll try to cut it short. I recommend staying off websites that are specific to the gear altogether. Try to read only books, articles, and websites that are about the photographs themselves, the history of photographers and photography, the philosophy of photography, etc.. One might find themselves getting really motivated and not dwelling so much on things like owning like the "best lens" that they can.

 

And one way to rid of 'GAS' (assuming that's what one wants to do; for some it's all part of what they like about photography) is to discover that owning the most expensive "best" Leica lens does little in respect to one's photographs and to one's life (aside from making you poorer and anxious about owning 'too much' stuff ) One's photography and their ideas about making images comes from within. As we all know, many of the most creative individuals throughout history had very few material possessions or even any desires for material possessions. Having less can sometimes make a person a lot more imaginative.

[Ruhayat]

...As we all know, many of the most creative individuals throughout history had very few material possessions or even any desires for material possessions. Having less can sometimes make a person a lot more imaginative.

 

This part of your post reminds me of the story of W Eugene Smith, one of my photographic inspirations to this day, who was apparently frequently so poor, he had to pawn off his cameras regularly just so he could eat. Every time he got a new assignment he would buy, borrow, be lent, get sponsored whatever camera he can get. Sobering story, and one I am constantly mindful of.

 

It's similar to the zen story about the monk who opens the pantry everyday and simply cooks the day's meal based on whatever he finds in it each day.

 

I generally agree with the rest of your post, and when I was writing mine I forgot about people who already have a photographic vision and need specific lenses to achieve that vision. I was thinking more of people like me, hobbyists who are not really interested in making art and simply wants to enjoy the simple joys of photography.

 

In a way, the concept of owning and shooting just one lens a year is a more extreme form of the one camera, one lens challenge that a lot of people embarked on a couple of years ago. Except this one could go on and on with new variations each year. And who knows, one might even come across that one lens that suits one to a tee and, like a good sword to a samurai, ends up being the only lens one will ever need for life.

[Jeff S]

 

(snip)

 

I was thinking more of people like me, hobbyists who are not really interested in making art and simply wants to enjoy the simple joys of photography.

 

(snip)

 

In a way, the concept of owning and shooting just one lens a year is a more extreme form of the one camera, one lens challenge that a lot of people embarked on a couple of years ago.

 

You could accomplish the principle espoused in the second sentence by buying a different, but inexpensive, lens each year. The fact that you don't suggests that the "simple joys of photography" you mention in the first sentence has a lot to do with gear lust.

 

But you knew that already based on your GAS comment in your initial post. Nothing wrong with that. But if you want to avoid GAS, then CalArts' comments are spot on IMO.

 

And one can still be a hobbyist and care more about the final image (and print) than the gear; I do.

 

Jeff

[CalArts 99]

I was thinking more of people like me, hobbyists who are not really interested in making art and simply wants to enjoy the simple joys of photography.

 

I understand. And I think that those "simply joys of photography" will be highly subjective and interpreted by a wide variety of people. So it's not necessarily going to be the same for everyone.

 

In a way, the concept of owning and shooting just one lens a year is a more extreme form of the one camera, one lens challenge that a lot of people embarked on a couple of years ago.

 

I did this for a 5-year project (one lens, one camera) not because I wanted to but only because I had no choice. I was just out of grad school and was broke (as I was through grad school.) But I had received a generous grant from the J Paul Getty Trust for the project which allowed me to eat and buy film. I could have easily bought some equipment but I couldn't have taken the time to do the work and also stay alive. Nonetheless, it made me understand that I could produce quality work with the very minimum of tools. And which was something I sort of understood starting in grad school where I went through the entire program with only a fixed lens camera (a 6x9 rangefinder.) And even today, despite that I can now afford more things, I probably tend to own less than the average photographer.

 

I think everyone will have their own philosophy of what works for them in respect to what their personal definition of 'photography' might be.

[CalArts 99]

p.s., to add what Jeff said, you could also consider renting lenses to see if they might work for you and/or if they make changes in your work (or in your life) that would warrant a purchase. But then again, if what he says is true (owning the gear is important) than it doesn't matter so much about what lens it is other than it's the 'best' and you are happy with it psychologically. Again, nothing wrong with that. We all get pleasure in a variety of ways and ownership of certain material goods is just one way. And don't get me wrong, I lust after a lot of things.

 

But in the end I have to realize that a Noctilux won't do anything for me personally in respect to my work which is always paramount over the gear itself. I'd rather spend that money on making prints than on a lens. But we all have our own priorities. I think you just need to follow your own instincts. Plus you'll no doubt change your views over time. As humans we're always in flux.

 

As to how to buy the stuff when you have limited resources, I can't answer that. But yeah, saving up for something can be fun and also a nice reward for having that sort of discipline when you do finally buy it.

[Ruhayat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...I think everyone will have their own philosophy of what works for them in respect to what their personal definition of 'photography' might be.

 

Agree very much. While I am now more inclined towards the "samurai" analogy (one blade for life), I have friends who subscribe to a "chef" analogy (having a set of blades, and using the right blade for the right task), and I am sure there are countless other ways of approaching it (that has nothing to do with knives, to boot!). I'm just putting out one that I am working towards in particular in this stage of my life.

 

I started out photographing more seriously 7 years ago with a single fixed lens camera as well (okay, the Digilux 2 has a Vario Summicron so that's cheating, a bit ), and some of my best photos during my student days were done with a Yashica T4 with a "slow and dated" 35mm 3.5 Tessar lens, which I used for 4 years without feeling I was missing much. I guess I'd like to get back to that state of being where, as you say, the focus is on the photograph rather than the gear.

 

I'm afraid I have been guilty, especially in the past 4 years, of letting gear lust get in the driving seat more than it should. But I suppose one has to know what is out there to make a more informed decision. Now that I somewhat know better what is available to me (and let's face it - with 22 lenses in my cabinet at the moment it's hard not to learn at least something hehe), I am inclined to the idea of owning limited equipment as a way of imposing forced discipline.

 

Thanks for your thoughts.

[CalArts 99]

with 22 lenses in my cabinet at the moment

 

It sounds like you want to get rid of all that stuff but then again not really and are looking for a more sensible way to acquire more but then again you don't want more and just want to see if you can live with less but then again you can't really but you would like to try it nonetheless but you wouldn't mind getting some new lenses but you aren't sure if you really need them but yes you like having them around but then again it would nice to live with only one but they sure are nice just sitting there but then what if you only had one lens a year to fuss with but hey you really like that you have them all but what good do they do in a closest but then again it's kind of good to have them just in case.

 

I realize now that my first post was kind of off the actual subject of your thread. Sorry about that.

 

I say go to GAS-Anon.

[satijntje]

Hi,

 

I fully understand your GAS issue, as I'm myself a GAS patient:o

 

Have you read my posting:

 

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/283658-m240-back-essential-m8.html

 

I'm still with my M8 and the 40mm cron, although I got an old 35mm summaron in mint condition for a bargain and this lens is older then me:p

 

I must admit however that I have started looking at the X-Vario, but I hope that I can stand it.

 

gr

 

Jiohn

[Jeff S]

... which allowed me to eat and buy film.

 

I can understand the need to buy film, but eating it seems a strange way to process it.

 

Jeff

[tobey bilek]

You can not cure GAS as new requirement emerge and new items to fulfill them.

 

The only possible way is to to cut up the credit cards and have the spouse put you on an allowance.

 

Better to live with gas.

[otto.f]

I don't know what you mean by GAS, is that German lens Acquisition Syndrome? but to your question: "So how do you maintain the discipline? ":

 

1. Most people on this forum have too many lenses, including me. So stay away from here.

2. The more lenses, the more weight to carry

3. The more lenses or bodies the more decision problems

4. The more you carry, the less photoos

5. Living with restrictions enhances creativity. If you have to do your architecture with a 50mm because you didn't bring your 24, you'll come home with different perspectives

6. Stay with old Leica glass, mostly more character, less weight, less money

7. Concentrate on printing, printing papers, framing, how to present my prints, where do I hang them, etc.

 

I realise that these are tips you can only get from someone who has gone through a lot of lenses and I'm afraid that you have to go that journey too. So throw away the discipline question. You are doing this for fun, isn't it? A professional would never restrict himself to one lens because customer demands are ruling.

But still, there is a lot of fetishism in getting the next interesting lens from Leica. If you PP with dedication you can get beautiful and honest images too. But psychologically that does not seem to satisfy your curiosity and that's good for ecconomy

[Ruhayat]

Hi,

 

I fully understand your GAS issue, as I'm myself a GAS patient:o

 

Have you read my posting:

 

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/283658-m240-back-essential-m8.html

 

I'm still with my M8 and the 40mm cron, although I got an old 35mm summaron in mint condition for a bargain and this lens is older then me:p

 

I must admit however that I have started looking at the X-Vario, but I hope that I can stand it.

 

gr

 

Jiohn

 

Hi Jiohn,

 

nice story! It parallels somewhat what I am going through at the moment. I open the cabinet and stare at the rows of lenses now and I think, do I really need all these. But then I pick them up one by one to consider selling them off and I just find it hard to let go. So I had to figure out a way to cure my GAS while giving me access to these delightful things. Renting is not an option in Malaysia, too bad, or else I could sell half the collection which I only need once in a blue moon. The 28mm I only use when I am travelling, for instance, and the macro only when I'm on a job.

 

Maybe we should start a GAS Anon chapter for recovering lens addicts. For me I constantly find myself looking through people's flickrs and really liking the signature of a particular lens and then wanting to know what that same lens could do for me. Back in my student days I used to sketch and draw a lot and I spent the same amount of time and effort on pencils, too. But pencils cost about the price of a lens cap.

 

You know, if I didn't spend so much time and money on these lenses, mostly classic and bought for a particular character and "look" they give to images rather than pride of ownership. Excepting the 28mm Elmarit ASPH which I bought brand new, they're not particularly expensive. I could probably sell the whole collection and only manage to buy a new 28mm Summicron and 50mm Summilux ASPH with the proceeds. Then again, those two are probably all that I really need, anyway.

[Ruhayat]

I don't know what you mean by GAS, is that German lens Acquisition Syndrome?

 

Haha. That would ruin me for sure and leave me with not just no money in my pocket, but NO pocket at all!

 

A professional would never restrict himself to one lens because customer demands are ruling.

 

True. So I have split my lenses into two: those I need for my work (renting lenses in Malaysia is not common, I wish we have Lens Rentals here, so we have to buy and keep our own), and those I bought purely for personal use. I'm looking to trim down the latter. Maybe I can cheat and place some of those lenses into the "I really need these for work" cabinet in the office.

[otto.f]

:D:D

[NZDavid]

I don't agree about constantly buying and selling, but I do agree about getting to know the characteristics of your gear, especially lenses, and getting the most out of them. I'd try to save up for what you really want and hanging on to it.

[pico]

[... eventually buy best lens, then...]] You use just that single lens for a year while again saving up monthly, then sell off that lens (with perhaps even a small profit!), added to the money saved for the second year, and you buy another lens and again use just that for that year. Rinse and repeat.

 

I cannot imagine a worse strategy. Your new lens should be viable for many years before requiring replacement. If your tax system permits depreciation, then go by its schedule - minimum! It is more likely that a digital camera body will require replacement, usually on a 3-year schedule.

[pico]

This part of your post reminds me of the story of W Eugene Smith, one of my photographic inspirations to this day, who was apparently frequently so poor, he had to pawn off his cameras regularly just so he could eat. Every time he got a new assignment he would buy, borrow, be lent, get sponsored whatever camera he can get. Sobering story, and one I am constantly mindful of.

 

Sobering is a path that W. Eugene Smith should have followed instead of spending his money on meth and alcohol. The point being that he was an addict with daily withdrawls, great pain. You might have GAS which is a whole lot simpler to manage.

 

I don't know why people praise Smith so much. They might not if they understood his methods and deceptions.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Ruhayat]

...I don't know why people praise Smith so much. They might not if they understood his methods and deceptions.

 

:eek:

 

I'm all ears. So what's the story?

[Ruhayat]

I cannot imagine a worse strategy. Your new lens should be viable for many years before requiring replacement. If your tax system permits depreciation, then go by its schedule - minimum! It is more likely that a digital camera body will require replacement, usually on a 3-year schedule.

 

But the point is to use it as an annually "disposable" lens - you sell it on at the end of every year, buy a different model and use just that for the next year. As for the body, I have no worries: I had an M8 but we just didn't get on. Until technology advances sufficiently for Leica to make a digital M the same size as a film one, I am using only a film M. I have the Canons from work for digital should I need it.