Why would anyone want a Leica with no screen?

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sure, let's talk about the age of film. No LCD to look at back then. I recall a number of other distractions that I don't have now, such as having to rewind entire rolls of film after every 36 exposures, unload the camera, load the camera very carefully, wind the film to its first exposure, making sure it had actually been wound, making sure the ISO was set correctly on the camera or light meter, etc. While those things were happening, no photography of anything was happening. That was then. Today, some believe one can't even look at the back of the camera without being so terribly distracted as to miss some important photo.

 

I'm amazed that some people have the self-discipline for everything related to working with a Leica, from earning & saving the money to buy it, to choosing the right lens, to focusing manually, to setting aperture and shutter speed, etc., but then seem to be unable to control the urge to chimp at inappropriate times (or to simply turn off the LCD), thus wanting a camera with no screen.

 

You surely put a lot of energy into telling the world just how bad an idea (you find) a screen-less Leica M is.

[Bill W]

I would not want a Leica digital without a screen. That's my vote..... If I want a Leica M without a screen, I can go buy an M7

[Advertisement]

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

[Dannybuoy]

I have a confession. I ONLY look at the rear screen at my photos. I don't download the raw files. I just format the card at the end of every day after I've sat down and had a final look through them with a good cup of tea and a garibaldi biscuit

[zlatkob]

I guess the OP will never learn why someone would want a screenless camera. As the neigh sayers are busy being amazed by simple things.

 

The OP won't learn very much because those in favor of it don't have much convincing to say in favor of it, while the naysayers have some very practical arguments against it. One wonders how the proponents of a screenless digital camera survived in the film era, with the distraction of having to keep an eye on the frame counter and then actually having to rewind & reload the film instead of giving constant unbroken attention to their subject.

 

You surely put a lot of energy into telling the world just how bad an idea (you find) a screen-less Leica M is.

 

Yes I do, because it's such a bad idea with very little in favor of it. A thinner camera, yes. The distraction argument is really poor. No one seems to be able explain it very well. Chimping is not some uncontrollable reflex to be solved by making a dysfunctional digital camera.

 

Someone can do everything it takes to work with a Leica, and yet is helpless to avoid chimping at inappropriate times? Hard to believe. We even hear that the human eye is the "best meter". Are there really people who possess the judgment to read light levels by eye and at the same time lack the judgment to turn off the screen?

 

Goodness, choosing when to give attention to the subject and when not to is just part of still photography, always will be. If you're out doing street photography in a busy area, and your subject needs ultra-constant attention, then you may not want to cross any streets because, you know, you may have to divert your attention to the traffic signs & signals in order cross safely.

 

I suspect that the idea of a screenless digital camera appeals to those who think or imagine that there was something more pure and simple about film photography, when film photography was anything but pure and simple. The screen essentially solves a problem of film photography -- a problem that even pre-existed film photography. That problem is not knowing what, if anything, was captured until the film was developed. That problem is why generations of photographers were saddened to find out too late that they had made exposures with the lens cap on, had made exposures with no film in the camera, had made exposures with film not properly winding in the camera, had made exposures with miscalibrated lenses or non-functional aperture blades, had made exposures on film that had previously been exposed, had made exposures on a film with a different ISO than the one they thought they were using, had made exposures on expired or defective film, had made exposures with a flash that wasn't syncing or that needed a lower shutter speed, etc. The film era was when the Polaroid was introduced to address a problem of film, and when black & white film was sometimes developed by inspection under a faint green safelight, and when photographers would sometimes have clip tests run on film before having all of their film developed.

[pico]

A meter? You can always use the best meter ever made, the human eye...

 

If you are real good you can look at bystanders' iris diameter to determine exposure.

.

[swamiji]

If you are real good you can look at bystanders' iris diameter to determine exposure.

 

.

 

 

No, but one can take a base meter reading and easily tell if the light has changed one or two f-stops. Even I can do that. I just don't use the meter in the camera. For street I use a Weston, and a Sekonic for studio.

[viramati]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You mean to say, you have never used the screen? I find that hard to believe.

 

No I wouldn't want a leica with no screen:confused:

[swamiji]

No I wouldn't want a leica with no screen:confused:

 

 

That's a clear statement, thanks

 

I however most likely will, that M-A looks really interesting!

[250swb]

For me, I want to take it one step further.., no meter and no screen. For some reason you can turn off the screen but not the meter.

 

So you want to treat photography as a game, a test, some sort of retro nirvana where everything was better when you couldn't rectify a mistake because somehow or other the increased concentration without a screen means you don't make mistakes? Of course it has always been the case that photographers who didn't make mistakes in the past also shot a gigantic amount of film to guard against mistakes. They compensated by shooting more. But a screen allows you to shoot less, you aren't blasting away at everything in sight like the greats of film photography, so either way your idea of a 'better time' of the purity of photograph without an LCD, and a 'worse time' with chimping, just doesn't stack up, it is delusional.

 

Steve

[Raul]

"screen allows you to shoot less"... good point, Steve. I never thought about it that way.

 

I can appreciate screenless from a delayed gratification perspective but if I really had that nagging desire, I'd probably just dust off my Bessa and shoot film.

 

A screen is about possibilities, not limitations. Having said that, there is no wrong or right side to this coin. Both enhance creativity and learning in different ways.

 

I'm just glad that Leica listens to both the majority and the minority in ways that other companies don't or can't.

[diogenis]

I have a confession. I ONLY look at the rear screen at my photos. I don't download the raw files. I just format the card at the end of every day after I've sat down and had a final look through them with a good cup of tea and a garibaldi biscuit

 

Please can you explain us in detail what you mean? What is a garibaldi biscuit?

[Marac]

Please can you explain us in detail what you mean? What is a garibaldi biscuit?

 

They were often used with film cameras back in the day, sadly in this digital age we are left with jaffa cakes.

[swamiji]

Simply put, some of us value the skills that technology has taken from us. The camera in the OP would help in that matter.

 

It seems that Leica does understand.

[rosuna]

I don't think people are approaching this in the right spirit of purism.

 

What I want is a Leica M Kodachrome. It would have no rear or other LCD, no meter and no electronic displays of any other kind. It should have a maximum shutter speed of 1/1000th of a second (or perhaps even slower) and the shutter should be mechanically cocked, released and timed.

 

We are very, very close to full electronic shutters (on sensor control of exposure), so mechanical shutters are prepared for extinction at this moment.

[dant]

I would rather see Leica offer a v.2 M240 with no "movie" ( ) button on the top plate and a firmware update that lets you deactivate live view. 90% of the time when I am composing a vertical shot, my glasses frame activates live view. This is getting very old very quickly.

 

Damn live view button, can't have nothin' nice.

 

Yes, I'd love that. I have hit the video button by accident a number of times. I never shoot movies, don't want it.

[dant]

Sure, let's talk about the age of film. No LCD to look at back then. I recall a number of other distractions that I don't have now, such as having to rewind entire rolls of film after every 36 exposures, unload the camera, load the camera very carefully, wind the film to its first exposure, making sure it had actually been wound, making sure the ISO was set correctly on the camera or light meter, etc. While those things were happening, no photography of anything was happening. That was then. Today, some believe one can't even look at the back of the camera without being so terribly distracted as to miss some important photo.

 

I'm amazed that some people have the self-discipline for everything related to working with a Leica, from earning & saving the money to buy it, to choosing the right lens, to focusing manually, to setting aperture and shutter speed, etc., but then seem to be unable to control the urge to chimp at inappropriate times (or to simply turn off the LCD), thus wanting a camera with no screen.

 

 

I review my work all the time. I shoot is tough lighting and need all the help fine tuning I can get. Back in the day polaroid backs were not considered chimping and we had to pay for each and every look-see.

 

A screen is a fantastic tool as far as I'm concerned. I'm just wondering what drives the fanatics that like to go backwards and make camera life tougher?

 

Now, sometimes I may have missed a shot or two taking a look-see. But without the screen I would have missed a zillion more pix from screw-ups on my part.

[aeturnum]

There are people in our community that view a camera without a screen as a huge plus. They like the philosophical implications of removing the screen and the sort of statement it makes about the priorities of the owner of such a camera. That's fine - I like the philosophy and statement as well.

 

However, just like a movie mode, I don't care if my camera has a screen. "It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg," as Jefferson would say. If Leica had a "budget" camera without a screen that was thinner and lighter, that would be very attractive to me. If Leica had a "premium" camera without a screen it would not interest me.

 

My friend is an audiophile, and I borrowed some equipment from him. After about a week I commented that I wasn't positive my music sounded any better with his nice stuff, but I thought it did and asked if I was imaging things. He said, "If you think it sounds better, who cares if it really does?"

 

Ultimately, we're all buying Leicas due to a somewhat irrational love of something about them. Whether it's the rangefinders or the design or the feel or the mystique or whatever. Having no screen seems as good a reason as any.

[Exodies]

Here's a handy tip to simulate having a Leica with no screen - look at your photographs with your eyes closed. And if you really want to re-live the good old days, develop your pictures in Lightroom with your monitor switched off.

[Jeff S]

Yes, I'd love that. I have hit the video button by accident a number of times. I never shoot movies, don't want it.

 

That's why the new M firmware allows one to disable the movie button and LV.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[swamiji]

Here's a handy tip to simulate having a Leica with no screen - look at your photographs with your eyes closed. And if you really want to re-live the good old days, develop your pictures in Lightroom with your monitor switched off.

 

 

Some people expect instant gratification and can't imagine a world without it.