Jump to content

Anyone Leica M as their only camera today.


Nshah

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I use the M as my only serious camera and I complement it only with a Sony pocket camera for family pics, beach, etc and the iPhone for quick snapshots when I don't have my M with me. But as serious photography goes, my M9 and my M6 are my main go to cameras, the M6 being used less of course. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not realistic to demand that a tool can simply be picked up and used. Take a simple tool like a pencil. Before being able to use this a human must undergo seven years of language study which includes three years of reading and writing practice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not realistic to demand that a tool can simply be picked up and used. Take a simple tool like a pencil. Before being able to use this a human must undergo seven years of language study which includes three years of reading and writing practice.

Not true. My son could use a pencil the moment he picked it up. Being able to use a pencil is not contingent on being able to read and write. In fact, most people I know are hard put to use a pencil for writing more than a few words at a time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't this analogy a bit far fetched or out of place?

A pencil does not make all kinds of decisions for the writer before he puts the pencil on paper, which he has to infer from its behavior before he can work adequately with it.

Learning to write down spoken language is a whole lot more investment than just learning a few basic principles of aperture, time, exposure and depth of field

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you look at the Nikon F2 and F3 The Canon F1 etc. You can see, that they had similar buttons and functions. If you knew the priciple of making a photo, you could see in an instant how it worked.

 

I really liked the F3. The moment I was inroduced to a Leica M5 I saw that the Leica was more rigid, felt more heavy and had an interesting rangfinder. The buttons were the same, only there was no mirror. It was almost the same in size, to my feeling.

 

The introduction of the Minolta 7000 led the way to comfort. Why focus yourself if the autofocus can handle it. Focussing asks for a practice and competence. If you can leave that to a camera. That is great, in the view of many buyers. The reason IMO why those cameras became a succes I think.

 

The choice of the people who made these tools got in different directions: In most brands, the custumer was given a way, to not understand the priciple of making a photo, the camera would take this burden, but still have an acceptable result.

 

Through these years, most cameras develloped in a way, that they gave more comfort and "less failiure rates", which is also comfort.

Only having these comforts comes with a price: a manual which is filled more and more with choices what comfort you want.

 

Typically, tools, cars, cameras etc.  have become more "comfortable", making our lives easier, but in the end, it appears they don't always realy appear do that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't this analogy a bit far fetched or out of place?

A pencil does not make all kinds of decisions for the writer before he puts the pencil on paper, which he has to infer from its behavior before he can work adequately with it.

Learning to write down spoken language is a whole lot more investment than just learning a few basic principles of aperture, time, exposure and depth of field

The pencil has been replaced by the spell-checker ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't have to relearn how to dial a telephone when it went to push buttons.
Then they added a digital answering machine and functions you needed instructions. to figure out

That's when the problems started.

 

Layers and layers of menus

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the Nikon F2 and F3 The Canon F1 etc. You can see, that they had similar buttons and functions. If you knew the priciple of making a photo, you could see in an instant how it worked.

 

I really liked the F3. The moment I was inroduced to a Leica M5 I saw that the Leica was more rigid, felt more heavy and had an interesting rangfinder. The buttons were the same, only there was no mirror. It was almost the same in size, to my feeling.

 

The introduction of the Minolta 7000 led the way to comfort. Why focus yourself if the autofocus can handle it. Focussing asks for a practice and competence. If you can leave that to a camera. That is great, in the view of many buyers. The reason IMO why those cameras became a succes I think.

 

The choice of the people who made these tools got in different directions: In most brands, the custumer was given a way, to not understand the priciple of making a photo, the camera would take this burden, but still have an acceptable result.

 

Through these years, most cameras develloped in a way, that they gave more comfort and "less failiure rates", which is also comfort.

Only having these comforts comes with a price: a manual which is filled more and more with choices what comfort you want.

 

Typically, tools, cars, cameras etc.  have become more "comfortable", making our lives easier, but in the end, it appears they don't always realy appear do that?

 

 

Yes I used manual film Nikons almost exclusively from 1979 to 2010 (except for my Contax T3). I previously had a Cannonet rangefinder and Pentax Spotmatic.  Moving between these cameras was virtually seamless except for those where the aperture, focus or shutter speed dials may have moved in different directions.  The function and use of very button and dial on each of these cameras  was intuitive and straightforward.  Moving between the Nikons was a breeze.

 

I kept my Nikon F3/T from 1985 till 2010 when I changed to Leica digital rangefinders. Again, every button's function and use is intuitive. As Bill wrote, the simplicity of the user interface of Leica digital cameras is almost identical to any of our old film cameras. Workflow with the M240/Monochrom and M7 is more or less identical whether digital or film.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I kept my Nikon F3/T from 1985 till 2010 when I changed to Leica digital rangefinders. Again, every button's function and use is intuitive. As Bill wrote, the simplicity of the user interface of Leica digital cameras is almost identical to any of our old film cameras. Workflow with the M240/Monochrom and M7 is more or less identical whether digital or film.  

I think it's not conservative to say, when I say, that I like to keep it this way. It's not illogical to do, it's also not illogical for other brands to look for a way to come closer to this idea with their new cameras. hence the retrolook in their cameras maybe.

 

Not only the want and need to go back to the simplicity of the 50ies but also because custumors begin to understand or feel, that there is a good reason why this camera , like  the F3 and the M6.7.8.9.10 kept that way.

Of course the learning curves will be more oncomfortable, but so is learning a bike...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I often use an iPhone for images destined for a computer screen.

 

I use the M240 for casually-composed images for prints up to 20x30".

 

For very formally-composed prints that I also print massively, I have yet to find anything that works as well as a 5x4" camera and 1gb drum scan. Tonality, resolution, smoothness, the ability to enlarge enormously, and front rise movements ....are factors that I find superior from that "old school" camera that I struggle to find replicated so well by other film or digital alternatives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...