I bought an M10. And became a worse photographer.

[jbradstreet]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Of course my initial failings were my own. A photographic lifetime, entirely dependant on autofocus and exposure previews, had ruined me. As a young kid I remember manually focusing at some point. I'm sure of it. But those days are but a blurry memory. And any focus muscle memory, that may have once had promise, had long since atrophied.

 

Leica was always a strange phenomenon to me. Something rich people or hipsters tinkered with. I was always curious about that little red dot, but as I didn't consider myself a hipster - and would never be confused for rich - it would remain nothing more than a curiosity for the first 20 years of my photographic life.

 

I grew up shooting film on a Nikon. And then digital with Canon. Not sure why I switched, but I'm sure there was some raging battle on an online forum about which was better at the time. Yes... there was internet. As long as your mom didn't pick up the phone and ruin your connection.

 

I always had a camera with me. I shot everything and everyone. Ruined my ears standing next to giant Marshall stacks shooting bands. And put my life on the line arguing with airport security about a giant bag of film that was NOT going through the X-ray. The big SLR with a long zoom hanging off it was a badge of honour. And I loved every Canon and Nikon that I shot with along the way.

 

Yet somehow, I started to find myself in front a great shot - without a camera. I simply wasn't dragging it everywhere I went. For whatever reason, the big SLR with the zoom lens had become a hassle. And eventually the day came where I realised my spanking new 5D mk2 was shooting 1/1000th of what my iPhone was, and figured it was time for a change.

 

So I said goodbye to my beloved Canon collection. And for a year or two I shot *only* with my iPhone. And it was one of the most rewarding photographic periods of my life. I bought a bunch of Moment lenses for my iPhone (which are wonderful btw), and always had them on me. I shot Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Iceland, England - all kinds of lands - all on that tiny little sensor. No longer was I standing in front of a great picture without a camera to capture it.

 

But...... something was missing. The portability and convenience was there. But the image quality - while amazing for a PHONE - was lacking. And then one day, on some design blog, sandwiched between a cafe racer motorcycle review, and an architectural triumph hanging off the side of a cliff, was a picture of a Leica Q. And the scars on my wallet are proof, that that damn article pushed me off my own little cliff.

 

With waiting lists as long as this rambling essay, I happened to walk into George’s Camera in Sydney, Australia, and there was one staring me right in the face. Daring me. What are ya… yella?

 

And so that was how it all started. I LOVED - and still do Love - the Leica Q. It was always in my bag, and was my constant travel companion since day one. I’ve loudly proclaimed to anyone who would listen (not many people) that it was the best camera I’ve ever had. And more importantly for this story, I finally understood what those presumed rich folks and hipsters understood long before me. Once you hold a Leica in your hands, and spend some time shooting with one, all other cameras seem… plastic in comparison.

 

And so, it was only a matter of time. And after one too many sandstorms, with the Q heading for service (dust on the sensor in a closed system SUCKS), I happened upon another expensive article in some design blog. And once again was taunted at the edge of a cliff. And with Samy’s in Los Angeles following George’s before it… I’m now officially one of “those people” with a Leica. A proper one. The holy M. With none of that fancy autofocus business.

 

So… back to the outrageous claim in the title of this thread. Of course I’m no worse a photographer - nor better - because of a new camera. It’s a poor carpenter who blames his tools, etc. However the experience of a rangefinder - my first - of course does take some getting use to.

 

My first 100 shots had very… ‘creative’ focus. Anyone can focus on a face. I was focusing on a different level. Focusing on the soul. If one considers an ear, or the back of a chair, where the soul resides.

 

I decided (after MANY hours pouring through articles and posts by Huff, Overgaard, and many of you kind folks) to try something different than my trusty 28mm view of the world, and shoot strictly with the 50 Summilux for a while. And just to make things more difficult, I’m forcing myself to shoot wide open. If I was really a masochist I’d follow Thorsten’s footsteps and have a Noctilux permanently mounted, but A) the 0.95 is starting to get into too ‘big to carry around everyday’ territory, and B ) I’m already throwing away a bunch of soft shots with the 1.4 as it is.

 

Surprisingly, I’ve taken to the experience quicker than I thought. My 1 in 10 hit rate on the first 100 shots has improved dramatically. My current success rate isn’t exactly bragging rights yet, but it’s surprisingly usable even in the dimmest of light. And more importantly, the overall experience is almost meditative. No grinding of the autofocus motors. No assist light alerting my presence. Just a dufus fiddling with a metal ring. And the most satisfying shutter sound I ever did hear.

 

And so that’s my life for foreseeable future. When the Q returns from the doctor, it’ll be fascinating to see if I ever pick it up again. Or if it gets sold to help finance the 28 lux. But that’s a story for another day.

 

I do have some minor gripes with the way everything is laid out of course. I would love to be able to customise the frame lines, as I have zero need for a 75mm frameline when I’m shooting 50mm. And I am tempted to try a magnifying lens to get the 50mm closer to ‘full frame’, as I’m not sure I buy the ‘seeing outside the frame’ narrative. And the red LEDs at the bottom are ugly as sin. And the baseplate is downright silly. But hey… I’m new here. So maybe I should just shut up for a bit and get busy shooting.

 

A heartfelt thank you to all the people who make these boards what they are, and a tongue-in-cheek damn you to Overgaard and the like who convinced me to throw down $12k with their beautiful work and words.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited August 30, 2017 by jbradstreet

[hunta]

Wash on, wash off. Wash on, wash off. Wash on...

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeffry Abt]

Good post! I enjoyed the read.

[thebarnman]

I always shoot with a 90mm (on a R9.)  Even while focusing through the lens; I do end up missing the area where I'm trying to focus.  Wide open for me is 2.0, so I totally understand about the 1.4 mishaps.  I was in the understanding (even though I don't know much about the M series...) that the M10 has one of those new electronic viewfinders which I thought were suppose to help with focusing...though maybe I'm wrong about that. 

 

In any case; keep the fun up with your adventures through your M10, and always feel free to share your images when you can. 

[lanetomlane]

Enjoyed reading your post. So pleased you've "seen the light".

 

Cheers, Tom

[CRTZMO]

Nice one — I see myself in many ways.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[microview]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Good post! I enjoyed the read.

 

+1

[@ndy_ellis]

Thanks very much.  I especially like your use of 'meditative'.  

 

I went Nikon>Minolta>Sony>Canon>Sony>Leica.  Guess Canon had the march on Nikon for digital for a while, then Sony for mirrorless and big range of adapters.  Leica is pure photography though.  You never forget with a Sony that you are using an electronic device first and foremost.

 

Digressing slightly, nothing against the guy but Steve Huff jumps too much from one thing to another for me - he is a kit reviewer so why wouldn't he. Thorsten is far more on point though.  And this forum is great.  So much knowledge freely shared.

[01af]

I see myself in many ways.

So do I.

 

 

Or if it gets sold to help finance the 28 Summilux.

Before shelling out the money for a Summilux-M 28 mm Asph, I strongly recommend to check out the Summicron-M 28 mm Asph, to compare the two, and to reflect whether you really are willing to put up with the Summilux's size, weight, viewfinder obstruction, and unwieldy 49 mm filter size.

 

 

And so that's my life for foreseeable future.

Ha! Just wait until you hear the siren call of the Leica M-A ... or the M4, or M2

[Foxtwo]

The M10 won't make you a great photographer, but it will make you a better, thinking photographer. I love it far, far more than expected, and enjoy the shooting experience immensely more than with my DSLR which have been relegated to sports/action duty only.

[tonyniev]

I went Voightlander, Mamiya, Leica,Nikomat, Nikon and Leica M3 on film, Sony point on shoot on Digital, then Canon Rebel Xt, XS1, full frame 5D2, 7D then Sony A7R and A6000, now back to Leica M10...I will keep the Canons and Sonys but will use the Leica with A7R for travel, the A6000 for walk around and small parties and family group pix, the Canons for astro and airshows...I look forward to shooting the M10 with Summarit 50, Elmarit 28 and CV 15, in my trip to Italy and Aegean seas.

[sls]

Thanks for the great post, although I did skip a few bits.

 

I'm fairly new to Leica in middle age, there are some of us here.

 

Very familiar, I went Trip 35, film SLR, APS and DSLR (during which phase I forgot how to use a camera properly), then M9 5 or 6 years ago and got back to teaching myself how to take proper photo's almost from scratch. I've never had so much fun. I have M7, M10 and Q and will definitely not be getting rid of the Q. Each camera is different, each lens different, unless you need the money, it's a hobby so why compromise? 

 

My change arose from lugging all my Canon kit on a month-long trip in the heat. Sold it all in one go. No regrets. 

 

I also bought a Fuji X-Pro1 as backup for the M9 and my son now has it. He also has a Bessa for film and only uses M lenses on both. His are cheaper but he gets mine when the day comes, if he doesn't permanently borrow before.

 

I originally thought just using a 35 or 50 was a limitation, I now see it as liberation. Both my kids (17 and 20) are keen photographers, film and digital, and are also mainly 35mm and know how to use cameras properly. I give thanks I never got them compact zooms.  

 

Lovely selection of portraits. 

Edited August 30, 2017 by sls

[jbradstreet]

So do I. Before shelling out the money for a Summilux-M 28 mm Asph, I strongly recommend to check out the Summicron-M 28 mm Asph, to compare the two, and to reflect whether you really are willing to put up with the Summilux's size, weight, viewfinder obstruction, and unwieldy 49 mm filter size. 

Thanks 01af. Definitely under consideration. And wouldn't be too far a cry from the speed of the 28 on the Q. I'll likely keep my eye out for a nice previously enjoyed copy and give it a whirl.

[jbradstreet]

I have M7, M10 and Q and will definitely not be getting rid of the Q. Each camera is different, each lens different, unless you need the money, it's a hobby so why compromise?

Thanks sls. The main reason I'd let the beloved Q find a new home, is for the very reason this whole camera diet began. Strong believer in 'the best camera is the one you have with you' mantra, and only one camera is always on my hip, so the Q would likely become the old relic like the Canon gear that came before it. Another lens on the other hand is easier to tuck in the bag if I find the 50 too tight. At least that's my current thinking. I'll get back to you in a couple years when I have half a dozen Leica bodies and room full of lenses!

 

Also, and not that I ever really care about depreciation for gear I love, but being a fixed unit the beautiful glass on the Q is glued to an aging bit of electronics. Where as a 28 cron or lux remains as useful today as it will be in 20 years.

[sls]

Thanks 01af. Definitely under consideration. And wouldn't be too far a cry from the speed of the 28 on the Q. I'll likely keep my eye out for a nice previously enjoyed copy and give it a whirl.

 

 

A 28 Summilux won't do a lot more than the Q. If you use the Q on fully automatic, it will default to f/1.7 unless it is very dark. You may use the Q more creatively, I don't know, but I don't see the point in spending the money on another fast 28mm. I went the other way and went for the 28 Summaron, which is actually a bit more expensive than the 28 Summicron and a lot more than the Summarit, but for a completely different approach than the Q. 

[sls]

Thanks sls. The main reason I'd let the beloved Q find a new home, is for the very reason this whole camera diet began. Strong believer in 'the best camera is the one you have with you' mantra, and only one camera is always on my hip, so the Q would likely become the old relic like the Canon gear that came before it. Another lens on the other hand is easier to tuck in the bag if I find the 50 too tight. At least that's my current thinking. I'll get back to you in a couple years when I have half a dozen Leica bodies and room full of lenses!

 

Also, and not that I ever really care about depreciation for gear I love, but being a fixed unit the beautiful glass on the Q is glued to an aging bit of electronics. Where as a 28 cron or lux remains as useful today as it will be in 20 years.

 

 

I think it will be a while yet before Q electronics or 24mp sensor become redundant. I get an M and Q in a very small bag from Courierware, plus phone, wallet and keys and even a spare lens. Could fit a Kindle in if needed. I love the Q for playing tourist with the wife, more flexible and quicker than M10 + 35/f2.

Edited August 30, 2017 by sls

[Jeff S]

Good read.

 

Thorsten's fine results notwithstanding, those other little numbers on your lens between 1.4 and 16 needn't die of loneliness. Mine at least appreciate the attention.

 

Jeff

[Maxx71]

That was indeed a good read! I went from Nikon to Canon to Fuji plus Sony plus Leica. I cant imagine just having a M since I've shot with AF for so long like you did. So, I'm keeping my AF cameras for the days I don't feel like shooting manually.

[Jared]

Well done! I hope you have found a new photographic home with Leica.

 

I found that I fairly quickly became a better photographer as I got rid of all the tools meant to help. First it was the zooms. They made me far too lazy in my composition. OK, it wasn’t the lens’ fault—it was my own. I became far too lazy. Then, when I switched to Leica, I had to give up evaluative metering and (gasp!) autofocus. Again, in order to make the images I could “see” in my mind’s eye I had to engage my brain. The pictures slowly got better.

 

There is definitely a place for mega-zooms, high frame rates, and one thousand point autofocus. If I were a reporter, a wildlife shooter, or probably even a wedding photographer I doubt I would be using a Leica, but for the type of photography that brings me joy it is definitely the right tool.

 

As to your few points of criticism... I agree with you on the ability to turn off frame lines for focal lengths you don’t possess or just won’t be using on a given day. That would be nice. The removable bottom plate, now that it is somewhat weather sealed I see as harmless if silly. For a 50mm I don’t find a magnifier very useful (I’ve tried one on an M9), but it would sure come in handy for my 135mm.

 

Once you’ve gotten the hang of focusing correctly, feel free to stop down a bit. Not every photograph benefits from the extreme subject isolation of n f/1.4 aperture. Oh, and don’t be too quick to sell the ‘Q’, especially if it’s to fund a 28mm. You’ve already got a great 28mm Summilux, it just happens to have a camera attached. A very good camera, at that. There are times when having an autofocus camera with a good EVF is priceless. Like vacation snaps or weekend getaways. I have kept mine and don’t currently own another 28mm lens.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jbradstreet]

Good read.

Thorsten's fine results notwithstanding, those other little numbers on your lens between 1.4 and 16 needn't die of loneliness. Mine at least appreciate the attention.

Jeff

Ha! Yeah it won't ALWAYS shoot at 1.4. But for now I'm pushing myself technically. And hey... it would be crime to NOT shoot wide often often. Especially at this price / weight.