why I now only shoot Leica

[frogfish]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I shot weddings with nearly everything: Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Leica... you name it.

After getting the new Sony A9, which is a fantastic camera, I started to feel bored, uninspired and just had the feeling I am operating a game-controller, but not a camera anymore.

I got out my old M9 and an 35 Summicron and took it with to weddings again. Can´t remember when I last time hat so much fun shooting 12 hours straight. I don´t know what happened, but after years of trying Leica at weddings and leaving it again for not being fast enough, I now finally feel comfortable to shoot anything with it that arises. I needed to adapt my technic a bit, but that went quick and easy.

So I pulled the trigger, sold my Sony A9, and got the Leica M-P and the 35 Summilux FLE. I nearly forgot how amazing this lens is...

Recently a wedding couple from Australia booked me, so I flew over the pond and got their wedding. Solely shot with the M-P and the 35.

Wanna see, what came out?
https://hamburg-hochzeitsfotografen.de/wedding-in-australia-leica-m-p-with-35-summilux/


Any comments, good or bad are appreciated (0:

 

heiko

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 October 9, 2017 by frogfish

[Ko.Fe.]

I'm not into weddings photography personally. But pictures are not boring for sure. 

 

It is a lot more fun to use Leica RF and pictures are different from (e)(d)SLR like gear. The only question I have is how economically viable it is. I don't think Leica Copal shutters are as durable as typical DSLR shutters are and replacing will cost more with Leica also service time, experience might be very different from Canonikon. 

 

In Canada weddings with five hundred guests are more and more common. With each guest picture required...

Edited October 9, 2017 by Ko.Fe.

[Advertisement]

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

[Peter Kilmister]

I feel happy for you. Auto focus, which was introduced about 40 years ago, has removed a lot of control in photography. It may have corrected a lot of focus errors but a computer became the decision maker. Fine for snapshots and selfies but a pain for anyone trying to select a subject that isn't obvious to the computer.

 

My moment on the road to Tarsus came about 4 years ago. The scales fell from my eyes when trying to focus on a bird in a bush. However hard I tried the autofocus kept missing the target. I ended up with lovely focus of the bush with an out of focus bird at the back. Grrr.

 

I tried to find out who makes manual focus digital cameras these days. It seems there is only one answer. Leica M series.

 

Frustratingly slow sometimes but that is art not gadgetry. I am happy, you are happy, and Leica is the key.

[frogfish]

"In Canada weddings with five hundred guests are more and more common. With each guest picture required..."

 

 

The cost effectiveness is not bad. Most of my colleagues use 2 semi-pro bodies, like D750 or higher, and a bunch of pro lenses. That get you in the ballpark of 20.000 bucks. I shoot with one camera and one lens (M9 is backup). It is not more expensive. It is just different. I shoot about 100.000 frames a year, professionally. Even if I needed a new shutter every year, it is not that much money compared what I get for the weddings...

And in reply to your statement above. I do not work like that. (0:
I am not the mainstream wedding photog. I sell myself as an artist. So I tell my couples I cannot guarantee a picture of every single guests. I capture moments and emotions, thats why I am there for. That´s the only way wedding photography is fun (0:

 

 

heiko

[jmahto]

I shot weddings with nearly everything: Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Leica... you name it.

After getting the new Sony A9, which is a fantastic camera, I started to feel bored, uninspired and just had the feeling I am operating a game-controller, but not a camera anymore.

 

I got out my old M9 and an 35 Summicron and took it with to weddings again. Can´t remember when I last time hat so much fun shooting 12 hours straight. I don´t know what happened, but after years of trying Leica at weddings and leaving it again for not being fast enough, I now finally feel comfortable to shoot anything with it that arises. I needed to adapt my technic a bit, but that went quick and easy.

 

So I pulled the trigger, sold my Sony A9, and got the Leica M-P and the 35 Summilux FLE. I nearly forgot how amazing this lens is...

 

Recently a wedding couple from Australia booked me, so I flew over the pond and got their wedding. Solely shot with the M-P and the 35.

 

Wanna see, what came out?

https://hamburg-hochzeitsfotografen.de/wedding-in-australia-leica-m-p-with-35-summilux/

 

 

Any comments, good or bad are appreciated (0:

 

heiko

Loved the pictures. Specially the B&W one of couple with sun showing through.

 

I guess Leica RF forces (for lack of better word) a certain style which is different than DSLRs.

[steamboat]

A Leica M with a 35mm is about as good as it gets. Congrats on eschewing all the other stuff and keeping it simple. Back in "film" days (when photographers knew what "fixer" was) Dave Harvey of NatGeo / Magnum fame would shoot all his NatGeo stories with an M6 and a 35. I don't know what he's doing today for equipment but I don't think it's an M digital. Anyway, good luck with your photography and keeping it simple.

[Steve Caddy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Harvey is shooting a bunch of Fuji gear alongside a Leica Q these days.

[bocaburger]

My moment on the road to Tarsus came about 4 years ago. The scales fell from my eyes when trying to focus on a bird in a bush. However hard I tried the autofocus kept missing the target. I ended up with lovely focus of the bush with an out of focus bird at the back.

Almost 50 years shooting Leica M, dyed in the wool fan. Gave up bird photography a decade or so ago because I had more bird photos than I could ever want, but at that point I was using a Canon 1-series AF dSLR, and all my L-series telephotos (and many USM non-telephotos) had manually focus override just by turning the ring, no need to turn switches on and off. The finder in my 1Ds-II was plenty contrasty that I could easily get tack-sharp on a bird's eye even if said bird was in the bush.

 

AF got me more keepers of birds in flight than my eyes and reflexes were capable of (respect to those who did splendidly without AF); manual focus was instantly at my figertips when AF's limitations reared its head.

 

OTOF I have never shot a wedding with AF gear. In the film days I used Rolleiflex TLRs, but sadly those did not live on the digital age, so I switched to Leica M. Nothing to do with AF vs manual focus. Everything to do with ZERO blackout and being able to see if my flash failed to fire, or if the subject blinked.

[Nick Bedford]

I owned a Sony A7 for about 3 weeks before selling it. Even the newest A7 bodies which are much better and more ergonomic feel like I'm putting a computer up to my face. I just can't enjoy it.

 

When I use my Leica, I feel so much more for photography.

 

...and just had the feeling I am operating a game-controller, but not a camera anymore.

[jaapv]

I shot weddings with nearly everything: Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Leica... you name it.

After getting the new Sony A9, which is a fantastic camera, I started to feel bored, uninspired and just had the feeling I am operating a game-controller, but not a camera anymore.

 

I got out my old M9 and an 35 Summicron and took it with to weddings again. Can´t remember when I last time hat so much fun shooting 12 hours straight. I don´t know what happened, but after years of trying Leica at weddings and leaving it again for not being fast enough, I now finally feel comfortable to shoot anything with it that arises. I needed to adapt my technic a bit, but that went quick and easy.

 

So I pulled the trigger, sold my Sony A9, and got the Leica M-P and the 35 Summilux FLE. I nearly forgot how amazing this lens is...

 

Recently a wedding couple from Australia booked me, so I flew over the pond and got their wedding. Solely shot with the M-P and the 35.

 

Wanna see, what came out?

https://hamburg-hochzeitsfotografen.de/wedding-in-australia-leica-m-p-with-35-summilux/

 

 

Any comments, good or bad are appreciated (0:

 

heiko

Really nice photography there. I particularly like that you tend to work in layers.

[georgio]

Your wedding pics are really good, you have great eyes for what to shoot and what not.

[Gobert]

"In Canada weddings with five hundred guests are more and more common. With each guest picture required..."

 

 

The cost effectiveness is not bad. Most of my colleagues use 2 semi-pro bodies, like D750 or higher, and a bunch of pro lenses. That get you in the ballpark of 20.000 bucks. I shoot with one camera and one lens (M9 is backup). It is not more expensive. It is just different. I shoot about 100.000 frames a year, professionally. Even if I needed a new shutter every year, it is not that much money compared what I get for the weddings...

And in reply to your statement above. I do not work like that. (0:

I am not the mainstream wedding photog. I sell myself as an artist. So I tell my couples I cannot guarantee a picture of every single guests. I capture moments and emotions, thats why I am there for. That´s the only way wedding photography is fun (0:

 

 

heiko

I think that’s the right (luxurious) attitude. I myself, being a pro wedding fotographer in the analog era, quit for that reason. Getting bored of partying, drunk people. I liked the ceremony and the pre-ceremony part, not the party thereafter.

Your results are nice, very nice.

Edited November 12, 2017 by Gobert