Teetering on the Brink of Buyer's Remorse

[JohnnySeven]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In my experience buying a camera is very much like buying a musical instrument.  You can buy an electronic keyboard with built in drum machine and large hall reverb, or you can buy a hand made Steinway that just has black and white keys, no bosa nova button or reverb.  If you cant play piano the electronic keyboard will provide hours of fun and make you feel like Liberace,  Johan S Bach or Elton John for a day.  If you can play piano it will be a fun distraction for a while and will leave you longing for a real instrument with real dynamics and sonic integrity that allows a good player to play music from their individual mind and intent.  The same holds for camera's.  The bells and whistles are fun and handy but in the end your images are about your eye and intent. A simple quality camera like a Leica is akin to The Steinway.  Its simple does its thing and lets you do yours.  (and its pricey)  Give it time, learn how to play the instrument and you will be rewarded.  I can't play violin, so a Stradivarius in my hands would be an expensive nightmarish squeaky disaster .  In the hands of a skilled player its magic.  Learn your instrument. 

Edited December 21, 2017 by JohnnySeven

[earleygallery]

You mean photography isn't holding down the shutter button and rattling off 30 fps of anything and everything?

Well if you were making your living as a sports photographer it would be. Are you saying they're wrong to do that?

[Surelythisnameisfree]

I think anyone thinking of making the jump into Leica would be much better served buying a second hand M240 and lens and trying that first. If you don't like it you can sell it on for what you paid, no harm done. If you do like it and want to trade up to an M10 you'll still get what you paid for it. It's basically a no cost trial.

[Desmoprem]

Go to Hawaii and Indonesia with the M10 and a single lens.  I recently took mine to Thailand, Lao, and Japan with a 35mm Cron and 50mm Lux.  I wish I had left the 50mm at home.  Who knows how many great shots I missed while my head was down changing lenses. But probably didn't miss that many as I only used the 50mm a few times.  Instead of the extra lens, take an extra card and battery.  Leave the DSLR at home, your back/shoulder with thank you for it.  Best of luck on your trip.

[paulj03]

What do you mean that you "bought for distraction"... pretty pricey distraction and doesn't quite ring true with "buyers remorse". "expensive flip phone" - hmmm.  Sounds like you are pissed or you are trying to provoke.  All is fine, but it sounds like there is more to your remorse.  But you do ask the fundamental question of "why buy Leica?"

 

I wanted a Leica for most of my life and then I bought one (m9)  about 4 years ago.  I have to say that the first 50 pictures, I was disappointed but then it turned around and soared the other way. No regrets.  Why didn't I bite the price bullet 2 or 3 scores of years ago?  The price is a very small issue compared to the photos that I take now and the progressing creativity in my eye, mind and soul.  OK I am carried away a little but not that much.  

 

It really has changed the way I see and photograph.  Why?  I think it is because it is back to basics, shutter speed, aperture and focus.  I use it wide open to "isolate", on A setting (I don't really care about shutter speed, unless it is purposeful) and just focus - one winds up "looking" and "photographing".  Not auto-intelligence where you don't know what the focus or exposure is and at the end of the day on the intelligence side - it is just about A,S and F.  Simplicity of the tool, enables creativity.  I also turn off the screen (like the old days, no preview; only to check exposure in tough light situations).

 

It really helps that the Leica lenses have that soft edge to the focus, meant to be shot wide open, great bokeh (there are better) and with contrast.  Each lens has its own character and this is where the comments on this blog allude to - it is the photographer and not the tool.  Matching the two is the trick.  

 

Is the Leica for everyone?  I don't think so.  If I was a professional sports photographer and wanted to shoot for still images at 64 frames per second and needed autofocus, it is absolutely not the right tool - buy technology with 50 menus and settings.   So, you don't say what you are using the camera for.  

 

So, hard to comment on your Buyer's Remorse, it certainly sounds like you can afford the "distraction" so it sounds like you are disappointed that it didn't meet some expectation and not clear what that is.

 

I have the M9 and the M10 is a different beast (all that interchangeability, video), but to me, it has many options that would confuse my simple brain.  Check out Thorsten Von Overgaard's web page - he is clearly a Leica enthusiast and attempts to articulate it - many times over.

Edited December 22, 2017 by paulj03

[frperdurabo]

Newbie here -- I just made a jump from D800 to add a M10 to my photo-arsenal and I'm struggling with the purchase. Please don't be offended. Maybe I'm the guy showing up with a can of worms at a fly fishing conference. Carrying a Bic to fountain pen convention. So I apologize in advance.

 

I've spent this much money on a camera that has quantifiably inferior features to many other options at far below the price.

 

I bought it for a distraction and because I wanted to try something different. I like the Leica build quality and wanted to try the RF experience, which people write about like it's extremely satisfying and special. I respect the brand. My friend has a Q; I tried it and really liked it! Wow what a nice camera that was. After several hundred shots with the M seeking the same feel but with interchangeable lenses I kind of wonder if I bought the camera equivalent of a fine hand-made flip phone. (Reduction to the essentials.) "Who needs navigation and Netflix on a phone?" my dad scoffs. Did I buy "spring water in a Pepsi world" -- as I read elsewhere -- only to realize they sell really good whiskey made with spring water for a lot less than this water cost? I mean with lenses I could buy a used M3, as in e46 BMW.

 

How much shooting do I need to do to "love" this camera? Yes, I kind of like slowing down and composing the shot and so on. But no info in the viewfinder other than shutter speed?

 

Sorry for the vent. Sorry for starting off on a negative note, but I'm scared I've spent a lot of money and even lost a little hope. Disclosure: One reason I bought it was to try to rekindle my lifelong love of shooting, snuffed out by a personal loss -- and a bizarre discovery at work -- that helped sapped my will to even keep going. I don't want to dwell on that. But I thought it's best to disclose my overall mindset is a bit colored these days.

 

I really want to love the m10. Can anybody help me love it?

I don't own any digital Leicas, so also the guy showing up with worms.  If you want to experience Leica get an M7 (or really, any used M series), a really good scanner, and lots of Velvia or Provia.  I own a nice-ish digital rig, but analog is fun in a different way.  The problem with digital Leicas is the sensors are just not as good as the best from Japan.

 

I've also wondered if the reason Leica doesn't use 36 or 42mp sensors is that rangefinder focusing just isn't accurate enough, but that's a wacky conspiracy theory for another day.  If you like 28mm lenses, the Q is the one Leica I'd buy, although one of my friends swears by the SL.

[chicagophoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well if you were making your living as a sports photographer it would be. Are you saying they're wrong to do that?

 

I have worked with many machine gun photographers as I call them and yes if all your doing is holding down the shutter release to shoot 20 fps then a monkey good do that. No skill required, point the camera and hit the drive. Fortunately the top level Sports photographers in the world, who I have worked with wait for the moment and shoot, skill at the highest level. I believe this is a generational difference from the young photographers today, who never knew what it was like to shoot film, process the film and make prints. Some photographers I worked with would shoot 9-10,000 frames from a football game, Why, because they could. Thats 250 rolls of film. On the other hand the veteran photographers I worked with in the film days would shoot maybe 20 rolls of film at most and 1000 digital images today. Why. Because they understood the sport, knew when to actually press the button to make a picture. I guess if you throw enough garbage in the can, something is going to stick out, and out of those 10,000 frames they actually only had maybe 20 -30 images that were good enough to be considered for publication, but thats the attitude today to compensate for lack of skill. After all isn't, everyone a photographer today. Apple wants you to think so

[asiafish]

I did the same thing almost five-years-ago, sold most of my DSLR gear (I kept one Canon body and two lenses) and bought a Leica M Monochrom, 35mm f/2.5 Summarit and 50mm f/2 Summicron.

I still have my Canon body and two lenses (sold the 24-105/4 and replaced it with the smaller 24-70/4) and those suit a purpose and still see a lot of use, but the M has taken over and become my favorite system.

 

 

The M10 is a wonderful camera for photographers who don't want the camera to do the work for them.  It gets out of the way, doesn't intrude, but there is more.  It is an object of beauty in and of itself.  The craftsmanship is obvious at first touch, and that goes double for the lenses.

 

It is also limited and excels only in certain types of photography.  I still use my Canon 5D3 and 50mm f/1.2L for fast-moving events, but for just about everything else, travel, portraiture, street, there is nothing I like more than my M10 and one or two good Leica primes.

[Peter H]

I have worked with many machine gun photographers as I call them and yes if all your doing is holding down the shutter release to shoot 20 fps then a monkey good do that. No skill required, point the camera and hit the drive. Fortunately the top level Sports photographers in the world, who I have worked with wait for the moment and shoot, skill at the highest level. I believe this is a generational difference from the young photographers today, who never knew what it was like to shoot film, process the film and make prints. Some photographers I worked with would shoot 9-10,000 frames from a football game, Why, because they could. Thats 250 rolls of film. On the other hand the veteran photographers I worked with in the film days would shoot maybe 20 rolls of film at most and 1000 digital images today. Why. Because they understood the sport, knew when to actually press the button to make a picture. I guess if you throw enough garbage in the can, something is going to stick out, and out of those 10,000 frames they actually only had maybe 20 -30 images that were good enough to be considered for publication, but thats the attitude today to compensate for lack of skill. After all isn't, everyone a photographer today. Apple wants you to think so

 

 

But there's a lot more to being a good photographer than skill.

 

When I look at a sports photo I don't care whether it was a well crafted one-off or a one-in-a-thousand from a roll of automated clicks: the skill of the photographer isn't the subject. The sport is.

 

It's great that more people can now use good-quality cameras without having to take a three-year course and twenty years experience in the subject, and just learn what they want to learn as they go along enjoying themselves and being creative.

 

But once you have learned the basics, it's certainly nice to have a camera like an M10 that allows you to make the important decisions in a very natural way, and leaves you free to concentrate on the matter you're interested in photographing rather than the camera you're using to do it.

[Foxtwo]

Well if you were making your living as a sports photographer it would be. Are you saying they're wrong to do that?

That isn't how I shoot sports at all! Spray and pray is for amateurs who end up practicing bleeding during post processing.

[eleven24]

 

 

Well if you were making your living as a sports photographer it would be. Are you saying they're wrong to do that?

 

Obviously if one is making a living at something like sports photography then high fps can be a benefit, but there is an immense difference between the person who sprays and prays and the other who knows his subject matter and can anticipate.  Both can still benefit from FPS, yet one will be sifting through 1000 images where the other maybe 20-30 of that single moment.

 

I guess anytime I hear that rattle of a DSLR at 30+ fps I always think about the amount of time that person will spend at home sifting through hundreds of almost identical photos.  Especially when the subject matter is something that really should have never dictated a camera be in high fps to begin with, like street photography, kids at the zoo.... landscapes....

[Princess Leica]

Leicas are not lovers. They're teachers. You need them. They school you in slow observation, almost brutally reverential seeing. When the double image clicks into one, I swear your brain gets tickled. I started late, with an M9. Went through a patch where I sold off many of my beautiful lenses, swearing I was over rangefinders for good. And then I bought many of them back. I just didn't like taking photos the easy way.

[Johno]

What do you mean that you "bought for distraction"... pretty pricey distraction and doesn't quite ring true with "buyers remorse". "expensive flip phone" - hmmm. Sounds like you are pissed or you are trying to provoke. All is fine, but it sounds like there is more to your remorse. But you do ask the fundamental question of "why buy Leica?"

 

So, you don't say what you are using the camera for.

 

So, hard to comment on your Buyer's Remorse, it certainly sounds like you can afford the "distraction" so it sounds like you are disappointed that it didn't meet some expectation and not clear what that is.

 

.

Yes, there is more. The distraction was partly an attempt to fend off a multiple month slide into a deep depression. I was willing to try anything to take my mind somewhere positive and productive. So there was no intent to provoke. Sorry if it seemed that way.

 

I've been very impressed with the thoughtful and even philosophical responses to my query.

 

Thanks for that, all of you.

Edited December 27, 2017 by Johno

[NZDavid]

...But no info in the viewfinder other than shutter speed?...

 

 

You have the shutter speed display in the viewfinder?! How distracting! I get used to a glowing red diode and don't even rely on that all the time -- a handheld meter will slow you down even more. 

[ramarren]

Yes, there is more. The distraction was partly an attempt to fend off a multiple month slide into a deep depression. I was willing to try anything to take my mind somewhere positive and productive. So there was no intent to provoke. Sorry if it seemed that way.

I've been very impressed with the thoughtful and even philosophical responses to my query.

Thanks for that, all of you.

Things do not "do"; things "are". People "do" ...

 

I know all about seeking ways to fend off a slide into deep depression. It's been many years now but I went through that in the middle 1990s. For me, distraction didn't work, things worked less. What worked was stopping the distraction and facing the depression directly, figuring out what was causing it, and working on that. Which actually took me away from photography and other pursuits almost entirely for a time. Addressing the cause of the depression, and slowly solving the other issues of physical health and mental well-being that were a part of it, has brought all of those other pursuits back to me.

 

So if you're facing depression, I'd recommend that you don't seek to solve it with distraction. Solve it with concentrated intent by working on the problems that are causing it.

 

Back to the cameras: The M10 is what it is, just like your Nikon is what it is. Neither does anything of their own. The Leica has fewer conveniences and less automation for you to take advantage of; it offers a completely different mechanism for focusing the lens and framing your exposures. In a sense, it's less distracting than the Nikon, if distraction is your focus, causing you to concentrate more on the photography you're doing and deal with the equipment at a more basic level. It's more expensive because it's made to a higher quality level of better quality components, not because it offers a ton of features. So, if you want to pursue working with it, give up your predispositions and previously held expectations of what constitutes the value in your camera gear and try to learn how to see doing photography differently.

 

The Leica M may not be how you want to do photography. Nothing wrong with that ... You can typically recover most of your expenditure with Leica gear and move on if need be. But I would try, first, to let your notions of what is more and better go, concentrate on what you want to photograph and see how the M10 does that. Try to let the simplicity of the Leica M take it out of your way rather than put an obstacle in your way; try to let the camera help you to see rather than hinder your doing. That way, even if it doesn't work out, at least you walk away from it in the end with the gain of having learned something about yourself and what is important to your photography.

 

"Equipment is transitory. Photographs endure."

[pgk]

They [Leicas] school you in slow observation, almost brutally reverential seeing.

 

Simple controls, an uncluttered 'interface' and the fact that if you get things wrong its your fault go together to make for a far more considered image creation process IMO. As I have said before, photography is about three things; subject, lighting and composition. All too often I see images which fail in one of these three because the photographer isn't seeing the whole picture (no pun intended). The automation of modern cameras does tend to promote technical acceptability over these three whereas it should actually have a support role. And it does tend to encourage a 'shoot first' ask questions later' approach which is revealed all too often in the poor use of light. What I do find to be a real concern is that I see an awful lot of images which are accepted despite their shortcoming regarding lighting. To me photography really is about drawing with light (its in the name) - anything else is note-taking (which, I like many, do do too).

[Lucena]

Simple controls, an uncluttered 'interface' and the fact that if you get things wrong its your fault go together to make for a far more considered image creation process IMO. As I have said before, photography is about three things; subject, lighting and composition. All too often I see images which fail in one of these three because the photographer isn't seeing the whole picture (no pun intended). The automation of modern cameras does tend to promote technical acceptability over these three whereas it should actually have a support role. And it does tend to encourage a 'shoot first' ask questions later' approach which is revealed all too often in the poor use of light. What I do find to be a real concern is that I see an awful lot of images which are accepted despite their shortcoming regarding lighting. To me photography really is about drawing with light (its in the name) - anything else is note-taking (which, I like many, do do too).

...and one being used with these notions pics come out of the camera perfect or almost... I hate processing, adjust a little is ok but no more, the picture is good or not. If it is only a note-taking and it is not very good I keep it for what it is... as it is...

 

I went to the Faroe with a group of photographers, all canikfujlumandsoonowners. Nobody compared brands or talked much about it, we talked more about landscapes, POVs... and provided some help with choices when needed (which speed, iso, etc).

What amazed me was seing pictures published by most of them and especially two of them who are pros... have we been in the same places at the same time? Responsible also is that lots of people use agressive post-processing and brutal HDRs...

Well of course I did not comment, no need to offend people, but I was really sad, I hoped better from these pro photographers, that is in my point of view of course, I like things to appear as they are, as I saw them...

Edited December 30, 2017 by Lucena

[Foxtwo]

I do suffer from Buyer’s Remorse. I wish that I would have purchased a rangefinder camera thirty years ago. I’d have been a much better photographer over those three decades.

Edited December 30, 2017 by Foxtwo

[Frase]

Don't get me wrong I like my Leicas but they are still only cameras, that do nothing more than take pictures.

Good luck and enjoy!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[JDFlood]

I find this an interesting discussion, as it gets to the heart of why Leica, what is it about it that is so appealing. I am new to M, and am having a very different experience than Johno. It seems at the root of the Leica appeal is how you look at it (leaving depression aside, which is relevant:  as what happens to a person in advance of an experience skews our likely response, positively or negatively). You can look at this as individual parts or the whole. And many people have indirectly pointed to this. But what is impressing me is the gestalt of the output. The M output is good, if you look at the colors, the sharpness, they are fine. If you compare individual attributes to other cameras, many are better. It is only when taken together that the Leica outshines other cameras. So, if I put up an Leica image on my monitor and push my chair back... wow. It reminds me when I see original Monet's. You can look close, and see a lot of unimpressive brush strokes of wildly different colors... or van Gogh, but stand back and wow, they frequently take the wind out of my chest. That is why Leica. Not for each pixel, or how many of them there are or for the sharpness, but for the gestalt, the output when taken as a whole. Obviously, you need composition, subject, etc, but that is what you practice at... and when used properly, the output will knock the socks off of you and instill a deep emotional response... not just, wow, "what a sharp technically perfect image"... that is beautiful. 

 

JD