Why Leica?

[itzeddy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had numerous discussion with friends on why Leica and this topic is probably well discussed already among the Leica community but just want to share in this forum of my thoughts

1. This is like a Porsche vs. Tesla, mechanical watch vs. Quartz watch debate that people can more relate to.
2. There is an engineering art to Porsche, a mechanical watch that Tesla, quartz watch does not offer, but of course, Tesla, quartz watch offers something else that Porsche and mechanical watch do not offer.  This decision/debate should start with the baseline there is no right/wrong end result

I transitioned from Nikon DSLR -> Canon DSLR -> M240 -> M10-D because

1. The portability, the unassuming, the stealth, the silence.
2. The optical quality of the prime lenses
3. The particular IQ of Leica M-system as each M generation evolves
4. The control. No AI, no autofocus, no face detection, no taking 40 pictures in 1 sec to give you insurance that one of them got to be good and given Canon/Sony brain to control everything rather than ourselves. Oh, no image stabilizer that compensates when your hand shakes. So in the end, do we want a camera to take pictures for us, or we are looking for taking the picture as a result of our own operations.
5. The slowness thus the process that we enjoy. Photography should not be just the result. It should include the process, the thoughts, the anticipation.
6. An engineering marvel. Just like holding a piece of an art form (granted a Sony A7 is also another kind of art form).
7. Heritage and timeless. Compatibility and accumulations of vast numbers of lenses throughout the years that spans the entire duration of modern photography history
8. And the no LCD .... this is probably controversial so my view of this is just the extension of what Leica is doing. Reduce/avoid the distraction down to the basic aperture, shutter speed, ISO, EV. The M10-D or M-D are just fitting to some users' purpose and may become a disadvantage to others.

 

Cheer!

[indergaard]

15 minutes ago, itzeddy said:

I had numerous discussion with friends on why Leica and this topic is probably well discussed already among the Leica community but just want to share in this forum of my thoughts

1. This is like a Porsche vs. Tesla, mechanical watch vs. Quartz watch debate that people can more relate to.
2. There is an engineering art to Porsche, a mechanical watch that Tesla, quartz watch does not offer, but of course, Tesla, quartz watch offers something else that Porsche and mechanical watch do not offer.  This decision/debate should start with the baseline there is no right/wrong end result

I transitioned from Nikon DSLR -> Canon DSLR -> M240 -> M10-D because

1. The portability, the unassuming, the stealth, the silence.
2. The optical quality of the prime lenses
3. The particular IQ of Leica M-system as each M generation evolves
4. The control. No AI, no autofocus, no face detection, no taking 40 pictures in 1 sec to give you insurance that one of them got to be good and given Canon/Sony brain to control everything rather than ourselves. Oh, no image stabilizer that compensates when your hand shakes. So in the end, do we want a camera to take pictures for us, or we are looking for taking the picture as a result of our own operations.
5. The slowness thus the process that we enjoy. Photography should not be just the result. It should include the process, the thoughts, the anticipation.
6. An engineering marvel. Just like holding a piece of an art form (granted a Sony A7 is also another kind of art form).
7. Heritage and timeless. Compatibility and accumulations of vast numbers of lenses throughout the years that spans the entire duration of modern photography history
8. And the no LCD .... this is probably controversial so my view of this is just the extension of what Leica is doing. Reduce/avoid the distraction down to the basic aperture, shutter speed, ISO, EV. The M10-D or M-D are just fitting to some users' purpose and may become a disadvantage to others.

 

Cheer!

 

1/2: Porsche's are also finicky and very expensive to service. And they require a lot of service. And they break down a lot (engines, gear boxes, clutches). Speaking from experience. Never buy a used Porsche!

1: Many other systems are just as portable, and offer completely silent shooting (Sony A9).
2: True
3: Pre-cooking of raw files is something I appreciate, and some times, something I don't appreciate. This is evident, just compare the same lens and raw files on an SL and M10. The M10 images are far more saturated, contrasty, and processed. This can be both a pro and a con, depending on the situation.
4: All of those features can easily be turned off in other cameras, and you can shoot it like any other fully manual camera.
5: I feel like using my A7rIII is slower than my M10. So for me it is the opposite. I can turn on, react, focus and grab a shot far quicker on my M10 than on my A7rIII. By the time my A7rIII is ready after being turned on, I would have already grabbed the photo with my M10. So much for the slower process. I find M cameras to give me a faster process.
6: Just because it feels dense doesn't make in an engineering marvel. Brass adds a lot of unecessary weight, and magnesium alloy would make the camera far lighter and more portable. The M form-factor was an engineering marvel in the 1960's.
7: Heritage and timeless. Ah yes, that feeling I get when I use my Leica MP 0.72 black paint (analog) with minor brassing that I have put on it myself from my own use in the last 5 years since I purchased it new. Sorry, I don't get the same feeling when I use the M10, M240, M Monochrom, or any digital camera for that matter. I suggest you get a real film Leica and you will probably feel the same after a while.
8: Taping over the screen or turning off image preview does the same trick. And you can format your SD card in the camera, and do other minor changes, without having to resort to a phone app (!!). What do you think happens when Leica stops updating their phone app 5-10 years down the road? Your M10-D won't be that timeless then. It will be time-limited.

Edited May 8, 2019 by indergaard

[Peter Kilmister]

Comparing a Leica digital camera with a Porsche makes little sense to me. Far better to think that Leica cameras, digital or analogue, are ... in the best meant terms ...relics of the 1970s. So try comparing them with a car from that era or even from the 1960s.

I remember being able to replace a valve set and springs, as well as a cylinder head gasket, on simple engines. The Jaguar engines of the 1960s were some of the best in the world. Anyone could strip them down with a simple socket set. 1940s Rolls Royce aero engines were simple and could be stripped down in a short time. 

Now everything is so complex I daren't look under the bonnet of a car except to fill the washer bottle.

The joy of Leica M cameras is that they are cathartic. You have to go back to basics and use manual focus. Thank goodness for that!

AF and loads of buttons has its uses. If that's what you want then go for it. I will use my Leica M.

[0luke1]

The quality of the lenses is what moved me from the twiddley a7riii to an m10. Unlike most here, I’d be thrilled with a built in electric viewfinder. (The visoflex is a cludgy battery suck).

However, the lack of buttons, dials, pages of menus, joysticks and other technology frippery is worth it.

[johnwolf]

I'm not an M10 user, but I don't think that's your point. Quickly raising a pre-focused rangefinder to the right eye and seeing the world through a bright window finder and framelines is one of the great pleasures of photography for me. I get the same sensation from my X100F. But the simplicity and quality of the Leica -- in  my case an M6 -- compounds the pleasure.

John

[budjames]

My suggestion is to buy an Audi S6 instead of a Porsche and use the $50k in savings to indulge in your Leica hobby.

Here's a photo of my 2017 S6 taken with a Leica M10 and Summilux 35.

Regards,
Bud James

Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/budjamesphoto.

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!

[indergaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, johnwolf said:

I'm not an M10 user, but I don't think that's your point. Quickly raising a pre-focused rangefinder to the right eye and seeing the world through a bright window finder and framelines is one of the great pleasures of photography for me. I get the same sensation from my X100F. But the simplicity and quality of the Leica -- in  my case an M6 -- compounds the pleasure.

John

Exactly. It's all about the "window to the world". If the M10 or a future M had an EVF with focus magnification and focus peaking instead of the optical rangefinder, I wouldn't even see the point in getting in.

[Guest Nowhereman]

Yes, I haven't met an EVF that I like. On the other hand, I love the new Ricoh GR III, a camera with no viewfinder at all. Over the years, I've ranted about one-handed, "no finder shooting"(as Moriyama Daido) calls it: that is, roughly establishing the edges of the frame and looking directly at the subject when pressing the shutter. Ideal for most types street photography and for anything when you want to capture a moment dynamically. Ni left-eye right-eye issue when shooting in this way.
_______________
Nowhereman Instagram

Edited May 9, 2019 by Nowhereman

[Tragg]

16 hours ago, Peter Kilmister said:

Comparing a Leica digital camera with a Porsche makes little sense to me. Far better to think that Leica cameras, digital or analogue, are ... in the best meant terms ...relics of the 1970s. So try comparing them with a car from that era or even from the 1960s.

I remember being able to replace a valve set and springs, as well as a cylinder head gasket, on simple engines. The Jaguar engines of the 1960s were some of the best in the world. Anyone could strip them down with a simple socket set. 1940s Rolls Royce aero engines were simple and could be stripped down in a short time. 

Now everything is so complex I daren't look under the bonnet of a car except to fill the washer bottle.

The joy of Leica M cameras is that they are cathartic. You have to go back to basics and use manual focus. Thank goodness for that!

AF and loads of buttons has its uses. If that's what you want then go for it. I will use my Leica M.

A relic of the  50s in the case of my M-3. And yet to be improved on.

[RexGig0]

It is not Porsche versus Tesla, for me, just Leica and Nikon/Canon. I drive a Toyota Tundra, my wife drivers a nicer Toyota Tundra, and if I had Porsche money, would add a nicer Toyota, such as a Land Cruiser. (We live in a flood-prone area, so high clearance is desirable.) Our next Toyota may be a Land Cruiser, perhaps; maybe as soon as next year. My wife owned a Turbo Carrera, for a while, which she drove very carefully, but we are more practical, today.

I started with Canon, gradually added Nikon, and eventually added Leica. It was the Summilux-M 50mm ASPH that prompted me to add Leica, just as specific Nikkors had prompted me to add Nikon. The viewfinder experience, for my bespectacled eyes, and slimness, of the M10, made it my choice to mount behind the Summilux. I added a pre-owned Monochrom 246, which I seem to prefer using with 21mm and 28mm lenses.

The portability and discreet size of the Leica cameras and lenses are quite nice. As for silence, well, no, I have some Canon SLRs with mechanical shutters that win that contest, with the Q setting, except perhaps with M10-P, but I have yet to see or handle an M10-P. The Nikon A, mis-marketed as a Coolpix, has an excellent made-in-Japan metal body, a discreet size, and a totally silent shutter. I have two of these, and my wife has one.

Some Canon and Nikon pro-level lenses are quite good. It is specific lenses that keep me from quitting either system.

Leica M cameras and lenses are, to me, works of art, that I can hold, and use, to sincerely attempt to create my own art. I hope to improve. Perhaps, I gain inspiration by using works of art to produce art. In the case of my Monochrom and my Zeiss 3,4/21mm Biogon C ZM, this theory seems to be working, somewhat. With the M10 and 50mm Summicron ASPH, well, at least the images of my wife have beautiful colors and a very special look.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 9, 2019 by RexGig0

[jdlaing]

1 hour ago, RexGig0 said:

It is not Porsche versus Tesla, for me, just Leica and Nikon/Canon. I drive a Toyota Tundra, my wife drivers a nicer Toyota Tundra, and if I had Porsche money, would add a nicer Toyota, such as a Land Cruiser. (We live in a flood-prone area, so high clearance is desirable.) Our next Toyota may be a Land Cruiser, perhaps; maybe as soon as next year. My wife owned a Turbo Carrera, for a while, which she drove very carefully, but we are more practical, today.

I started with Canon, gradually added Nikon, and eventually added Leica. It was the Summilux-M 50mm ASPH that prompted me to add Leica, just as specific Nikkors had prompted me to add Nikon. The viewfinder experience, for my bespectacled eyes, and slimness, of the M10, made it my choice to mount behind the Summilux. I added a pre-owned Monochrom 246, which I seem to prefer using with 21mm and 28mm lenses.

The portability and discreet size of the Leica cameras and lenses are quite nice. As for silence, well, no, I have some Canon SLRs with mechanical shutters that win that contest, with the Q setting, except perhaps with M10-P, but I have yet to see or handle an M10-P. The Nikon A, mis-marketed as a Coolpix, has an excellent made-in-Japan metal body, a discreet size, and a totally silent shutter. I have two of these, and my wife has one.

Some Canon and Nikon pro-level lenses are quite good. It is specific lenses that keep me from quitting either system.

Leica M cameras and lenses are, to me, works of art, that I can hold, and use, to sincerely attempt to create my own art. I hope to improve. Perhaps, I gain inspiration by using works of art to produce art. In the case of my Monochrom and my Zeiss 3,4/21mm Biogon C ZM, this theory seems to be working, somewhat. With the M10 and 50mm Summicron ASPH, well, at least the images of my wife have beautiful colors and a very special look.

 

 

 

 

You need one of these: 

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 May 9, 2019 by jdlaing

[jaapv]

5 hours ago, RexGig0 said:

[...]We live in a flood-prone area, [...]

So you need a Leica X-U.

[adan]

Why Leica?

I got into Leica back in the tail end of the film era (2001), and my reasons haven't really changed since then:

- Sharp-but-lower-contrast, and cooler-colored, 1980s Mandler lenses (and some C/V clones that fit that model as well).

- fast, binary, split-image, strictly-manual focus - pulling that focus tab across is part of my photographic "backswing."

- Compactness, light weight and "stealth" of the cameras and those older lenses.

Tradition, history, heritage, timelessness - Bahh! If Canon or Sony or anyone else made a digital RF, I might be just as happy with that. I used Canon P and Nikon SP RFs in college, and a Konica Hexar RF 2002-2004 - the "mutts" did the job, didn't need a pedigree.

Slowness and process - Zzzzz. What I enjoy is seeing and capturing good pictures, and getting the validation that they are good pictures via sales, national competition with the best in the business, and the knowledge that they will long out-live me in the world's archives. "Fast" is how I operate to get such pictures. "Slow" is the road-kill I run over along the way. Fortunately the M10 is decently fast. Results are all that counts - process only counts to the extent it produces the goods.

Are there other cameras that are as light or as small or as stealthy or as fast, especially these days? Some. As we said when the tiny Olympus OM-1 system came out, "All cameras aspire to the condition of Leicas." But it's the "package" that counts, not this or that individual spec. Leica still makes the only package that touches all my bases - film or digital.

I don't see that having no LCD achieves anything useful, that simple will-power can't do. If someone told me they were "a better driver" because their car had no rear window - I'd check their accident history, and/or their ability to get anywhere.

[Herr Barnack]

On 5/8/2019 at 5:04 PM, itzeddy said:

I had numerous discussion with friends on why Leica and this topic is probably well discussed already among the Leica community but just want to share in this forum of my thoughts

1. This is like a Porsche vs. Tesla, mechanical watch vs. Quartz watch debate that people can more relate to.
2. There is an engineering art to Porsche, a mechanical watch that Tesla, quartz watch does not offer, but of course, Tesla, quartz watch offers something else that Porsche and mechanical watch do not offer.  This decision/debate should start with the baseline there is no right/wrong end result

I transitioned from Nikon DSLR -> Canon DSLR -> M240 -> M10-D because

1. The portability, the unassuming, the stealth, the silence.
2. The optical quality of the prime lenses
3. The particular IQ of Leica M-system as each M generation evolves
4. The control. No AI, no autofocus, no face detection, no taking 40 pictures in 1 sec to give you insurance that one of them got to be good and given Canon/Sony brain to control everything rather than ourselves. Oh, no image stabilizer that compensates when your hand shakes. So in the end, do we want a camera to take pictures for us, or we are looking for taking the picture as a result of our own operations.
5. The slowness thus the process that we enjoy. Photography should not be just the result. It should include the process, the thoughts, the anticipation.
6. An engineering marvel. Just like holding a piece of an art form (granted a Sony A7 is also another kind of art form).
7. Heritage and timeless. Compatibility and accumulations of vast numbers of lenses throughout the years that spans the entire duration of modern photography history
8. And the no LCD .... this is probably controversial so my view of this is just the extension of what Leica is doing. Reduce/avoid the distraction down to the basic aperture, shutter speed, ISO, EV. The M10-D or M-D are just fitting to some users' purpose and may become a disadvantage to others.

 

Cheer!

All the above are on target - but I shoot with an M-P 240 so #8 is out for me. 

Other photographers don't understand why I "pay through the nose" for such "insanely overpriced" cameras and lenses - until they see the image quality that M lenses and sensors produce in images printed to 16x24 inches and 24x36 inches at an exhibit opening and have the wind knocked out of them by the image quality.

 

 

[david.kize]

After 15 months with my M-10, I am still unsure whether my photos with it are any better, or often as good as, either of my Nikon DSLR cameras. Some of my Leica shots are so good that I don’t know if the DSLR’s would have matched the Leica image quality or not—I haven’t done any controlled testing of the same shots with different cameras or lenses. 

For some of my photography—birds and wildlife—only the DSLR with a zoom or long prime lens can produce the results that I want. 

Yet, I far prefer my M-10 whenever it’s use makes good sense to me.  Here are my personal reasons, not in any order of importance:

 

1.    The M-10 is a throwback to the simplicity of cameras in the era in which I learned photography.  I like paying attention only to composition and artistic efforts, while dealing only with aperture, speed, ISO and manual focus. (I know that I can set all these manually on a DSLR, but rarely do I fiddle with all the controls to achieve that result.)

2.   I like the rangefinder and the control that I have over focus. 

3.   I like the reduced size, weight and feel of the M-10 compared to my big Nikons.

4.   I like the quality of Leica prime lenses (at least I hope they are better, given their price).

5.   Unless I use my Nikons regularly, I am frustrated by having to ensure that all the switches, buttons and options are set properly. For example, I failed in some shots with a DSLR yesterday until I discovered that two switches on the zoom lens (manual vs autofocus, and vibration reduction) were not set to what I wanted.  Even shooting whales at a distance with an M-10 and a 35mm lens (since my longer Leica lenses were not with me at the moment) would have produced good shots compared to blurry DSLR shots with some of the many electronic options improperly set.

[lykaman]

I think we all agree that at times Leica's are not the camera of choice for certain tasks.. I still use a D90 with appropriate lenses.. But the fact is that Leica cameras & Lenses when used in tandem produce Great Images.. The provision being that the photographer knows what he or she is doing..L

[lykaman]

34 minutes ago, david.kize said:

After 15 months with my M-10, I am still unsure whether my photos with it are any better, or often as good as, either of my Nikon DSLR cameras. Some of my Leica shots are so good that I don’t know if the DSLR’s would have matched the Leica image quality or not—I haven’t done any controlled testing of the same shots with different cameras or lenses. 

For some of my photography—birds and wildlife—only the DSLR with a zoom or long prime lens can produce the results that I want. 

Yet, I far prefer my M-10 whenever it’s use makes good sense to me.  Here are my personal reasons, not in any order of importance:

 

1.    The M-10 is a throwback to the simplicity of cameras in the era in which I learned photography.  I like paying attention only to composition and artistic efforts, while dealing only with aperture, speed, ISO and manual focus. (I know that I can set all these manually on a DSLR, but rarely do I fiddle with all the controls to achieve that result.)

2.   I like the rangefinder and the control that I have over focus. 

3.   I like the reduced size, weight and feel of the M-10 compared to my big Nikons.

4.   I like the quality of Leica prime lenses (at least I hope they are better, given their price).

5.   Unless I use my Nikons regularly, I am frustrated by having to ensure that all the switches, buttons and options are set properly. For example, I failed in some shots with a DSLR yesterday until I discovered that two switches on the zoom lens (manual vs autofocus, and vibration reduction) were not set to what I wanted.  Even shooting whales at a distance with an M-10 and a 35mm lens (since my longer Leica lenses were not with me at the moment) would have produced good shots compared to blurry DSLR shots with some of the many electronic options improperly set.

I would suggest you study your Nikon User Manuals, and practice with the cameras more often, I might only use my D90 4-5 times a year, but as soon as it's On my mind has preselected my inputs and I'm up and running..Learn to adjust your equipment in a darkened room, know your camera inside out and back to front..(an old Fleet Street hack).. L

[Chaemono]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb david.kize:

Even shooting whales at a distance with an M-10 and a 35mm lens (since my longer Leica lenses were not with me at the moment) would have produced good shots compared to blurry DSLR shots with some of the many electronic options improperly set.

+1. Pictures of tiny sharp whales in the distance are to be preferred to a perspective of big blurry ones that fill the frame. 

[Chaemono]

Am 9.5.2019 um 10:25 schrieb budjames:

My suggestion is to buy an Audi S6 instead of a Porsche and use the $50k in savings to indulge in your Leica hobby.

Just be careful not to hit the breaks too hard on the Audi S6. Things can come flying off the seat, like an M10, for example, hit the seatbelt bracket in the front, and cause a ding in the top plate. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[magixaxeman]

For me its a combination of the bodies and lenses, the way they work together faultlessly, even if its a 50 yr old lens with a modern body or a modern lens with a 54 yr old body and lets face it where else will you find a sharp as a razor 90mm f2.8 that covers FF sensors weighing in at 226g !!

For that matter where else will you find a camera body from 1965 that still works just as it did the day it left the factory.

I used to think the Nikon FM was a tank of a camera for the way it survived war zones but Leica's are even more robust.