Where's the magic?

[phernz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey guys, 

 

I must admit I've been a victim of the gateway drug that is the Q, now I'm considering M's. Leica glass is second to none is the conclusion I've come to after using my Q, but I just want to know from more experienced M shooter, which is more important, the M glass or the body? Or which should I get first due to budget restrictions, a M10 with Voigtlander 35 1.4 or Sony A7R III + Leica 35 summilux? 

 

Thanks!

[Advertisement]

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

[pedaes]

You will not see the full potential of Leica lenses on Sony bodies, good as they are with their own lenses.That said, be sure you fully understand what you are buying into with a rangefinder without auto everything, especially focus. If you crack it you will love it!

Edited August 7, 2020 by pedaes

[hteasley]

The glass is more important for the final image. The body is more important for the act of shooting.

[Michael Hiles]

 Use only Leica lenses (mostly old-ish), and I do not think about lenses. What I have will be fine. I am most enthralled by the M body and viewfinder (M2 and M3). Unsurpassed, in my experience.

Given the options you set out, I would get the M10. The Voigtlander lens will be fine, I am sure. But as noted above, there is very little automatic about any Leica M.

[TomB_tx]

I use a Voigtlander 35 f1.4 (ver II) on my M9 & M10 quite a bit, and like the results. If you don't pay attention to all negative comments on the Internet about it, you will be very happy with it!

There are sharper 35s, but I like the rendering of the Voigtlander a lot - especially on my M9 where the 1.4 speed is handy. On my M10 I normally use a Leica Sumarit f2.5, which is hard to beat.

I've used the Voigtlander 35 f1.4 on the Sony A7 series, and while the central part of the image is fine, the edges and corners smear badly as the Sony sensor wasn't designed for the optical characteristics used in wide M lenses. For such lenses the camera body (sensor) does make a big difference.

[a.noctilux]

1 hour ago, phernz said:

Hey guys, 

 

I must admit I've been a victim of the gateway drug that is the Q, now I'm considering M's. Leica glass is second to none is the conclusion I've come to after using my Q, but I just want to know from more experienced M shooter, which is more important, the M glass or the body? Or which should I get first due to budget restrictions, a M10 with Voigtlander 35 1.4 or Sony A7R III + Leica 35 summilux? 

 

Thanks!

Hello,

The magic is to be found with the last but most important, I mean yourself.

Even with the most applauded gear, if you don't feel good with the gear, you would be deceptive.

Buy the most expensive that you can, then use the gear a while, then decide by yourself to upgrade or to give-up.

I'm happy with M10 + Summarit-M lenses even if I do have other lenses Noctilux, Summilux, etc. Summarit-M lens line is sweet spot with M10

(... or other Monochroms that I happen to use also).

Have fun,

 

Arnaud

[Leicaiste]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would not use any Leica lenses with a focal length shorter than 50mm on any Sony. 

Their sensors are not adapted to the Leica wide angles. 

[evikne]

45 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

The magic is to be found with the last but most important, I mean yourself.

I agree. Don't expect any equipment to make magic, because you are the only magician. 😉

[FlashGordonPhotography]

2 hours ago, phernz said:

Hey guys, 

 

I must admit I've been a victim of the gateway drug that is the Q, now I'm considering M's. Leica glass is second to none is the conclusion I've come to after using my Q, but I just want to know from more experienced M shooter, which is more important, the M glass or the body? Or which should I get first due to budget restrictions, a M10 with Voigtlander 35 1.4 or Sony A7R III + Leica 35 summilux? 

 

Thanks!

Between these two definitely, definitely the M10 and CV. The Sony doesn't play nice with wider M lenses. The shooting experience isn't what you want (if you like the Q) and the CV35 is a really, really good lens. Modern CV glass is well built, optically fabulous and draws really nicely. I do have CV lenses that I prefer to their Leica counterparts. A chain is as good as its weakest link and here the Sony definitely is the weak link. If you have to go that route a Z6 or Z7 Nikon is a better but not perfect option. Also if you're not looking for high resolution then plenty of lightly used M10's are available due to the release of the M10R. And honestly, for a first M, used is the way to go. Rangefinders aren't for everyone. I adore them as do most here but a good used M10 gives you a get out of jail card if it's not for you. After all there's also the SL and CL systems that have brilliant optics.

The big thing with getting into M glass is that you'll have the opportunity to experiment with different glass. lots of us own more than one 50 or 35. One that's ultra modern and one that's got beautiful flaws. You have several manufacturers and can go back over 60 years. Since there's so much variety at each focal length you get to build a kit that draws the way you love.

Gordon

[gotium]

The lens is where the magic is, but you won't get it with an M lens on a Sony body. You can get magic with many M lenses, not only Leica. Some of the Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses are excellent. 

I would not get a 35 lux to put on a Sony (I would not get a 35 lux at all, TBH - the Zeiss version is much more to my liking). I'd happily use an M10 with a 35 Voigtlander. 

Edited August 8, 2020 by gotium

[Mikep996]

UNLESS you are a professional photographer and need specific capabilities to perform the work efficiently, the choice of a camera is about how much you enjoy using it.   I left Leica in the early '00s when I switched to digital, selling all my Leica gear and darkroom equipment.  At that time, Leica had no digital cameras.  I switched to Nikon Ds and used them until this year when I decided to try Leica again and bought a used M10 on Ebay.  I was prepared to "realize" that I no longer cared for the "M experience" after years of auto-everything DSLRs and put the '10 back on Ebay after using it for a bit.

However, I quickly discovered that I enjoyed using the M10 far more than the DSLRs, just as I had enjoyed the film Ms more than my SLRs back in the day.  Sure, any of the DSLRS can "do" a lot more than the M10 but since the M10 is FUN for me to shoot with, I use it a lot more and haven't touched any of my other cameras since I bought the '10.

So what I'm saying is that the important thing is to enjoy using the camera.  If you enjoy using the Q, and have no experience with an M, it would be good if you could borrow or rent one to see if you ENJOY not having autofocus, stabilization, etc, etc.  You may find that the 'romantic' aspect of doing it all yourself (focus, shutter speed, focal length) is more conceptual than actual!   OR, the opposite could be true! 

Good luck with whatever direction you choose!

[Viv]

As has been said, (a) the lens is the most important link in the chain and (b) a rangefinder camera is a very different animal and takes some getting used to; no autofocus, parallax error in the viewfinder, rudimentary metering, best used with lenses in the 35 to 50 mm range, no zoom lenses.

Having said that, using a rangefinder camera can be very satisfying. My first rangefinder was a Zeiss Ikon film camera, which I absolutely loved. My second rangefinder was a Leica M9, with which I never bonded. The wildly inconsistent white balance and the frequent lockups frustrated me.

If you decide on a Leica rangefinder camera, have a good look at the Zeiss ZM lenses. They are really very good.

If you decide that a rangefinder is not to your liking, consider the Leica Q2.

Edited August 8, 2020 by Viv
typo

[pgk]

13 hours ago, phernz said:

.....  I just want to know from more experienced M shooter, which is more important, the M glass or the body?

Neither and both. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Many manufacturers make superb lenses, but only one build rangefinder cameras and a range of superlative lenses designed to work with the camera body as well as possible. Using a Leica rangefinder is not about magic, it is about using an integrated system.

[250swb]

The magic of a camera comes when you can make the photographs you want with the least possible effort, where you can forget about the camera and lens because they aren't going to fight you. So to find the magic decide what you like photographing and buy camera equipment to suit that.

A Leica and the range of lenses is like an adjustable wrench, it can be used for pretty much anything, but not all things equally well. So landscape, street, documentary it will shine, less so macro or with long tele lenses. You won't get magic from a lens if the lens isn't pointing at things you want to photograph, and you won't get magic from the body unless it can do justice to the lens and perform the tasks you need from it.

[rramesh]

Magic in photography comes from using the right tool, at the right moment, to frame and snap an image, and to be able to tell a story.

[a.noctilux]

I have no story to tell when I take pictures.

As decades long Leica user ( and other brands user ), I "appreciate the Leica straightforward process" over all things.

Sometimes, the pleasure to take pictures is the only thing I search for, results are only lying where they may "fall".

I don't have clients to satisfy, so the magic is in the process of creation ( gear can be admitted to this process, but not only ).

 

Right tool in right hands is not a godsend, this may take some times to come with experimentations and time.

[LBJ2]

19 hours ago, phernz said:

Hey guys, 

 

I must admit I've been a victim of the gateway drug that is the Q, now I'm considering M's. Leica glass is second to none is the conclusion I've come to after using my Q, but I just want to know from more experienced M shooter, which is more important, the M glass or the body? Or which should I get first due to budget restrictions, a M10 with Voigtlander 35 1.4 or Sony A7R III + Leica 35 summilux? 

 

Thanks!

Slippery slope 😃

I shoot both Sony FF mirrorless and Leica. My Leica experience started with adapting the Summilux 35 Asph, Fle to the Sony and I liked that so much I also tried the Summilux 50 Asph too. A pretty good kit on the Sony FF cameras IMO. Then I decided I wanted to get the very best from my Leica lenses so I tried the M10. Took me a some days to learn how to use the Rangefinder and and then more practice with Zone Focusing. I now use both RF and Zone Focusing even for events and sports.

Since you already have the Q with AF, you might want to try the M10 with the Lux 35 you've been thinking about. You can find some very good deals for both used M10 and 35 Lux with a little bit of patience and if you don't get on with either, you can resell both fairly easily too. If you are in the US, you have up to 30 days to try the M10  with B&H and Adorama. But do give it some time if you are not used to MF. 

I also own Voigtlander lenses E-mount and M-mount and IMO a very different look and feel than Leica M lenses. 

[Dennis]

Here when the magic happens, skip to 10 sec.

 

21 hours ago, phernz said:

which should I get first due to budget restrictions, a M10 with Voigtlander 35 1.4 or Sony A7R III + Leica 35 summilux? 

I would say M cameras with Zeiss/Voigtlander lenses. Why? The Sony are great cameras, but EVF + Tilting Display + Video features + a lot of buttons + "x" number of cable connections etc etc are things we can find in many modern cameras, only features are changing. The M10 is different. The process to shoot with the M10 is unique, and I think more enjoyable: the essence of photography.

Sony with M lens is an hybrid that, despite great results, doesn't make sense (IMHO) in my mind. M10 with whatever lens according to your needs, it's the answer 🙌

But when you saw the light, also if you have a Pinhole camera, the magic will happen.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[derleicaman]

As many here have said, the "Magic" is with the person behind the camera and lens.

As life is a journey, so it is with cameras. I have been a Leica M user for over 50 years. I have owned and still own pretty much every Leica M model ever made. I have used it both for personal work and professionally. The M cannot be all things to all people or for all tasks, but it works well for me. Most of all, I have enjoyed using the M. It is second nature to me, and I don't have to think about anything but putting it up to my eye and getting the shot. I have been a digital M user, first with the M9 and Monochrom and now with the M10-P, for over 8 years. I loved my M9, but the M10 is a far superior camera and feels just like my beloved film M cameras in the hand. I have kept the Monochrom because it is indeed special, but mostly use the M10-P exclusively.

I have many legacy Leica lenses, including the ones my dad bought back when he was using a IIIf and 2 M3's in the Fifties. I have newer Leica lenses too, in addition to CV and Zeiss ZM lenses. You can't go wrong with any of them really. CV has come a long way, and Zeiss has always been great, even though the ZM lenses are made by CV. My go to is my 35 Summilux ASPH, but I have a 35/2.8 Summaron that is great too. 50's I have pretty much everything Leica has ever made including Elmars, Summars, Xenons, Summarits, Summicrons, Summiluxes. I sold my Noctilux years ago, but recently acquired a CV 50/1.2 which I use the most as it is just that good! Lots of fun playing with all of them.

As I said, its a journey. Enjoy the journey, not just the destination!

[rivi1969]

On 8/7/2020 at 4:08 PM, a.noctilux said:

Hello,

The magic is to be found with the last but most important, I mean yourself.

Even with the most applauded gear, if you don't feel good with the gear, you would be deceptive.

Buy the most expensive that you can, then use the gear a while, then decide by yourself to upgrade or to give-up.

I'm happy with M10 + Summarit-M lenses even if I do have other lenses Noctilux, Summilux, etc. Summarit-M lens line is sweet spot with M10

(... or other Monochroms that I happen to use also).

Have fun,

 

Arnaud

Correct. Between the body and the lens, the most important factor is the photographer.