Why Leica?

[mikelevitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I shoot Leica because I need a camera that will take out of focus photos.

 

My other systems just don't do that properly.

[Advertisement]

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

[Malvolio]

Its just a camera - they are great cameras but the best camera is the one you have in front of you.

[ianforber]

I know that plenty of people describe their cameras as “tools”, just as many do not. I fall into the latter camp. To me, a computer and it’s software is a tool - I just need something that does what I need.
 

Cameras (like watches) are different - the way they feel when I take the picture is important to me. I also don’t mind if they get in the way a bit (not too much). The only camera I can use with my eyes closed is my Minolta X-700 which I used for so long it’s second nature. I don’t use it though. I prefer my Leicas. They don’t produce any better photos though - the limitation is the photographer and I drag every camera down to a pretty low level. 

[MikeMyers]

2 hours ago, ianforber said:

Cameras ...... the way they feel when I take the picture is important to me.

Could you please elaborate?  I can guess what you mean, but I'd rather hear it from you.

 

2 hours ago, ianforber said:

the limitation is the photographer and I drag every camera down to a pretty low level.

If you enjoy photography, and if you enjoy taking photos, and if you enjoy using such a fine tool as a Leica, does the "level" really matter?  Chances are, the more you use it, the better you will get, discovering more and more things about it, and how to improve.

Back when Ocean Liners were one of the main ways to travel between the USA and Europe, Cunard used this saying in their advertising:  "Getting There is Half the Fun".  I've always enjoyed taking photos, even when the results were rather mediocre.  Doing it was very enjoyable.  The photos were secondary.

After enough years, and enough cameras, and enough photos, a photographer may start to realize that the camera is just a tool, but I suspect that most of us started out just enjoying the process of taking photos.  The results were not as important as "the doing".

[ianforber]

9 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

Could you please elaborate?  I can guess what you mean, but I'd rather hear it from you.

 

If you enjoy photography, and if you enjoy taking photos, and if you enjoy using such a fine tool as a Leica, does the "level" really matter?  Chances are, the more you use it, the better you will get, discovering more and more things about it, and how to improve.

Back when Ocean Liners were one of the main ways to travel between the USA and Europe, Cunard used this saying in their advertising:  "Getting There is Half the Fun".  I've always enjoyed taking photos, even when the results were rather mediocre.  Doing it was very enjoyable.  The photos were secondary.

After enough years, and enough cameras, and enough photos, a photographer may start to realize that the camera is just a tool, but I suspect that most of us started out just enjoying the process of taking photos.  The results were not as important as "the doing".

You put it better than I could. I enjoy taking photos. The results are mediocre but I don’t mind that. I may well improve but that would be a side effect of doing what I enjoy. I think that is why I don’t perceive the camera to be my tool - it’s the journey not the destination that is important for me. I appreciate that many take a diametrically opposite view. All good either way!

 

[MikeMyers]

Just for the heck of it, next time you're walking around with your Leica around your neck, be on the lookout for something interesting to photograph.  It can be as simple as just a fire hydrant.  Challenge yourself to capture the most interesting image you can of whatever you've selected.  Take a photo, look it over and see how you can improve it.  Take as many as you wish, until you think you've nailed it as best YOU can.  Then upload that one best image to the M10 (or whatever) images thread.  

If nothing else, you'll most likely enjoy the process, trying to get the most you can out of your M10.  

Take your time, thinking where the shadows, if any, are, what's in the background, if it looks better from holding the camera higher, or lower.  I know I say it's only a "tool", but I enjoy doing what I just described, trying to wring out the best photo I can from all the possible viewpoints, exposures, and so on.   

[sls]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In my 20s and 30s I used Olympus and Nikon film cameras. When I started using digital I forgot how to take pictures and the technology got in the way. Kit bag got big and heavy. Bought an M9 around 2010 and it was like the old days, back to basics. Been through some kit, sold longer heavier lenses, now have M3/50Rigid NF, M6 TTL 0.72, M10-R, V 15/f4.5, 28/f5.6, 35/f2, 50/f1.4 and 90/f2.8. Basically the largest lens is the 50/f1.4 and my favourite is the 28/f5.6. The 90 Tele-elmarit is very practical, my only regret is selling the 90/f2 ASPH for image quality, it's just a bit big to lug around.

Bought a Q on release date and love it, now have Q2 and love it more. Incredibly practical and just love how it is so easy to switch from fully automatic to manual modes.

[Herr Barnack]

For the uninitiated (and some of the initiated 😊) who suffer from LPT - Leica Price Trauma - here's an article that may be of help:

Why Are Leica Cameras So Expensive?  https://hiconsumption.com/why-are-leica-cameras-so-expensive/

Edited September 24, 2022 by Herr Barnack

[MikeMyers]

A lifetime ago, I had a Contax II, 35mm rangefinder camera introduced in 1936.  After WW II, my dad somehow bought a Contax IIa, which I adopted for my own.  This led to a Nikon SP, and shortly afterward, a Leica M2.  All of these were similar, but for various reasons the M2 was the best.  Then, I switched to SLR, and then to DSLR, sticking with Nikon as I already had a growing collection of lenses.

For the wrong reason, I grabbed the last of the M8.2 cameras, as I discovered it was great for infrared photography.  For "real" photography, which for me meant sports photography, I was updating each year to the latest Nikon, until I got tired of that game, and decided a Nikon D750 did what I needed.  Long after the M10 was introduced, I had a growing desire to buy one.  Two things contributed to that interest, first, a notice that prices were going up substantially (this is from when Covid just made its appearance), and second, from finding a new M10 body available as an "open box sale" with full new camera warranty - that pushed me over the edge, and I bought it.

I'm retired, with minimal income.  Now the M10-R and M11 are pulling at my brain and my heart (mostly my heart).  Either way, it's a $9,000 expense.  That is the main reason why I haven't ordered either.  I'm also not convinced that either camera will do so much more for ME than my M10.

 

In my opinion, which is not all that valid, the Leica cameras are so expensive because of brand recognition, and because they are hand made, and because there is no real competitor.  Fuji comes close, but it's not full frame, which I want.  If Fuji modified the camera so it was full-frame, and so Leica lenses could fit it just as they do an M camera, at what would probably be a very reasonable cost, I would be VERY tempted.  As to lenses, for me, Voigtlander is close enough to Leica that I'm sure I'd be happy with them.

Unfortunately, the biggest advantage the Leica has, is that the M uses a wonderful rangefinder.  No other cameras I'm aware of are comparable.  I bought the Voigtlander 50mm F/2 APO-LANTHAR, which I think gives me most of what I would want in a 50mm lens.....    but the same Voigtlander lens is available for other bodies with a full set of electronic contacts.  Maybe eventually Leica will bring out a new body that uses these electronic contacts to communicate with the lenses.  M12 ?   

 

One of these days, I'll walk into the Leica store, with my M10 complete with the box and all the accessories, and ask how much $$ I would need to add to go home with an M11.

(......but I don't want to start filling up my drive with 60-meg images, and I don't like the shutter sound of the M11, but I suspect the metering would be improved, along with dynamic range and other things....)

[evikne]

10 hours ago, Artin said:

It was in 1980 and I was 18 year old kid with my first big man pro camera a Canon F1 n and so proud of it. One day I walked into one of my favourite Camara stores in town Called.. Inches Camera.. with my F1 sound over my shoulder browsing for a bargain lens or whatever and struck up the usual conversation on what brand is the best camera and so on. There was an old British fellow who worked there called Rory, he pulled out an old Leica M4 of the shelf and said come here kid and let me show you something. He walked 20 paces from me turned around and told me to focus on him with my Canon F1. After I focused and confirmed he took a small step forward and asked me if he was still in focus , I said yes. Then he asked me to do the same with the M4 focused on him and confirmed yes, he took a small step forward and asked me again ,, am I in focus. My answer was no. He goes there you go kid now tell me what is better system. The next  week I purchased a beat up old M5 and a 50 Summicron and I was hooked. 42 years now I have had an M camera with me almost every day. 2 M5s. 1 M4p.   2 M3s.  2 M6s.  2 M9s.   3 Mp 240s   1 M10R.  And 1 M11...... 42 years 

Great story!

[M11 for me]

10 hours ago, Artin said:

It was in 1980 and I was 18 year old kid with my first big man pro camera a Canon F1 n and so proud of it. One day I walked into one of my favourite Camara stores in town Called.. Inches Camera.. with my F1 sound over my shoulder browsing for a bargain lens or whatever and struck up the usual conversation on what brand is the best camera and so on. There was an old British fellow who worked there called Rory, he pulled out an old Leica M4 of the shelf and said come here kid and let me show you something. He walked 20 paces from me turned around and told me to focus on him with my Canon F1. After I focused and confirmed he took a small step forward and asked me if he was still in focus , I said yes. Then he asked me to do the same with the M4 focused on him and confirmed yes, he took a small step forward and asked me again ,, am I in focus. My answer was no. He goes there you go kid now tell me what is better system. The next  week I purchased a beat up old M5 and a 50 Summicron and I was hooked. 42 years now I have had an M camera with me almost every day. 2 M5s. 1 M4p.   2 M3s.  2 M6s.  2 M9s.   3 Mp 240s   1 M10R.  And 1 M11...... 42 years 

You came across a great salesman. Such people are so valuable. You will never forget him.

[weatherproof]

On 9/24/2022 at 5:53 PM, MikeMyers said:

In my opinion, which is not all that valid, the Leica cameras are so expensive because of brand recognition, and because they are hand made, and because there is no real competitor.  Fuji comes close, but it's not full frame, which I want.  If Fuji modified the camera so it was full-frame, and so Leica lenses could fit it just as they do an M camera, at what would probably be a very reasonable cost, I would be VERY tempted.  As to lenses, for me, Voigtlander is close enough to Leica that I'm sure I'd be happy with them.

Leica has carved out a very nice niche. If Ricoh brought back the GXR, but full-frame, I'd be very tempted. However as it stands, no one makes a dedicated manual-focus digital camera.

I'd like to shoot with something that has focus scales and a readable shutter dial so I can set my focus and exposure before I even lift the camera to my eye. Unfortunately only Leica makes such a camera. The Fuji X100-series might have fulfilled that niche had they included a focus scale on their lense.

[MikeMyers]

6 minutes ago, weatherproof said:

The Fuji X100-series might have fulfilled that niche had they included a focus scale on their lense.

Unfortunately, the Fuji X100 cameras are all "focus by wire".  I wish they made the camera with an "M mount" for Leica lenses.

 

Yesterday I was taking a photo of a sailboat in a storm with my M10, 135mm lens, and to check the focus, the Visoflex up on top.  I was wondering why I was going to so much trouble, when I could have used a DSLR?  When I need a long lens (300mm would have been even better) the M10 no longer seems like the best choice to me.

Worth watching:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD3oRSTRDgw     Fujifilm X-Pro2 vs Leica - On the Streets Camera Review by Thorsten von Overgaard

[PeterGA]

I dont like big cameras anymore and the definition of big gets smaller every year - leica stuff is also nicer in the hand - I dont like ugly things either.

[Luke_Miller]

53 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

Yesterday I was taking a photo of a sailboat in a storm with my M10, 135mm lens, and to check the focus, the Visoflex up on top.  I was wondering why I was going to so much trouble, when I could have used a DSLR?  When I need a long lens (300mm would have been even better) the M10 no longer seems like the best choice to me.

That is why I keep a DSLR or two and my exotic long glass. I've discovered there are two kinds of cameras, ones that do everything and ones I enjoy using. My Nikons fill the first role and my Leicas the second.

[MikeMyers]

5 hours ago, Luke_Miller said:

That is why I keep a DSLR or two and my exotic long glass. I've discovered there are two kinds of cameras, ones that do everything and ones I enjoy using. My Nikons fill the first role and my Leicas the second.

What you wrote, is both my predicament, and my solution.