Regret buying a Digital M. Can't compare to a film M

[ktmrider2]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am curious as to those who regret buying a digital M over a film M feel the same regret about purchasing another Leica digital product.  I sold both an M9 and M240 within the last several years and purchased a new MP in February while thinking about a M10R.

It turns out that the Leica Store in Malaysia is half a kilometer from my hotel.  I came very close to purchasing a Q2 or Q3.  The Q model is very different than an M and most reviews give it high praise indeed.  However, I did not see it being worth the price since I have both the Ricoh GR3 and a Nikon Zf if I want digital.

Again, do not regret buying a film MP vice the M10 or M11.  But I do wonder about the Q2/3.  If I regret it, there is always B&H when I return to the USA or Hong Kong if I want it sooner.

[Mr.Prime]

I've only handled the Q2 in a store and it's nice but I wanted to pick my own lens. I later bought the CL, which although a crop fame sensor, was useable with my M mount lenses using an adapter. I sold it in anticipation of the CL-2 which never came. Since them I've used an iphone for digital and stick with M for film. A new M6 is on it's way.

[rmueller]

I have no regrets whatsoever selling the M240 few years ago. My current setup is a M-A and MP film camera and I couldn't be happier. Q3 43 is tempting BUT I must admit, I really don't like EVF's. When I see something interesting I just want to hold the camera in front of my eye and look. For me it's a pain in the neck to first switch on the camera and wait for it to boot, big bummer. This is the reason why my X1DII-50c is collecting dust, it's a really fine camera with excellent image and color quality BUT, the spontaneity is ruined by the EVF IMHO.

[Danner]

I'm sort of that way too.  The M is a film camera to me, the best 35mm film camera, IMHO.  For digital, the comprehensive systems (Nikon, Sony Canon) don't leave much for wanting.  Features are nice.

[Danner]

On 10/29/2024 at 6:07 PM, 250swb said:

What is burdensome in photography is going down a path that isn't fulfilling. A little bit of work never killed anybody, and if aesthetically the results match the expectations it's hardly work at all. 

<snip>

 

One of my favorite past times is spending an evening under the red lights making prints.  Not work, a pleasure.

[hansvons]

@rmueller, the same here. Don't like EVFs either. The Q3 43 is the first digital Leica that I find tempting to buy for joy despite the EVF. But as I have an SL2-S, which I use with my M lenses for assignments that require quick turnarounds or occasional video shoots or film scanning, I’m sufficiently equipped. 

However, as my professional work evolves, a Q3 43 is not out of question. But I feel that the Q3 has to come as a pair (the 28mm and the 43mm) to work properly, like Ms always come in pairs, too. 

[ktmrider2]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My flight from Malaysia leaves in a few hours.  I was so very tempted by the Q2 or Q3 but managed to resist temptation.  I did not see them as being worth $5000 more than the GR3.  I am tempted to pick up a GR3X so for $2000 total I would have 28 and 40 FOV compared to a cost of $13000 or so for the Q3 and Q343.  

To me Leica is film and has been since I started with a Leica CL back in 1975.

[lekitr]

On 11/5/2024 at 8:59 PM, Danner said:

One of my favorite past times is spending an evening under the red lights making prints.  Not work, a pleasure.

It' a kind of therapy for me too.

[lmans]

On 10/30/2024 at 11:27 PM, Mr.Prime said:

I use film M's too, but one of the reasons why is that Leica just doesn't make a digital M that I'd want to use (or pay the stupid prices for). The latest gear has gotten out of hand with too many pixels and lenses that are too expensive - the 35mm format digital M is now really capable of medium format quality but I don't need it and don't want to pay for it or deal with the file sizes. As for film M's, they are stuck in the past, I mean we have the M6 but no more the M7. I think Leica have lost their way.

yet the MA exists....essentially the M3 right? So I don't think you can say Leica has lost their way as the M6 with the light meter or the MA without, just about covers it. 

[Mr.Prime]

I mean to say, we have the MA, MP, M6 but they are all old designs, no attempt to move forward in the analogue realm The M7 was more advanced in terms of functionality but it's out of production. It's not so much that they lost their way in analogue, they simply stopped moving at all.

[JoshuaR]

I've been through the various permutations of this thought process:

• For a long time I was an M film purist. I tried an M10 and just didn't enjoy it.
• Then I went down the 'if I want digital, it must be über-digital," and paired a Q with my film Ms. Did the same with Ricoh GR cameras.
• Eventually I used a digital M and film M simultaneously.
• Now I own only digital Ms (M10-R and M10M) and use them the same way I used my two film Ms, one loaded with black and white film, the other with color.

In the end, for me, it's the OVF, rangefinder, form factor, and glass that makes the M system special. Not the film. In fact, I've concluded that—for my purposes—the look of digital files is superior. I actually look back on the years I shot film and regret that I wasn't shooting digital then, for aesthetic reasons. But everyone's different and has different goals.

All that said: there's no question in my mind that the experience of using a film M was special, and I sometimes miss owning a film M as a beautiful object. I end up looking at film Ms and browsing this forum. I have to look back through my pictures to remind myself that I prefer digital output.

[jakontil]

My M digital is a backup M body to my M films.. i wouldnt mind using it when film aint attainable.. but no way i would replace it with a Q 

M swaps lenses seamlessly.. 

[Anthony MD]

On 11/5/2024 at 12:15 PM, rmueller said:

I have no regrets whatsoever selling the M240 few years ago. My current setup is a M-A and MP film camera and I couldn't be happier. Q3 43 is tempting BUT I must admit, I really don't like EVF's. When I see something interesting I just want to hold the camera in front of my eye and look. For me it's a pain in the neck to first switch on the camera and wait for it to boot, big bummer. This is the reason why my X1DII-50c is collecting dust, it's a really fine camera with excellent image and color quality BUT, the spontaneity is ruined by the EVF IMHO.

Has anyone here heard of the Leica MD 262…?

[rmueller]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Anthony MD:

Has anyone here heard of the Leica MD 262…?

Hi Anthony,

are you referring to this: Leica M-D (Typ 262) Digital Rangefinder Camera 10945 B&H Photo

Leica M-D (Typ 262), 24MP M without a display.

Regards,

Ralf

[ktmrider2]

I broke down on a recent trip to Bangkok and bought a new Q3 from a camera store, not the Leica Store.  With the VAT refund at the airport upon leaving the price was very close to USA and Hong Kong.  AV Camera had a great collection of film cameras including Leica, Nikon, Hasselblad and Rollie.  And their prices seemed pretty good.  I was really tempted by a SWC but do not want to get back into MF.  My favorite film M is the M2 but I prefer modern film loading.  The store had four M2 bodies, three of them were M2R’s.  

With the new MP in February, 2024, and the new Q3 in early December 2024 and a Nikon Zf in May, I have reached my quota for cameras for the calendar year, otherwise I would have had an M2R.  And I cannot even claim that it was for professional pursuits!

But we did just enter a new year and I am a very cheap flight to Bangkok since I will be in the Philippines for another month before continuing my RTW trip.

Edited January 1 by ktmrider2

[didier]

On 10/30/2024 at 9:15 AM, LocalHero1953 said:

Cameras have different purposes, and recognising this reduces some of the angst that seems to bubble over in threads like these. Cameras can be:

1. A pleasure to look at and admire: a work of art in a cabinet
2. A joy to use to take pictures: a therapeutic object
3. A practical means of taking interesting and attractive pictures: a simple tool

I don't have any of (1) at the moment, although my Gandolfi in brass and mahogany, could be one if I put it on display. My Chroma Carbon Adventurer (5x4) and all my film cameras  are (2). My digital cameras are (3).

But any camera can be any combination of these: I like the look of my iif, but also enjoy using it. The Chroma is just pure relaxing therapy to use, but I like the look of the large format images. I think the Q2 is a marvellous work of engineering design and a practical tool.

But there's no need to feel guilt about a camera not meeting any of these descriptions. On this forum I suspect that there are lots of people for whom the pleasure of acquiring and using outweighs the end product (the image). And some (among the collectors) who buy a camera as an object, not as a tool or as something to use in practice.

Thanks @LocalHero1953 for this great analysis !  I fully agree photography can be a mix of the 3 purposes you describe. I am always between (2) and (3) with a little of (1), as I love the nice models though I always use them… And recently I went back to a bit more of (2) as I shoot film (Ms and ScrewMount) more again… even color film (C41) I hadn’t shot since I was a young adult in the end of 90s…

 

I have been a long time film shooter who went digital only in 2014. For a long time I did not want to mix both means, and shot almost exclusively digital for 9 years (apart from a B&W film from time to time). Now I mix both, even if it is a bit burdensome to manage both medias.

Edited January 1 by didier

[musers]

I’m the same. I might sell my m11-p because I can’t stand the digital colors and the endless tweaking is annoying. But would it be a massive mistake to sell that camera?

[ktmrider2]

Well, you could get a fair price for your M11P and pick up a new Leica film body for about half.  If you already have a film body and want to keep your hand in digital, there are an awful lot of cameras out there that do not carry the Leica price tag.  I purchased a Nikon Zf with 24-120f4 Nikon S zoom last May for about $3200.  It is an awesome combo and there are smaller cameras with primes that are every bit as good as a Leica M.

I love the Leica film cameras (been using them since 1975) but never got on with digital M’s.  My thinking is if I want digital then I want modern technology including auto everything.  Can always turn off an auto function but cannot turn it on if not on the camera.  

I am having a bit of buyer’s remorse on the Q3 I purchased recently.  Not because it is a bad camera (quite the opposite in fact) but because I already owned a Ricoh GR3.  Thinking on this forum to the contrary, how many cameras do we need?  It would be nice to break the continuous consumerism in modern society.  Luckily a camera does not consume as many resources as an automobile and is more benign than some other objects I can think of.

However, I am 72 and am traveling RTW and cannot take the money with me.

Edited January 3 by ktmrider2

[LocalHero1953]

2 hours ago, ktmrider2 said:

Well, you could get a fair price for your M11P and pick up a new Leica film body for about half.  If you already have a film body and want to keep your hand in digital, there are an awful lot of cameras out there that do not carry the Leica price tag.  I purchased a Nikon Zf with 24-120f4 Nikon S zoom last May for about $3200.  It is an awesome combo and there are smaller cameras with primes that are every bit as good as a Leica M.

I love the Leica film cameras (been using them since 1975) but never got on with digital M’s.  My thinking is if I want digital then I want modern technology including auto everything.  Can always turn off an auto function but cannot turn it on if not on the camera.  

I am having a bit of buyer’s remorse on the Q3 I purchased recently.  Not because it is a bad camera (quite the opposite in fact) but because I already owned a Ricoh GR3.  Thinking on this forum to the contrary, how many cameras do we need?  It would be nice to break the continuous consumerism in modern society.  Luckily a camera does not consume as many resources as an automobile and is more benign than some other objects I can think of.

However, I am 72 and am traveling RTW and cannot take the money with me.

If I was on a RTW trip then carrying more than one camera would be just a hassle. I have only once carried a second camera, as a theoretical back-up, which was a holiday in India, when I took a TL2 as back-up to the CL - it occupied space and weight allowance and I've never done the same since. These days a smartphone, shooting raw if necessary, is all the back up you need till you can find a dealer in a big city for a replacement.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ktmrider2]

Agree, I started this trip with an MP with 35/90.  Somehow a Q3 attached itself to me so now I have to carry two cameras until getting back to the USA in April, 2024.  I am just grateful they are not the size of motorized Nikons I carried in the past.  I believe the Q3 will be my main travel camera for the near future (motorcycle trips around North America this summer).