Why do you shoot M?

[Mahesh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Compact (not necessarily lighter anymore with A7Cii), 

Fewer buttons and easy menu

No EVF as we look at screens enough already (and I used to post that M should come with an EVF!),

small lenses

Joy of focussing yourself / zone focus any activity happening in front of you so you don't have to worry about missing focus, e.g. snapping skaters 

 

Cons - I will never use a Leica as a easy to carry around on a holiday considering I am carrying so much worth of money.

Rangefinder alignment can go bad

"the essentials" that Leica calls may not be essential for you, e.g. 60MP in my case

freezes (M11 is definitely a problem child)

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[DadDadDaddyo]

Sheer ergonomic and kinesthetic comfort! 

I've been shooting with Leica rangefinders since the age of 14... Ummm... two score and 17 years ago. 

The Leica M is a suite of contributing factors that come together, greater than the simple sum of its individual parts. 

If you look at camera body design at the time of the Leica I, you'll see what a breakthrough its design represented.

For example: that familiar spot where the shutter button is placed, positioned comfortably beneath where your index finger naturally falls? That was there in the first Leica. 

What else?

No mirror slap, a big deal when the world was flocking to 35mm single lens reflexes. The Leica is a natural machine for handheld low-level available light work.

The beautiful view through a fine optical finder, its eyepiece window placed on the upper left on the back of the camera body. No greasy nose schmutz on the screen!

Most likely, any well designed technical tool that you use for decades is capable of attaining a similar level of comfort. For handheld camera design, the Leica established and maintains the standard. 

These and other factors all contribute to the way the M simply disappears in my hands. It inserts itself into the picture making process less than any camera system I have ever used.

We always talk about how photography is fundamentally about seeing. The Leica M, in the hands of the experienced user, transforms itself from an electromechanical machine into a simple extension of seeing.

 

[Stephen.s1]

2 hours ago, Steadimann said:

There are two things in my opinion:

1. Functional

2. Emotional

1. Function wise you do not get anything 'better' as people would like to think. Hell, there is no autofocus on M series. So if you're looking for numbers, features, technicalities, price/quality, price/performance, price/features ration etc. - M is not for you.

2. Emotional is totally different story. To this I would also add experince, feeling, handling, happyness - whatever there is which cannot be measures and calculated but it gives you joy. 

So my answer is that I use M purely because of the second one. I love analouge-like experience, I love the way it looks, feels etc. To me it would be the same question - why would you eat at small family restaurant instead of going to well known restaurant chain. Because you feel the love they put in that food, because you share emotions with them etc. 

p.s. the only thing when I'm frustrated is that then there's rain outside and I cannot carry umbrella in one hand and take pictures with other hand  

if shooting in the rain the OM1 II  lets you throw your umbrella away. (and makes superb images)

Edited November 28, 2024 by Stephen.s1

[Stephen.s1]

+ My reasons are; Simplicity, Dependability And Fun. 

 

 

[Jipster]

Small, small, small for great IQ and shared lenses across digital and film. No other system does that. I am willing to pay the price of no autofocus for that. The rangefinder became a bonus AFTER I got it for the previous reasons I mentioned. Not having my view of the world influenced by the minimum depth of field of the lens I am using was a wonderful discovery. Not appreciated enough. When I take my camera up to my eyes to take a picture, it's of the world I saw prior to looking through a viewfinder (of whatever kind) and being able to see through the viewfinder just the same depth of field is liberating.

[Smudgerer]

Leica? Because it's the most expensive choice I can find out there, cool too with Black Paint and other even more expensive signature edition options of basically the same camera under the skin but cooler still, plus a version or two without a LCD or any other convenient attributes for again more money, and at times it can be frustratingly unreliable taking up to a year or so to repair, what's not to like and why wouldn't I shoot Leica?

[S Maclean]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I like that it makes me take crafts and take the picture.  You can, of course, shoot manually with any camera, but the M system is designed for that. And the RF brings you closer to the actual reality around you as you're not seeing through the lens.

It also forces you to think about the image before you take it and choose your Sensitivity, speed, aperture..., and focus.

Ironically, unless I am tired, I focus faster on a 50 and bellow with the rangefinder than autofocus.  It is not always as accurate, though, that is true, but on busy scenes, the AF can get a little jiggle, and the RF stays where you set it.  I often shoot manual focus with the SL and, if needed, just use the force focus button to be accurate.

I love the compactness; walking around and shooting Hyperfocus for the street is easy.

The camera becomes a companion instead of a tool to carry.

All this said, I have an SL3, and it is a better/ easier performer for the studio or certain occasions. Sometimes, in low light conditions, with tired eyes or longer lenses, it is better on m lenses as well. Crisp!

I recently visited Madrid to see family and friends and had both the SL with a 24-70, a 90 APo, and a 50. I bought the M11 with the 21 SE, 35 lux, and 50 lux. My sister had an expo opening, and I wanted to bring the SL with the 24-70 to the event to have a flexible, fast, and accurate camera to move around....I did not even get it out of the car. M11 + 35 Lux covered everything, and many people didn't even notice me taking pictures and were surprised to see themselves later on. Had I used the SL3, everyone would have known I was photographing the event.

Same for walking around in Madrid, something you would not necessarily want to do at certain hours with a larger camera.  I took the strap off, and the M11 fit in my jacket pocket.  I took some very nice candid shots these days (I'm on the flight back as I write)

When comapring it to the Q.....it's just not a comparable system.  THe Q in all versions is an outstanding camera, but I rather have an SL with a 50 than a Q with a 50(ish)  or a Dlux if I really want a compact

 

[R6M6]

Austerity, haptic, quality, eternalness (digital?)

and you have to use your brain which results in beautiful memories!

[johnwolf]

A few favorites for me:

• Viewing the world through a window finder with framelines
• Small lenses
• Focus tabs and relatively short focus throws
• Superb zone focusing capability
• Nothing but the essentials
• The coolest looking camera designs ever.

John

Edited November 28, 2024 by johnwolf

[pgk]

23 hours ago, anonymoose said:

What do you like about the M system? What don't you like?

The ability to shoot manually without compromise, and precise, accurate, user designated focus. Don't like the silly prices. Neither cameras nor lenses are worth the money being asked new. (Never tried a Q - it holds zero interest for me.)

Edited November 28, 2024 by pgk

[fishbrain2000]

The fact that it’s closer to shooting film in that you think before shooting, as you have to manual focus. Even when you have a 28mm at f8 and you are zone focusing- you still have more awareness that shooting a modern autofocus camera in Auto setting. It’s kind of like choosing a bow and arrow rather than a machine gun. Also- Voightlander lenses are INCREDIBLE value and quality. You can enjoy 35 and 50 apo lanthars, a 90 apo scopar, a 75 and a couple more small 35 and 50 lenses for the price of one Leica apo. Good times. I also have a Leica MP and love that too- using the same lenses on both cameras- same body format.

[londond]

I photograph with  Leica for the pleasure of using the cameras rather than functionality (better elsewhere) or IQ (for me clean, clear APO style which I imagine other brands can do: classics or sumi/noctilux may be more distinct). Essentially I like the combination of the stripped back interface and lovely haptics - true of all Leica e.g SL3 vs the far more capable new Sony A1 - but at its most marked in the Ms. It’s about the process of taking the pictures, which is even more engaging with less automation and beautifully engineered devices.  

Size too, while I have three Ms  (7/11/11M), I only ever take one body and lens in a Billingham 72. At the risk of sounding pretentious the Ms bring or a sort of freedom and contentment unmatched even in other (very nice) Leica kit.

[anonymoose]

I've had my M11 for about a week now including photographing Thanksgiving with 20+ people. If anyone has any tips/tricks related to things I'd appreciate you sharing!

What I'm liking about it so far:

1. I am forced to choose focus whether I like it or not. Oftentimes with my Sony I'll let it grab focus and I'd say 90% of the time it gets the thing I want (e.g. a person, something in the foreground, etc.) and this reinforces laziness--I'm no longer making a picture I'm simply taking one. I've grown to really like the M11 making me be purposeful with my photography.

2. The shutter sound is very satisfying.

3. With my Sony + 35mm f1.4 GM, taking a good picture is way too easy and has started to feel almost boring and cheap. In terms of the philosophy of capturing moments for later enjoyment, this is a good thing, but I also like the process of photography and I get bored easily. The M11 makes me earn good pictures and there's this weird psychology taking place where I'm excited to see if any of the last 20 pictures I took are keepers (like developing film) on my computer screen. I'd say out of 20 pictures: 10 are properly focused, 5 are focused and framed nicely, and 1-3 are what I'd consider good shots. With my Sony out of 20 pictures: 18 are properly focused, 15 of those are framed nicely, and I find myself having to choose between 5-10 to find my favorite, which is not an enjoyable process to me (flipping back and forth between them, asking my wife, printing them, etc.). With the M11 I don't have much to choose from and it forces me to move on and not get stuck overanalyzing photos to death, which has value to me.

4. The rangefinder, in proper lighting conditions, is becoming really enjoyable to use except for when I'm holding it vertically (still figuring out ergonomics here). I'm not sure if this is normal practice, but I actually keep both eyes open and my brain has now figured out how to merge what I'm seeing with both eyes in a way that helps me focus the shot better. I'm also able to see even more of the scene with my left eye, then fine tune my framing with my right eye. In low light I'm finding it a bit of a struggle.

5. I've struggled with ADHD my whole life, so the M11 punishing me with bad pictures when I don't slow down is something I need. I'm stubborn, so I'm still taking a lot of bad pictures 🤣

What I'm not liking about it:

1. I am forced to choose focus, which makes capturing sudden moments with proper focus challenging. I've definitely missed a lot of shots of my daughter in the time it takes to dial in my settings, frame the shot, and focus. I'm trying to adapt to this by always having the camera on, set to an aperture that would be appropriate for a situation, have the focus ring in roughly the right position, and practicing frequently to develop muscle memory. Any tips here are much appreciated.

2. The price tag of course. I feel like my M11 does less and is capable of less while carrying a steeper price tag and that creates some sort of inherent discomfort.

3. Having to use the rear display to dial in focus on shots closer than 0.7m really ruins the experience for me. It makes me feel like I'm taking pictures with my Sony again. It has caused me to not really take any close up shots and I'm finding with the Summilux 35mm I'm oftentimes too far away and have to rely heavily on cropping. This has me wondering if I should rent a 50mm to see if that addresses this, but I do a lot of landscape photography so I'm hesitant.

4. I err on the side of higher f-stop to ensure the picture is in focus if I didn't get plane of focus exactly where I wanted, which has resulted in flatter, noisier pictures. I suspect as I get better at dialing in focus quickly I'll be able to go back to lower f-stops.

5. When I adapt the Summilux 35 to the Sony A1, I think I'm actually getting better pictures than with that same lens on the M11. Given the cost of the M11, this is inherently undesirable, but I don't find myself wanting to sell the M11. The rangefinder experience and shutter noise are simply enjoyable.

6. Even at f2.8-f4 and 1/320 or faster shooting a stationary target, the Summilux 35 is nowhere near as sharp as the pictures I took with my Q3. I suspect I'd need to buy the APO 35 to get back to that level of sharpness (which I really like), but $9,000 camera and a $8,500 lens means the price of a used car to get pictures that my $6500 Q3 spit out with ease. I'm fortunate to be able to easily afford that, but as someone that grew up quite poor I don't know that I'll ever be comfortable with it.

7. I'm really struggling to nail focus at f1.4. Oftentimes it seems like the focal plane is just a tiny bit closer than where I set it, but I think part of this is how soft this lens is wide open compared to the Q3 and my 35mm f1.4 GM.

What I've learned/what's changed:

1. I'm using my Sony with the EVF more now than pre-M11 as a result. Firstly because it's becoming an ingrained habit and secondly because I've learned to enjoy it. Doesn't hurt that the Sony's EVF is much higher resolution than the rear display.

2. With the Sony I typically live in f1.4-f4.0 range to maximize bokeh/separation. With the M11 and manual focusing, I find myself using f4-f8 a lot more to ensure I'm capturing focus. This has made me more comfortable using higher f-stops on my Sony as well, which I believe has led to some better images.

3. I might want to rent an M6 and give film photography a try at some point.

4. I'm still not comfortable taking it out of Auto ISO unless it's a staged shot (e.g. landscape with tripod) where I have lots of time to setup the shot. Do most people leave it in Auto ISO for day-to-day photography or am I being lazy?

Edited November 30, 2024 by anonymoose

[marchyman]

4 hours ago, anonymoose said:

Do most people leave it in Auto ISO for day-to-day photography

I am not most people and don't claim that what I do is common. With that out of the way...

I rarely use auto ISO.  I typically keep the ISO at 64, 200, or 400 depending on how bright the day. I usually have the aperture set somewhere between f/4 and f/8. Shutter speed is shown in the viewfinder so I can see if aperture or ISO changes are needed. That works for the majority of shots I take.

For indoor shooting I'll bump the ISO to 800 or 1600 if needed.  Often 400 is enough.

On the rare occasions I shoot "street" with my 35mm lens I'll set speed (1/160), aperture (f/8), and range focus to about 2 meters. That's when I use auto ISO. 

[lct]

Auto iso M mode in most cases here.

[erl]

I'm a control freak, so I rarely use Auoto Iso. The only time I might find it useful is when I am in a rapidly changing light environment and, for some reason need to keep my shutter speed fixed. Otherwise the only Auto I use is  that which controls the shutter speed, having already set the aperture.

[markc2]

I've only had 4 cameras an R3, R8, Hasselblad 501, and now an M8.2. The viewfinder on the 501, and M are both awesome. I thought not looking thru the lens would drive me nuts, but man I am freaking loving it because I trust Leica glass to catch what I'm seeing, with the Hasselblad I got a sense of space and weight with the Leica it's this proportional feel looking thru the viewfinder, and EVERYTIME I look at a Sony/Nikon/... I feel like the computer took over the camera, the level of buttons and switches is nuts. I love the mindset the M lets me get into, and the size of the camera, it's funny when you M guys talk about how bulky some of the lenses can be, I'm stunned when I go to a camera store I always have a good laugh, because I'm always stunned at just how small they are. 

It's funny never thought of covering up the red dot, the people who don't know just see a strange old looking camera, and so far the people that I've met that do know, it usually leads to cool conversations!

and if I really want to cut to the chase, every time I use the camera it makes taking photos feel special, and someone mentioned about being part of something bigger, yep can totally attest to that feeling!!!

 

Mark

[adan]

Why do I shoot M?

Manual split-image/coincident focusing, plain and simple.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[THEME]

Why? The feel, the haptic response, the bare minimum. Don't like these computers dressed up as cameras. Want the basics – and happy to pay extra for "less is more."

[BruceRH]

On 11/30/2024 at 11:40 AM, anonymoose said:

I've had my M11 for about a week now including photographing Thanksgiving with 20+ people. If anyone has any tips/tricks related to things I'd appreciate you sharing!

What I'm liking about it so far:

1. I am forced to choose focus whether I like it or not. Oftentimes with my Sony I'll let it grab focus and I'd say 90% of the time it gets the thing I want (e.g. a person, something in the foreground, etc.) and this reinforces laziness--I'm no longer making a picture I'm simply taking one. I've grown to really like the M11 making me be purposeful with my photography.

2. The shutter sound is very satisfying.

3. With my Sony + 35mm f1.4 GM, taking a good picture is way too easy and has started to feel almost boring and cheap. In terms of the philosophy of capturing moments for later enjoyment, this is a good thing, but I also like the process of photography and I get bored easily. The M11 makes me earn good pictures and there's this weird psychology taking place where I'm excited to see if any of the last 20 pictures I took are keepers (like developing film) on my computer screen. I'd say out of 20 pictures: 10 are properly focused, 5 are focused and framed nicely, and 1-3 are what I'd consider good shots. With my Sony out of 20 pictures: 18 are properly focused, 15 of those are framed nicely, and I find myself having to choose between 5-10 to find my favorite, which is not an enjoyable process to me (flipping back and forth between them, asking my wife, printing them, etc.). With the M11 I don't have much to choose from and it forces me to move on and not get stuck overanalyzing photos to death, which has value to me.

4. The rangefinder, in proper lighting conditions, is becoming really enjoyable to use except for when I'm holding it vertically (still figuring out ergonomics here). I'm not sure if this is normal practice, but I actually keep both eyes open and my brain has now figured out how to merge what I'm seeing with both eyes in a way that helps me focus the shot better. I'm also able to see even more of the scene with my left eye, then fine tune my framing with my right eye. In low light I'm finding it a bit of a struggle.

5. I've struggled with ADHD my whole life, so the M11 punishing me with bad pictures when I don't slow down is something I need. I'm stubborn, so I'm still taking a lot of bad pictures 🤣

What I'm not liking about it:

1. I am forced to choose focus, which makes capturing sudden moments with proper focus challenging. I've definitely missed a lot of shots of my daughter in the time it takes to dial in my settings, frame the shot, and focus. I'm trying to adapt to this by always having the camera on, set to an aperture that would be appropriate for a situation, have the focus ring in roughly the right position, and practicing frequently to develop muscle memory. Any tips here are much appreciated.

2. The price tag of course. I feel like my M11 does less and is capable of less while carrying a steeper price tag and that creates some sort of inherent discomfort.

3. Having to use the rear display to dial in focus on shots closer than 0.7m really ruins the experience for me. It makes me feel like I'm taking pictures with my Sony again. It has caused me to not really take any close up shots and I'm finding with the Summilux 35mm I'm oftentimes too far away and have to rely heavily on cropping. This has me wondering if I should rent a 50mm to see if that addresses this, but I do a lot of landscape photography so I'm hesitant.

4. I err on the side of higher f-stop to ensure the picture is in focus if I didn't get plane of focus exactly where I wanted, which has resulted in flatter, noisier pictures. I suspect as I get better at dialing in focus quickly I'll be able to go back to lower f-stops.

5. When I adapt the Summilux 35 to the Sony A1, I think I'm actually getting better pictures than with that same lens on the M11. Given the cost of the M11, this is inherently undesirable, but I don't find myself wanting to sell the M11. The rangefinder experience and shutter noise are simply enjoyable.

6. Even at f2.8-f4 and 1/320 or faster shooting a stationary target, the Summilux 35 is nowhere near as sharp as the pictures I took with my Q3. I suspect I'd need to buy the APO 35 to get back to that level of sharpness (which I really like), but $9,000 camera and a $8,500 lens means the price of a used car to get pictures that my $6500 Q3 spit out with ease. I'm fortunate to be able to easily afford that, but as someone that grew up quite poor I don't know that I'll ever be comfortable with it.

7. I'm really struggling to nail focus at f1.4. Oftentimes it seems like the focal plane is just a tiny bit closer than where I set it, but I think part of this is how soft this lens is wide open compared to the Q3 and my 35mm f1.4 GM.

What I've learned/what's changed:

1. I'm using my Sony with the EVF more now than pre-M11 as a result. Firstly because it's becoming an ingrained habit and secondly because I've learned to enjoy it. Doesn't hurt that the Sony's EVF is much higher resolution than the rear display.

2. With the Sony I typically live in f1.4-f4.0 range to maximize bokeh/separation. With the M11 and manual focusing, I find myself using f4-f8 a lot more to ensure I'm capturing focus. This has made me more comfortable using higher f-stops on my Sony as well, which I believe has led to some better images.

3. I might want to rent an M6 and give film photography a try at some point.

4. I'm still not comfortable taking it out of Auto ISO unless it's a staged shot (e.g. landscape with tripod) where I have lots of time to setup the shot. Do most people leave it in Auto ISO for day-to-day photography or am I being lazy?

My little bit of advice as someone who had an A1 and now an A7CR mainly to use some of the E mount glass that I like, would be don't try to make the M11 a Sony. I have greatly reduced my use of Sony for the very reason you mentioned, "taking a good picture is way too easy and has started to feel almost boring and cheap." Your other comment about missing pictures of your daughter, so what. We really don't need so many images of our kids in order to remember a particular event or day. One good image trumps 100 in focus shots IMHO.

In my opinion, using an M is more about making an image rather than taking an image if that makes sense. I am much more deliberate with the M but I still "take" too many images. I found an interesting thread on FM about using a small SD card so as to limit the number images one could take, much like when using a roll of film. I am just as guilty when it comes to the sheer number of images I come back with at the end of the day. With the Sony it was worse, and like you said culling through the number of images that are all focused perfectly with just minor differences in movement drove me nuts. I much prefer the simplicity of shooting with my M11-P, and before that my M10-R. Nailing focus at f1.4 will take time and practice.

As far as Auto ISO, I use it a fair amount as I am pretty comfortable with how good high ISO is on this sensor but there are also many times I set it for the conditions I am in. I also like how the M11-P tends to keep ISO as low as possible so I am generally happy with its decisions.  It really depends on my mood but not something I think about much. 

It comes down to this I guess, at least for me. When I look at images of my childhood taken by my father with his Canon IVSB, the sharpness or volume of images do not matter as much as the memory so I try to keep that in mind when I shoot today.