Why do you shoot M?

[ArcherRoan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The M cameras I shoot make it possible for me to achieve a range of image looks I haven't found with any other camera. One reason for this: M lenses. With the exception of my Noctiluxes, these lenses are all compact and lightweight. Even the Noctiluxes are comparably light when compared to the SL lenses or Hasselblad V Series lenses.

For example, consider what is possible shooting with a Thambar. What that lens accomplishes with highlight diffusion is poetic. I'm not saying that similar looks can't be achieved with some other vintage lens. People with a lot more experience than I can undoubtedly educate us all. Still, the bottom line is that the M makes things possible with its glass that make the bodies feel worth it.

To achieve these looks takes some doing. One really has to spend a lot of time shooting with a lens and looking at the output to figure out what's possible. I would go further and state that even different lenses of the same type and focal length have subtle (and sometimes not-so subtle) differences from their siblings.

Are there easier cameras to use? Unquestionably. Not many of them will teach their user as much as an M can, given time, patience, and an open mind.

[Advertisement]

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

[Erato]

The M-Series camera is a great match for my M mount and LTM/L39 lenses. But some of the newer lenses I have aren’t as impressive as I thought they would be, even though they’re supposed to be top-notch and well-made.

The new camera design is somehow super intuitive and technically perfect, but it can be a bit distracting from the rhythm and simplicity sometimes.

Edited January 8 by Erato