Why do you shoot M?

[Dazzajl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’m getting the impression that what our provocateur is alluding to is those folks that have chosen an M as their camera so it can show off their wealth. I don’t think that such people do exist will surprise anyone. Anything you can buy has it’s luxury brands and this is no different. 
 

I see no reason not to do this if it makes you happy. 

[jpark114]

I like its classic feel and small form factor (weight wise is different story though).

During the film era, I was mostly a nikon guy, so I don't have any special feeling toward M because of it, but Leica is the only brand still producing camera that feels classic.

Photo wise, the result doesn't feel unique enough to force me use leica cameras.  I actually like landscape photos produced by my Z9 and A7CR.

But when you are city wondering, Leica is perfect.

[RQ44]

3 hours ago, Dazzajl said:

I’m getting the impression that what our provocateur is alluding to is those folks that have chosen an M as their camera so it can show off their wealth. I don’t think that such people do exist will surprise anyone. Anything you can buy has it’s luxury brands and this is no different. 
 

I see no reason not to do this if it makes you happy. 

I got into Leica in that I respect the engineering, design and optics. I don't ever flaunt the fact I own Leica to anyone, there is no need to. I purchased it for me to enjoy and admire.

Unfortunately there are millions of people who purchase premium, designer and luxury goods for social acceptance. 

[Dazzajl]

17 hours ago, RQ44 said:

I got into Leica in that I respect the engineering, design and optics

There are a myriad of reasons people might choose the M system and who’s to say one is any better than another. Personally, I was looking for the connection that comes from the imperfections of camera that is unchanged at its heart for over several decades now. 

[Ralf]

I love the M's, because shooting with them makes me look and think in a different manner.

[Lee S]

Because I’m a glutton for punishment and have expensive taste.

Many reasons to shoot M, mostly emotional.

1) A cliche but I feel more satisfied when I captured a good picture as I feel I’ve done more to achieve it (Manual Focus).

2) It’s probably the most creative camera you can get in such a small package when paired with something like a 35mm Lux Steel Rim / Voigtlander Classic. Dreamy wide open and sharp stopped down. I appreciate these lenses can be  mounted on other cameras via an adapter but I don’t like Frankenstein cameras.

3) The rangefinder works well, I prefer it to focus peaking for non-critical shots.

4) It’s beautifully made and looks gorgeous (firmware aside).

5) it’s quite a disarming camera, don’t really feel comfortable taking a mirroless with massive lens out now

6) The more technology involved in taking a photo the less I enjoy it.

My iPhone has the best autofocus, dynamic range and high iso performance in the world, but I get no joy from its images. 

 

Edited January 4 by Lee S

[Tseg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Like wearing a fancy watch, 99.999% of people won't notice your camera brand either.   I guess there is a certain type of person that think others notice (?)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

M11-D | 50mm Summilux ASPH II

 

[anonymoose]

56 minutes ago, Tseg said:

Like wearing a fancy watch, 99.999% of people won't notice your camera brand either.   I guess there is a certain type of person that think others notice (?)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

M11-D | 50mm Summilux ASPH II

 

BLNR is one of my favorites!

[lct]

1 hour ago, Tseg said:

I guess there is a certain type of person that think others notice (?)

People with good eyesight?

[DadDadDaddyo]

Does this watch make me look fat?

[erl]

2 hours ago, DadDadDaddyo said:

Does this watch make me look fat?

Yes!

Just don't look in the mirror. 

[Smogg]

Perhaps I was inattentive, but it seems to me that no one mentioned one of the most important advantages of a rangefinder camera - convenient and fast focusing and shooting through obstacles (leaves, glass, reflections).

During a recent walk with Q3 43 I was simply exhausted taking such pictures.

Edited January 5 by Smogg

[Smogg]

I also want to point out the very successful implementation of Exposure simulation when using the screen/EVF with a half-press of the shutter button on the M11. On the Q3, I either won't see anything on the screen in the shadows at normal exposure, making it difficult to compose, or I'll burn out the highlights if I make a positive exposure compensation to see something for proper framing.

[evikne]

16 minutes ago, Smogg said:

Perhaps I was inattentive, but it seems to me that no one mentioned one of the most important advantages of a rangefinder camera - convenient and fast focusing and shooting through obstacles (leaves, glass, reflections).

During a recent walk with Q3 43 I was simply exhausted taking such pictures.

I mentioned it not long ago in another thread:

[evikne]

Another example: 😉

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Ray Harrison]

I use the M because it's something I grew up with (my dad had a long-suffering M3) and fun. He was a photographer and art director. Photography is my hobby—I'll occasionally do paid work in the cultural heritage space, with a few events scattered here and there. My day job is as a tech leader with a background in software development, so photography also keeps me sane and in another headspace. Most folks here have illuminated some great reasons to shoot an M.

I've always been drawn to photography's slower and more manual aspects, and an M forces those constraints on me, at least to a degree. At the very least, I must do the focus work, which I find enjoyable. I enjoy the M lenses, too (not just Leica), including the size and character. The M is, for me, the perfect walk-about camera and doesn't tend to freak people out as much as a DSLR/mirrorless equivalent does in my experience. That's generally how I use it. 

When I say "hobby," it's more the end of the spectrum where people put most of their time and free money into it rather than a more traditional casual hobbyist. Think weekend car racing or people who do weekend battle reenactments or what-have-you.  I'm not generally interested in a one-size-fits-all camera because where's the fun in that? Over time, I've built three main kits: (M) Walkabout, (Medium Format) Architecture/Landscape/Cultural Heritage, and (DSLR) Wildlife. Whenever I do a rare event, that will tend to be the DSLR because what better to capture bazillions of similar (but in focus!) shots of the antics of fast-moving but bored (and drunk) people making asses of themselves 🙂?

As for the problems people have with the M11, thankfully, I don't have freezes of any note. I think I had one way back in 2022—the same rate as my other cameras, to be honest.  As for the "magenta monster" issue, it's not a concern for me. Should any tint or color-cast issues concern me (from any camera), they are 100% correctable 100% of the time (except for some shifted Rodenstock lenses on an older digital back). I never shoot in-camera JPEGs, so I'd not see any tint issues in that regard. As for my raw files, I process every image individually to my liking. I don't share a ton online and mostly do my own printing for local camera clubs and contests. 

To sum up, using an M is fun; I have a personal history with them, and it makes me work (in a good way). I like the character and quality of the images, and I love the character and quality of the lenses. Can I get the same image with my Nikon that I can get with the M? Absolutely, but would I? That's more unclear. Each camera type has its bounds, benefits, and quirks that you need to work with, and those are in your head when making image subject and composition choices. Plus, using one camera: Where's the fun in that? 🙂

 

 

Edited January 5 by Ray Harrison

[Derbyshire Man]

To stop me buying a Canon R5 mkII and deal with all of the crashes which are needing battery removal to reset?

Taxi for Mr Man…

[Altair]

On 11/28/2024 at 12:20 AM, evikne said:

Pros:

• The rangefinder focusing experience
• Ease of use (only “Das Wesentliche”)
• Top, full-frame quality in a compact size
• Iconic design
• Leica's history and heritage (feeling part of something bigger)
• Compatible with a huge range of old and new lenses

Cons:

• Price
• Risk of focus shift or miscalibration

Coming late to the thread. I am new to the M a d only had an original Q since it was released as far as Leica is concerned. However deeply fell in love with the M experience since acquisition a few months back and throwing in my 2 cents...

 

The M is a unique photography experience in a world of lookalike throwaway Japanese cameras. The Canikony trilogy have AI powered lens attached devices that can do science fiction grade stuff, and I find that makes you a far worse photographer and less inclined to go out and shoot. They do have a place for me as far as wildlife, but for everything else, especially street environmental and portraits, the M is a breath of fresh air. The challenge of mastering the RF system is overcome much quicker than you would think possible at first, the quality of the images due to the true to life colour science and the magic of the Leica glass breath new air in an old hobby. The quality design and materials used in the hardware are also a plus, a fine fountain pen will make you want to write more, a great handmade mug will make your coffee taste better, and a finely made instrument will make you want to take it along far more than a big plastic thing. In that regard, no one makes a better camera than the M, the build quality is second to none.

 

I do love my Hassleblad X2D and it is still my main camera and will remain as such, it bridges the gap between Leica and the Japanese cameras in a very useful and enjoyable experience. 80% of my shooting is done with it, Leica is king of street though. Landscapes, serious portrature, and product it's Hassleblad. 

You will have to find your use cases and decide based on your priorities. I would say, if you mainly do portraits for example I would NOT switch to M, if you do street or just want to enjoy photography definitely consider it.

 

Good luck

[Mute-on]

I suspect all of the following points have already been made in the comments to date, but for the sake of clarifying my own self-justifying rationale, I shoot M because I really enjoy the following:

1. The way the camera feels in my hands
2. The manual controls for aperture and shutter speed that do not require interacting with or second guessing technology
3. Using a manual focussing lens, combined with the excellent rangefinder focus mechanism that still works brilliantly despite my failing eyesight 
4. The simple and symmetrical design with no protruding bulges, grips or mirror pellicle 
5. The mechanical feel of the cameras (even my only digital, an M262)
6. Using a 60 year old camera and lens that operates as beautifully as the day is was made (M2)
7. It makes the experience of photography feel special, which inspires creativity and enhances enjoyment and satisfaction
8. The photos I can produce are often spectacular (and sometimes not … )
9. The fact most people don’t bother with using a Leica M system, and resort to autofocus, auto exposure SLRs or modern mirrorless cameras, or nothing more than an iPhone. I like to be a little bit different. 

Edited January 7 by Mute-on

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[JoshuaR]

I wrote a version of this list on DPR a while ago, and I've revised it for this thread. Here's what I love about the M system (especially digital M):

• Small size and beautiful design that make it fun to take the camera along every day.
• Fantastic image quality with no compromises.
• A huge library of lenses, many with old-fashioned rendering, not all insanely expensive.
• A big clear optical finder which never blacks out and lets me feel immersed in what's in front of me. I never feel lost in the camera; I stay tethered to the scene.
• The RF patch, which lets me hit precise focus at wide-open apertures with confidence.
• The ability to range (or zone) focus, which lets me forget about focus entirely and shoot intuitively and instantaneously, just by having a sense of how far away I am from what I'm interested in.
• The ability to make focus decisions entirely by feel, before I even lift the camera to my eye.
• The sense of making pictures "by hand," which persists for me even when I use Auto ISO and aperture priority.

I really do believe that functionally—in terms of how the camera works—the rangefinder is a special mechanism with its own unique strengths. In particular, I love how quickly it's possible to pivot from zone-focusing a scene—which allows you to skip the whole routine of finding a "focus point" with AF—to focusing precisely on an exact spot with the patch. I find this to be faster, simpler, and more enjoyable than futzing with the little crosshairs, boxes, and peaking dots that appear in an EVF. I never have to change focus modes. It's all just muscle memory.

Finally, there's a kind of poetic side. When I use a mirrorless camera, I feel like I'm watching a movie of reality and isolating a frame. I know exactly how the final image will look, because I've seen it in the EVF. With the M system, it's the opposite. I see reality, I imagine how the picture will look (at my chosen F stop, and rendered in photographic tones), and I only find out later if I was right. Often I'm pleasantly surprised to find something different than what I imagined. I like this element of mystery and anticipation, and I like that the M approach keeps me in reality rather than pulling me into the movie of reality. Probably many people have very different experiences, but that's mine.