Why I love and hate the Leica M

[charlesphoto99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Perfect focus and sharpness is overrated. How about we concentrate more on how the image makes the viewer FEEL vs thinking how great a camera it is we have that can do everything for us in any light and scenario known to man and make images that are just as 'perfect' as all of the other owners of the same camera. Until a 'better' one comes along that is, that makes even more 'perfect' photos, done 'easier.' What a sad joke. 

And do keep in mind that the Summiluxes and Noktons (and Canon 85 1.2's etc) of this world were once a necessity beyond the 'look' and were never considered easy to use wide open, but when one is 'stuck' at iso 400-1600 they could save the day. With the advent of clean digital high iso's they are mostly dilettante items now, imo, which is not bad per se, but still difficult to use wide open, even more so with the unforgivingness of digital vs film. 

 

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

3 hours ago, Markey said:

People today are probably more ambitious in terms of what they want to capture and what result they deem to be acceptable.

People today look more interested in reprography than photography but ambition is not what it used to be 😉

[anonymoose]

@Altair in an effort to tie this back to your other thread (discussing the reaction from reddit), this is why some people react negatively to someone going in to buy a Q3 (with modern AF, EVF, etc.) and walking out with an entire M system.

You went from sitting in a shallow pool to jumping into the deep end of a wave pool and you're surprised that it's hard to stay above water. Instead of learning to swim in a more controlled way (e.g. 35 Cron @ higher f-stops + practice) you're saying that the wave pool should be designed differently to accommodate you.

Edited December 8, 2024 by anonymoose

[evikne]

An example of three images in a row, taken at a short distance at f/1.4. The room was so dark that I could hardly see anything (the pictures are brighter than reality). But that didn't stop me from taking pictures of the girls dancing and singing. My M10 is the only camera I have, and I use it for everything.

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!

 

[IkarusJohn]

8 hours ago, pgk said:

Whilst Leica still continue to market the M as a 'street' camera, its purpose will be confused. An M is really a camera which is capable of high precision results (so 'street' isn't really its forte) when used within its operational envelope. But building M lenses which are too fast (f/0.95/1.25), or focus too close for RF use, confuses the marketplace. Most long term users of the M understand its strengths and weaknesses and use M cameras accordingly. But today's world always seems to want to uprate things when doing so is neither logical nor desirable.

FWIW I would say that a ~25MPixel M camera with good higher ISO capability (again within the RF tolerance of lower light/contrast levels), weather proofed as far as possible, is probably a sweet spot. But from a marketing point of view it possibly doesn't meet expectations. At some point hopefully realism is going to impinge though.

I agree, Paul.

The only thing I would say is that the fast lenses were first developed in the film age to deal with low light without a flash; which is a logical extension of the M’s function.  These days, people assume that it’s all about bokeh, which again is only part of the picture - not its subject.  Peter Karbe advises to use aperture to control depth of field, and for me this is really the charm of Leica’s fast lenses.

Now, a lot has been written about the 0.95 having a depth of field as thin as an eyelash, and lots of criticism follows.  The truth is, at a given distance, the 75 Summilux has a thinner depth of field at 1.4 than the Noctilux at 0.95.  I will never understand why anyone would bother to take such a photo - a fast lens wide open taken at minium focus distance would not produce a photo of any interest.  Conversely, both lenses can produce pleasing subject isolation where the out of focus areas are not at all distracting at sensible distances.

Somewhere here, I have posted a picture of my partner and her mother taken with the 75 Summilux wide open at a ditance of 20 metrres or so, soft, but perfectly in focus with light blur of the background.  I have no problem focusing either lens on my M cameras, at all apertures.

Edited December 8, 2024 by IkarusJohn

[pgk]

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

The only thing I would say is that the fast lenses were first developed in the film age to deal with low light without a flash; which is a logical extension of the M’s function.

Back in the day I had a 50/1 Noctilux and M6, used the combination and sold photos from them which were duly published. Reality though was that wide-open the lens was far from perfect and the combination was not easy to use in the low light levels where f/1 was needed (together with a steady hand more of the time than not). I didn't hang on to the Noctilux for long and have never regretted selling it. I miss my 75mm Summilux at times but have few regrets over its disposal either good as it is.Perhaps its an age and experience thing but these days I am happiest with my M9 and 35/1.4 pre-FLE which remains the sweet spot of M ownership for me.

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

...a fast lens wide open taken at minium focus distance would not produce a photo of any interest...

With the very greatest of respect, John, I disagree.

Then again I'm thinking, primarily, about some unquestionably majestic potraits I've taken with 50mm f1.1 lenses at min. focus / max ap. where the subject-matter was my cat.

Pics available on request!

Philip.

Edited December 8, 2024 by pippy

[IkarusJohn]

44 minutes ago, pippy said:

With the very greatest of respect, John, I disagree.

Then again I'm thinking, primarily, about some unquestionably majestic potraits I've taken with 50mm f1.1 lenses at min. focus / max ap. where the subject-matter was my cat.

Pics available on request!

Philip.

I think I'll pass on the cat photos! 😂

By my calculations, at f/1.1 the depth of field at 1 metre is 2mm - if that gets the whole of your subject in focus, perfect!  Not sure what you disagree with ...

[pippy]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

I think I'll pass on the cat photos! 😂

By my calculations, at f/1.1 the depth of field at 1 metre is 2mm - if that gets the whole of your subject in focus, perfect!  Not sure what you disagree with ...

PrrrrrMeaowwwww!

😸

Here is a pic commisioned, specifically, to promote 'Healthy Whiskers within the Feline Community'. Check out her feelers!

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!

😸

Philip.

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 11 Stunden schrieb IkarusJohn:

By my calculations, at f/1.1 the depth of field at 1 metre is 2mm - if that gets the whole of your subject in focus, perfect!  Not sure what you disagree with ...

For the usual "circle of confusion" setting, it is 2cm for 50mm at f/1.0 and not 2mm. Typical portrait distance (for human subjects) is about 2 - 3 m (1m distance is not particularly flattering, unless you like big noses). At 2m, we talk about 9cm DoF.

[lct]

13 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

By my calculations, at f/1.1 the depth of field at 1 metre is 2mm

On which CoC (circle of confusion) value did you base your calculations if i may ask? On the usual 0.03mm CoC value, the total DoF  for a 50mm lens at f/1 & 1m is about 2cm, and for a 0.015mm CoC value, the total DoF there is about 1cm according to the site below if i read it well:

https://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Edited December 9, 2024 by lct

[Smudgerer]

To to OP's original posting, "Why I love and hate the Leica M", I can't say that I love or hate any camera, it is just an inanimate object after all and really can those emotions actually apply to lumps of metal and glass? Maybe for some, not for me. A camera is just a tool, it's the results that trigger emotions in me, what the camera with my eye and for sure other's eyes and skills too of course can produce by way of images that pull on emotions, not the tool itself..............That could be anything from a Box Brownie to you name it something up there in the €€€€ stratosphere. If love and hate are emotions that come into it for a "tool" then I could say that I "love" my Estwing hammers ( except perhaps when they hit my thumb rather than the nail head ), but more so for what they've faithfully over the years helped me build..........like a final print made from an images from whatever camera, the final print / image is the thing, it's your eye, your skills, not the camera............I "like" Leica M's because they've been part of my "toolkit" for decades and are comfortable for me to use, they get out of my way when imaging because most now is muscle-memory with their use, they sort of leave the path clear for me to be with whatever I am trying to make in a photograph.

[fotografr]

On 12/8/2024 at 5:56 AM, costa43 said:

I don’t think there has been a better camera invented at documenting your life and world around you than the Leica M, mine has become an extension of me. I for one enjoy the process of shooting as much as the final image, if not more. 🤣

 

 

 

That point of view resonates with me. If my priority was getting nearly every shot tack sharp I'd probably have a Sony system. I use the M because I'm more process oriented. I enjoy the mechanics of image making and if I miss focus now and then, it's my fault and not a shortcoming of the camera. 

[fotografr]

M6, f1.0 Noctilux wide open. Not tack sharp, but I enjoyed making the shot more than if I'd used an autofocus camera that pinpointed the eyeball.

 

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!

[costa43]

1 hour ago, fotografr said:

That point of view resonates with me. If my priority was getting nearly every shot tack sharp I'd probably have a Sony system. I use the M because I'm more process oriented. I enjoy the mechanics of image making and if I miss focus now and then, it's my fault and not a shortcoming of the camera. 

In a world which demands instant gratification and automation, I've been craving more tangible and 'real' experiences. I've been shooting and developing a lot of film recently with a Leica M and it's been a blast, a learning curve for sure but really rewarding when you nail it.

Here is one I'm quite happy with that I developed at home. Who said you can't stop motion with an M? 

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!

[IkarusJohn]

4 hours ago, lct said:

On which CoC (circle of confusion) value did you base your calculations if i may ask? On the usual 0.03mm CoC value, the total DoF  for a 50mm lens at f/1 & 1m is about 2cm, and for a 0.015mm CoC value, the total DoF there is about 1cm according to the site below if i read it well:

https://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

30 microns for both - not that it really matters are the point was one of comparison.  The point is, given the same factors (distance to subject, circle of confusion etc) save for aperture (both wide open), in use the f/1.1 Noctilux is no harder to focus than the 75 Summilux.  Sure, the framing is different, but we’re talking depth of field.

In reality, taking a portrait with either lens wide open at 1 metre makes little sense.  At a reasonable distance, the depth of field wide open is very usable.  What’s missing from this discussion is that you select the aperture for depth of field.  Conversely, we tend to see images where the photographer, filled with the joys of spring over their new Noctilux, starts with the wide open aperture and discovers two disappointing things - the lens won’t focus closer than 1 metre and, while the plaane of best focus is acceptably sharp, very little of the subject is actually in focus.

Nice iris and eyelash photo, but what about the rest of the face?  That’s why so many state (with justification) that the Noctilux is a one trick pony.  Mine isn’t, but I use the aperture ring.

[IkarusJohn]

7 hours ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

For the usual "circle of confusion" setting, it is 2cm for 50mm at f/1.0 and not 2mm. Typical portrait distance (for human subjects) is about 2 - 3 m (1m distance is not particularly flattering, unless you like big noses). At 2m, we talk about 9cm DoF.

You’re quite right - 2cm, not 2mm.  Typo.

I can’t think of a portrait where 2cm would be enough, nor would I really want to photograph a person at 1 meter - I’m sure others have, but I don’t see the point.  Even 2-3 metres with a 50mm lens is quite close.  Anyway, we digress.

[pippy]

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

...I can’t think of a portrait where 2cm would be enough, nor would I really want to photograph a person at 1 meter - I’m sure others have, but I don’t see the point...

This might be a very good time to post a link to Edward Steichen's extraordinary photograph of Gloria Swanson. Easily one of my favourite portraits of all time;

https://venetianred.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/edward-steichene28094gloria-swanson-1924.jpg

Philip.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb IkarusJohn:

I can’t think of a portrait where 2cm would be enough, nor would I really want to photograph a person at 1 meter - I’m sure others have, but I don’t see the point.  Even 2-3 metres with a 50mm lens is quite close.  Anyway, we digress.

What kind of portrait or what kind of sensor do you have in mind, when you find that too close or the DoF too shallow?

This is, what you already get with a 50mm lens on fullframe sensor at 3m distance:

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!

(Source: https://dofsimulator.net/en/)

Depth of field in that case already 14.2 cm - so almost the whole head.

Edited December 9, 2024 by 3D-Kraft.com

[pippy]

7 hours ago, costa43 said:

In a world which demands instant gratification and automation, I've been craving more tangible and 'real' experiences. I've been shooting and developing a lot of film recently with a Leica M and it's been a blast, a learning curve for sure but really rewarding when you nail it.

Here is one I'm quite happy with that I developed at home. Who said you can't stop motion with an M? 

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!

I'd just like to say that in my opinion this is a great photograph.

Thank you very much for posting it here.

Philip.