Why I love and hate the Leica M

[charlesphoto99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 minutes ago, username said:

I think it works quite well, seriously.

What gear do you think people are using who shoot the world cup for example?

Even a decade ago, before AI / eye-AF etc. this worked incredibly well.

And what you did there with the jumping shot (great photo by the way!) is not really a focus problem no matter what gear one is using, I mean with a 18mm - c'mon.. you can have your camera on manual focus roughly pre-set (if you really distrust your AF or think it wouldn't be fast enough), and your shot will be perfectly sharp where you need it to be anyway.

They are not using M11's with hobbled on EVF options to shoot high speed sports, that's for sure. That's not the equation I'm making. But if I were to get a commission for the World Cup, I would show up with a bevy of M's and leave it at that. Because I know I make the best images with them, that's the way I work, and hopefully would be the reason I was hired. That would mean focusing on something other than what the other 100 photographers with long AF zooms would be doing. But if I was a sports photographer, and that is what I was known for, of course I would shoot with long AF lenses, or whatever works for me. I'm not stupid, even with main focus on M's, I would have something else with a long lens with me as backup. A D850 or Zf along with a 400 or something. 

I guess my point with the photo above is not so much about focus (yes with an 18 one gets quite a bit of depth of field, and the lens was already semi pre-focused to the band from the time I'd set it down to switch to the Mono) but more about dispelling the whole notion that M's can or can't do certain things. At the end of the day it's more about showing up, reflexes, and knowing the limitations of your gear, but not being limited by it. Understanding light, even before subject and composition, whether natural, supplied, or even accidental, is the true fundamental. 

Both M10-R, 135mm APO, both in my neighborhood.

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!

[Derbyshire Man]

57 minutes ago, username said:

I think it works quite well, seriously.

What gear do you think people are using who shoot the world cup for example?

Even a decade ago, before AI / eye-AF etc. this worked incredibly well.

And what you did there with the jumping shot (great photo by the way!) is not really a focus problem no matter what gear one is using, I mean with a 18mm - c'mon.. you can have your camera on manual focus roughly pre-set (if you really distrust your AF or think it wouldn't be fast enough), and your shot will be perfectly sharp where you need it to be anyway.

The only thing I'd say about that though is that if I'd been taking a shot like that on my Canon 5m mk4 the autofocus would have failed and I'd have got no shot at all! I don't know how well an R5/sony/nikon would have managed. 

As per usual with all pursuits it's about knowledge, learnt skills and the correct tool for the job, all of these are independent variables which a decent photographer will re-arrange or adapt to as needed.

Would I chose a M11 for autosport/football? No. Could I manage if I really had to? Yes but the output wouldn't be as good!

[Derbyshire Man]

10 hours ago, Altair said:

Just a quick update, in case someone else is thinking of jumping on the M train and is wondering how I am doing.

 

I actually progressed fairly quickly, once the initial adjustment going from a full auto focus mindset to full manual and a rangefinder is over, getting used to the rangefinder is actually easier than I thought it would be. I just came back from a London trip where I only had the M11 and 35 APO and had a great time, made some fantastic images ( this lens is surprisingly versatile by the way ) and perhaps most importantly, my hit rate with the 35 shot wide open at F2 was surprisingly high the whole time. I would say I did about 80% tack sharp. I am somewhat frustrated I can't choose what to focus on as early as I would on an EVF but again, the rangefinder concept demands a different mentality and rewards with fresh perspective and a genuinely new photography experience.

 

Overall, I am loving the M more and more, and hating it less and less with each passing day.

 

With that in mind, now feeling like I am a somewhat experienced rangefinder user, or at least used to the experience, I dropped by the Leica store and wanted to try the SL3 just for the sake of it. I loved allot about the camera and focusing was super easy and precise, but still preper my M11 for it's size, design, and build quality.

 

Would i still go for a hybrid camera that bridges the gap between the M and SL? Basically an M with an EVF and advanced focus assist?

I would have said absolutely last week, now I say most likely. I do see the charm of the rangefinder, and now that it's second nature I am starting to enjoy using it, but I would still trade that charm in for a greater success rate. Especially true with the Noct 0.95 ( not tested but assuming ) 

 

Bottom line, enjoying the M11 to bits, very exited to see what the M12 and Leica come up with next. I have a hunch some exciting cameras are coming in soon

I'm looking forward to you 3 month update, that was about how long I thought an EVF based M would be better! It's also probably 2 standard deviations of really getting the hang of the camera! There is a chance I'd buy a monochrome EVF version to see what it was like but it would have to be a damn sight better than the visoflex 2 to convince me and I think I'd be very unlikely to do so.

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb IkarusJohn:

One thing I would add is to think about placing your subject away from the centre of the image - this can be difficult with the rangefinder as the subject will move inside the plane of best focus as you rotate the camera.  You can deal with this by focusing on something else at the same plane, rocking your head slightly back to get the subject back into that plane, selecting a slightly higher aperture or using a Visoflex.

... and don't forget the strong inverse field curvature of the Noctilux which will reduce your chance to get a well focused eye outside the center with a RF even more.

vor 1 Stunde schrieb IkarusJohn:

I can bet good money that an EVF won’t be faster than the rangefinder, once you have the hang of it.

Are you sure - even after the advice for out-of-center-focusing you gave right before?

At least, the EVF will give you the chance to focus the Noctilux properly when the desired focus point shall be placed outside the center.

@Altair: By now you have seen a lot of positions (essentially two camps) and received many recommendations. The intersection of the positions probably lies in exploring for yourself what is possible with a Noctilux on the M and what is not. Now you are spoiled for choice as to whether and how your project can succeed.

By the way: For your Z9, there is also an autofokus adapter for M-mount available from Techart (TZM-02) but I have no experience on that and the Noctilux 50/0.95 ASPH is most likely outside the weight range supported by that adapter.

Edited December 12, 2024 by 3D-Kraft.com

[evikne]

2 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Case in point: My fifteen year old son got a used a6400 with a couple of used kit lenses and a 35 prime last year as a gift (he's getting a used 16mm 1.4 Sigma this Xmas, as the $59 kit zoom went bust in Hawaii). I went over few basics, told him that for the Sony menu YouTube is probably best, and gave him my spare copy of Lightroom to play with. He honestly hasn't used it that much, but recently showed some renewed interest. Yesterday he was taking snapshot of his new skis, but in landscape orientation. I was like, maybe better to get them all in if you turn it vertically. He admitted that he did not know you could do that, laughed, and thanked me. I left it at that. Guess I skipped a few true basics and went straight to the point, click, download, phase of things, with a bit of this lens is wide, this one long thrown in. But fifteen year olds don't want their Dad telling them anything (until they actually need them to).  

Once my 14-year-old daughter was going to take a picture of a beautiful landscape. But like most teenagers, she only uses her phone to take photos, and always in portrait mode. When she complained that she wasn't getting everything, I told her that she could hold her phone horizontally. She hadn't thought of that! 😄

Edited December 12, 2024 by evikne

[Altair]

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

That's sad, because for most of the "still lifes" I have shot in the past, this extreme shallow depth of field was neither required nor desired.

For me, the option for strong subject separation and blurring the (often not so attractive) background is desired when shooting people. That's why I spend a lot of money for Leica lenses (including their imperfections) but prefer using them on cameras with less limitations and more reliability.

Oh no doubt, the 0.95 would make for an unbelievable portrait lens, the shallow DoF does make for extremely attractive portraits especially street portraits where the background is usually busy and is replaced by an artistic blur that nothing does like the .95 Noctilux, but what's the use if its only theoretical and you miss most shots? With portraits the eyes have to be absolutely tack sharp or its a failed portrait in my opinion and that of most, and that's nearly impossible with the Noctilux on an M11, I don't know if anyone can actually use it in that way?

 

I use my 35 APO for street portraits and it does a great job and usable, the noct is big and heavy for that anyway.

I do also own a Z9 with the fantastic Plena lens which I use for portraits often and it's absolutely fantastic, and of course the X2D does a fine job with the 55V. I should get the 90V soon which will be my new default portrait lens on the go. Hence my frustration with the M11 limitation, in comparison to other choices, it produces theoreticaly great portraits but can't be used reliably, at least by me.

 

Another three months and we see where I land. I will keep the collective updated on my progress. I will say this challenge is enjoyable and a new depth in photography. Stuff I am bringing out is very different to my usual photography, not as perfect, far more magic. My wife prefers the Leica results 

[Altair]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One more pro for the M11.....

 

It just screams pick me up and go shooting! I have my silver M11P with the 35 APO on it right now and it's a sexy, professional, ergonomically sound machine that is a joy to hold and behold. Comoare that to my Z9 which is a chore, a big black plasticy thing that gets the job done perfectly with very little or no charm to it or its pictures. The X2D is somewhere in between, closer to the Leica but still no where as enjoyable to use and own. Leica will always have that about it, the charm, quality, and unique approach to photography, love that about regardless of the challenges.

 

I do have the Steel Rim reissue which I have not used at all.

[username]

2 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said:

I guess my point with the photo above is not so much about focus

Ah, ok - I got the impression it actually was about focus / AF, because you said 

And if the AF goes wrong for that one shot? Or you're too busy fiddling with focus points, EVF focus aids, etc etc and miss the shot? 

..and continued to elaborate that

in a split second grabbed the M9 that was laying at my side and pointed it upwards from floor/stage height. No time to adjust. 

And my point was just that a) your photo is great, b) today's AF is really really fast, seriously, and c) with a 18mm it doesn't matter anyway 🙂

 

Ps: that dreamy picture of the mountain you posted is lovely as well, I wish I lived in a neighbourhood like that!

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Altair:

Oh no doubt, the 0.95 would make for an unbelievable portrait lens, the shallow DoF does make for extremely attractive portraits especially street portraits where the background is usually busy and is replaced by an artistic blur that nothing does like the .95 Noctilux, but what's the use if its only theoretical and you miss most shots? With portraits the eyes have to be absolutely tack sharp or its a failed portrait in my opinion and that of most, and that's nearly impossible with the Noctilux on an M11, I don't know if anyone can actually use it in that way?

For street portraits, the 50mm will already be a bit too short in my opinion as even at 1.50 m distance you already have almost half of the body in the frame but it depends on, what you call a portrait.

For street portraits I usually choose 75 to 90 mm. If the scenery isn't too dynamic, you can use also the Noctilux 75 (of course at f/1.25 - that's what you pay for...):

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!

 

 

 

 

In this case, it was used on the Sony A7RII but on a M11 with Visoflex it also would have given similar results.

But to be honest: The yield with the Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN (also avialable for L-mount) was way better: https://flickr.com/photos/hhackbarth/albums/72177720314399436/

Edited December 13, 2024 by 3D-Kraft.com

[Altair]

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

For street portraits, the 50mm will already be a bit too short in my opinion as even at 1.50 m distance you already have almost half of the body in the frame but it depends on, what you call a portrait.

For street portraits I usually choose 75 to 90 mm. If the scenery isn't too dynamic, you can use also the Noctilux 75 (of course at f/1.25 - that's what you pay for...):

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!

 

 

 

 

In this case, it was used on the Sony A7RII but on a M11 with Visoflex it also would have given similar results.

But to be honest: The yield with the Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN (also avialable for L-mount) was way better: https://flickr.com/photos/hhackbarth/albums/72177720314399436/

Fantastic images! Are those with the 75 1.5?

 

Using a Sony body with Leica glass isn't for me, it would ruin the experience. I do have some excellent glass both for my Nikon and Hassleblad cameras, what I am after is the whole Leica experience though I do wish for some modern features.

I just reread some of the posts here, and it's evident some people are frustrated when I mentioned Leoca could do several improvements to the M or introduce a hybrid camera. I completely understand the mentality, some people are purists, they are passionate about the experience they are after and are very specific about heritage and purity. I respect that, and have seen similar mentalities in other hobbies, car enthusiasts who only want a Porsche with a manual transmission and no steering assist, watch enthusiasts who prefer mechanical movements over a smart watch. Cost and convenience are not to be considered.....completely understand and respect that.

But don't be offended if someone wants something else, we, I, am not proposing we take away what you love, but add to it an option that works for the rest of us.

 

An articulating screen would not change the experience, don't use it if it bothers you. The Nikon zF has a focus assist system that allows it to lock on with a green box on the eyes if using six bit encoded lenses. Also can be turned off. Would be awesome on the M11 with the 0.95 Noctilux! 

Alternatively an MQ with an EVF would also fit the bill.

 

I suppouse the introduction of a digital M also was controversial at the time. I know some people simply will only shoot with film

Edited December 13, 2024 by Altair

[Altair]

11 hours ago, jaapv said:

Really? I haven't had that problem for decades - on an M focussing is wholly instinctive in my case. Point the camera, focus is there by muscle memory, recompose and shoot. And yes, I automatically pull slightly back whilst recomposing...
AF costs far more mental energy - find the focus point, half-press, check with magnification, lock, check composition and then shoot if the moment is still there...

Interesting, good for you. Maybe with practice I will get there and be able to frame and shoot as effectively as I do on my other cameras.

 

To clarify, the way I shoot with a Hassleblad or Nikon...find a subject, position the camera where I want it to capture the frame and more importantly angle I want while monitoring through the angled screen, shoot using AF.

 

With an M11, find a subject, compromise on positioning the camera where I want as I don't want to contortionist myself ( I have back disk issues and also don't like to draw attention to myself by being in an odd position) and then take 3 or 4 images to try and nail focus. 

 

That's what I'm not crazy about, everything else about the Leica M experience is stellar ( again....image quality..unique artistic look....build quality...size...unique and enjoyable  focusing system etc) 

 

Here is a question for the collective: I have pointed out what I like and dislike about the M, what is it that attracts you to rangefinder focusing vs EVF specifically? I am very interested in hearing your thoughts as I would like to learn and start appreciating an element I might not be aware of. Is there any aspect on a rangefinder focusing that is superior? For instance with enough time and practice is it superior?

[otto.f]

On 12/12/2024 at 1:36 AM, pippy said:

focus on the eyes

The lips aren’t bad either

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb Altair:

Fantastic images! Are those with the 75 1.5?

No, as written with the 75/1.25 Noctilux.

vor 6 Stunden schrieb Altair:

Using a Sony body with Leica glass isn't for me, it would ruin the experience.

As I wrote: M11 + Visoflex allow similar experience. Or think about an M-mount adapter for your H2D or your Z9. Or carry on limiting the Noctilux experience to still lifes.

 

[pgk]

3 hours ago, Altair said:

Here is a question for the collective: I have pointed out what I like and dislike about the M, what is it that attracts you to rangefinder focusing vs EVF specifically? I am very interested in hearing your thoughts as I would like to learn and start appreciating an element I might not be aware of. Is there any aspect on a rangefinder focusing that is superior? For instance with enough time and practice is it superior?

I suggest that you start a new thread or you will get a muddle of thoughts on this and other areas covered in this thread. Its a valid question which has been covered but if you rephrased it to do with what advantages does the M have over other systems and why do these specifically attract its users, you might well get some interesting responses. But my immediate response is the rangefinder focus is superior with wide angle lenses because it is independent of the image they produce which can be difficult to assess using dSLR or EVF. So from 35mm and wider RF focus is quick, highly accurate and very precise.

Edited December 13, 2024 by pgk

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Altair:

Here is a question for the collective: I have pointed out what I like and dislike about the M, what is it that attracts you to rangefinder focusing vs EVF specifically? I am very interested in hearing your thoughts as I would like to learn and start appreciating an element I might not be aware of. Is there any aspect on a rangefinder focusing that is superior? For instance with enough time and practice is it superior?

In earlier times, the EVF (and also DSLRs) had a short blackout while the image was taken, whereas the RF continuously let's you see the scenery in front of your camera. Meanwhile (with electronic shutters and parallel processing) also EVF can be realized without blackout.

The other argument usually given for the RF is, that with longer focal lengths (where you have to use the inner frame lines as orientation), you still can recognize what's happening around your frame without taking away your eye from the VF.

That's why it works good for 35mm and 50mm lenses with not too shallow DoF and that's why Summicron-like 35mm lenses are most popular in the M-world (for me, one of the most boring focal lengths).

The rest (i.e. the disadvantages) have already been discussed extensively here.

Edited December 13, 2024 by 3D-Kraft.com

[evikne]

3 hours ago, Altair said:

Here is a question for the collective: I have pointed out what I like and dislike about the M, what is it that attracts you to rangefinder focusing vs EVF specifically? I am very interested in hearing your thoughts as I would like to learn and start appreciating an element I might not be aware of. Is there any aspect on a rangefinder focusing that is superior? For instance with enough time and practice is it superior?

Simplicity. The focusing method is always the same: Pick up the focus in the center of the viewfinder, recompose and click! There's no way the camera can get it wrong, even if the subject is behind or between something. It's just as easy whatever the situation. If you can focus on something with your eyes, so can the camera.

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!

[fotografr]

In my early days with a pair of M3 ds bodies and three lenses, I was having a very difficult time when trying to focus quickly on moving subjects. Someone who had much more M experience gave me a tip that proved invaluable. He told me to always keep my lens set to infinity so that when I had to react quickly I would always be turning the focus ring the same direction, as opposed to starting from some unknown point and working the focus ring back and forth until the images aligned. It's one of the best pieces of advice I ever got about using the M effectively.

I apologize if someone has already mentioned this in the thread. I don't want to read through 14 pages of comments to find out.

[anonymoose]

11 hours ago, Altair said:

Here is a question for the collective: I have pointed out what I like and dislike about the M, what is it that attracts you to rangefinder focusing vs EVF specifically?

As a former DSLR shooter and current Sony mirrorless + Leica RF shooter:

1. I'm seeing the actual scene vs. a digital recreation of the scene. I feel more present as a result, which is important when I'm photographing my daughter, wife, family, etc.. I equate it to being in a meeting room with someone vs. being on a Zoom call with them. The other day I captured a photo of my daughter crawling for the first time and I saw the scene as it played out instead of feeling like I was watching a video of it.

2. Consistent focusing experience. With EVF there's variability in how I focus every time I take a picture (AF, spot focus, DMF, MF, etc.) depending on the scene whereas with the RF I go through the same process every time: center patch on what I want in-focus, focus, recompose, take picture. These repetitions allow me to develop muscle memory and create a consistent, enjoyable experience. I never feel like I'm fighting the camera to get what I want in focus. I also don't miss having to digitally zoom in on the EVF, move the focus window, use focus peaking to find focus, tap the shutter button to zoom back out, compose the scene, then take the picture. I have a Visoflex2 for low angle shots of my daughter and low-light and it immediately reminds me of what I don't like about the EVF experience.

3. RF being in the top left and me being right eye dominant allows me to hold the RF window to my right eye and leave my left eye open. My brain has figured out how to "switch" between eyes, so I can actually see a lot more of the scene with my left eye, then quickly switch to my right eye (with both still open) to compose and capture the moment.

I'll add two areas where the RF experience falls short for me: low-light (hard to see if I'm focused correctly) and capturing low f-stop in-focus shots of subjects moving in and out of focal plane (e.g. my daughter). Maybe I'll get better at the latter, but the Sony snaps onto any moving subject's eye and does not let go allowing me to take a picture at f1.4 with the eye perfectly in focus.

Edit: one thing I've noticed is that I more or less don't use the EVF on my Sony unless it's bright out and it's hard to see the rear display. I'd rather use the rear LCD to do everything while having the ability to look up from the camera and see the scene.

Edited December 13, 2024 by anonymoose

[Max EPR]

On 12/1/2024 at 6:04 AM, JoshuaRothman said:

@Altair, I get it, for sure. But your fountain pen analogy is wrong, I think. It's more like a car with a manual transmission. Sometimes people buy the car with the manual transmission and they say, "I wish this were just a little more automatic." But it doesn't work that way. A stick shift is a stick shift. It's supposed to be challenging and fun.

Just keep practicing. Or buy an SL camera, which gives you the M lens experience but in a different way. Many people own SL and M cameras side by side and use the SL for circumstances where the M isn't as strong.

 

The M11 is my favorite camera.....I learned a lot about cameras from the M. I love the size and the shooting techniques. That said, I get a higher percentage of "keeper" photos with the SL. I used the SL3 recently for a concert in a dark room (with SL APO lenses) and was very happy. I used the M11 with the viewfinder on several vacations and got enough "keepers", but not as many as the SL. The M made me a better SL photographer. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Velo-city]

2 hours ago, anonymoose said:

As a former DSLR shooter and current Sony mirrorless + Leica RF shooter:

Could I ask what Sony you use? I’ve been looking to go the other way maybe to the a7cr but never used Sony, so be interesting to hear from an M user.