Collectors Should Be Shot (or at least, they should learn to shoot)

[Roger Hicks]

But at the same time, the tools shouldn't be "bargained", either. Throwing out what's still fully functional and usable based on the market agenda is like half a step to committing suicide and so harmful to the environment. That is a real disgrace to what we call "civilization."

We completely agree. The only thing I'd add is that an equal disgrace is building complete rubbish so it will break in a half or a tenth of the time one might think reasonable. Umberto Eco wrote that if you want to buy a good knife, buy it in Africa, because if you buy it in America it will break the second time you use it.

Cameras like the Nikkormat (I have two) are the 'African knives': a well made product at a fair price. M-series Leicas are, in that sense, Samurai swords, folded and re-folded from an incredibly worked steel. They are several times more expensive than the 'African knives' but these are in turn twice the price of the stamped steel that breaks. Too many people take the stamped steel, not the Africvan knife/Nikkormat, as the basic unit of currency.

As I said before: quality doesn't cost: it pays.

Cheers,

R.

 

[firecracker]

Cameras like the Nikkormat (I have two) are the 'African knives': a well made product at a fair price. M-series Leicas are, in that sense, Samurai swords, folded and re-folded from an incredibly worked steel. They are several times more expensive than the 'African knives' but these are in turn twice the price of the stamped steel that breaks. Too many people take the stamped steel, not the Africvan knife/Nikkormat, as the basic unit of currency.

Exactly!

I have and use both types: "Samural swords" (Leica M3, Canon New F1, Contax T3) and "Afirican Knives" (Nikon FM, Retinette 1a, Mamiya Press Universal). But now too many people are throwing out and giving away the "Afircan Knives" for nothing and I'm collecting them back so they can be used again.

I think what's really new and pretending to be the "Samurai swords" today are just as good as "Ginsu Knives" from some late-night TV ads programs a while back. It's a "You-can-make-10-easy-payments-of-29.99$" type of cheesy stuff.

But one more question: How come Nikon Fs' prices are coming down now, but not any of the Leicas except for the earlier R series models? In your views, which "knife" group do they belong to?

 

[Uncle Bill]

I inherited my M3 from my dad's estate, I found a regional clique of photographers who actually use the cameras for what they intended for and are a decent group of people.

Those in the pre loved Leica trade, well that is a different story , picture a cranky middle aged version of the comic book guy from the Simpsons at the camera shows, I can do without thank you.

There are other options in the M mount rangefinder market namely Voightlander and Zeiss Ikon. If I wound up with a pile of cash, I don't know what I'll get as a second body, a M6 would be nice but....

Bill

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I'm quickly warming to the idea of an M2 body with M6 framelines. I saw one selling on Ebay a while back and remember thinking how useful that would be.

I could just get an M6, too, but I figure that a user M2 + trip to Solms for framelines would still be cheaper than buying an M6.

 

[reub2000]

Further, it was brought up that Leicas only synch flash at 1/50 second. True. I've never used a flash with my Leicas. Since I bought them both used and they both came with the little plastic plug in the PC sockets and unscarred hot shoes, I must assume the previous owners didn't use flash either. In my opinion, putting a flash (or a motor drive) on a Leica rangefinder is like putting deep-tread mudgrip tires on a sports car. They might fit but they really detract from the machine's strong points.

I wouldn't really use a flash with such a camera, however one can snag a rangefinder with a 1/500 X-Sync much cheaper on ebay.

And why does one need a Leica to produce images? Are kids really deprived of the ability to make great photographs because a Leica camera is outside of their price range?

 

[Stephanie Brim]

It's not that people need a Leica to produce great images...that is simply not the case. There have been tons of great photos made by cameras other than Leicas. It's that some people want to use Leicas to produce their great images. That is perfectly okay. I'm still pondering my first, but I'm sure that by the end of next year I'll be pondering a second.

Leica's reputation for outstanding optics and incredibly put together cameras makes people want them more and more regardless of the price.

And, for the record, some of the people who have told me that they could never afford a Leica generally have one thing I won't have to worry about for a long time: a digital SLR.

 

[Lachlan Young]

It's not that people need a Leica to produce great images...that is simply not the case. There have been tons of great photos made by cameras other than Leicas. It's that some people want to use Leicas to produce their great images. That is perfectly okay. I'm still pondering my first, but I'm sure that by the end of next year I'll be pondering a second.

Leica's reputation for outstanding optics and incredibly put together cameras makes people want them more and more regardless of the price.

And, for the record, some of the people who have told me that they could never afford a Leica generally have one thing I won't have to worry about for a long time: a digital SLR.

The Canon P and its ilk are as good as Leicas anyway - how else would Canon have made its name?

Lachlan

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I have a Canon P...I can tell you that I love it. It's not a Leica, though. I don't want one or the other, I want both. I won't be giving up one to have the other. I won't stop using one because I have the other. The Canon P gives me access to all the screwmount glass I want, but not the m-mount glass. The real reason I want an m-mount camera is so that I can use the 50/2 Summicron and the 35/1.2 Nokton. I don't *need* to go Leica for this, but I want to. It's my choice. I want the quietness of the Leica compared to the Voigtlander bodies. I want a used camera with something of a history. I want a camera without a meter and with a mechanical shutter. I want something that feels right in my hands and that I'm not going to be afraid to abuse. This is why I like the Canon P as much as I do, and that's why I want a Leica to accompany it.

I pay more for the quality I get and I expect the things I buy to stand up to me. So far the Canon P hasn't let me down. I highly doubt a Leica would either.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I have a Canon P...I can tell you that I love it. It's not a Leica, though. I don't want one or the other, I want both. I won't be giving up one to have the other. I won't stop using one because I have the other. The Canon P gives me access to all the screwmount glass I want, but not the m-mount glass. The real reason I want an m-mount camera is so that I can use the 50/2 Summicron and the 35/1.2 Nokton. I don't *need* to go Leica for this, but I want to. It's my choice. I want the quietness of the Leica compared to the Voigtlander bodies. I want a used camera with something of a history. I want a camera without a meter and with a mechanical shutter. I want something that feels right in my hands and that I'm not going to be afraid to abuse. This is why I like the Canon P as much as I do, and that's why I want a Leica to accompany it.

I pay more for the quality I get and I expect the things I buy to stand up to me. So far the Canon P hasn't let me down. I highly doubt a Leica would either.

In that case try an M2 or an M3 BUT don't play with the RF & framelines as Leitz cheapened the design in the mid 70s & only recently went back to the old finder design with the MP. For the price of a secondhand M2 & a secondhand M3 though you could have a new Zeiss Ikon...

Lachlan

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Actually, M2s and M3s are going down. Someone was selling a nice one on Ebay for $600 BIN and I've seen others in user condition go as such. Also, if I did send it to Solms for a new set of framlines, it would be the MP/M7 choices I would have, methinks. I would just go for an M6-like set. It covers all the focal lengths I could possibly want to shoot.

And about the Zeiss Ikon...I want a mechanical shutter. You missed that part. The Zeiss Ikon has an electric one, which means that when batteries go out so does my camera. I have had horrible luck with electric shutters going out at the worst times in the past in other cameras, so I've vowed not to use them.

 

[Dan Fromm]

<snip>
And about the Zeiss Ikon...I want a mechanical shutter. You missed that part. The Zeiss Ikon has an electric one, which means that when batteries go out so does my camera. I have had horrible luck with electric shutters going out at the worst times in the past in other cameras, so I've vowed not to use them.

You must have been using junk cameras or Leicas. I made this dismissive comment because I shared your views on electricity and cameras until I married a woman who had (still has) a Nikon ELW. Since then I've had an EL and an EM and an FG and, most recently, an N8008S, all battery dependent.

In addition, after I married I took up Super 8 and have owned a number of S8 cameras. Mainly Bauer, Beaulieu, and Canon. All electric drive, the Beaulieus' lenses with power zoom. All autoexposure, the Beaulieus and some of the Canons with manual override. Of the ones that passed acceptance testing, only one has let me down in the field. That was a 4008ZM whose exposure system failed. Otherwise the camera still functioned; if I'd been smart enough to have measured how many stops its 8-64/1.9 Angenieux ate I could have used one of the Nikons to meter and kept on shooting.

Leica Camera and predecessor firms have had great difficulty learning how to use electricity. I once had an 8/8 Leicina; its drive system was a lovely example of how not to do it.

I don't know whether you have problems with statistical inference or had a bad or too small sample, but I think refusing to own cameras with electrically-timed shutters can't be justified on the basis of the likelihood of failure. Yes, I always carry a spare battery. Or several.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Stephanie,

I'd second the advice NOT to have new frames fitted -- too damn' expensive -- but I am completely with you on the batteries. This is however one of those points where the Battery Taliban will tell you that you are a Bad Person and deserve to lose your pictures if you do not always carry spare batteries with you at all times.

I'm also completely with you about 'something that feels right in my hands'.

Cheers,

R.

 

[jovo]

Perhaps the collectors of a few 'brands' like Leica relieve the pressure on other equally good (for actual picture making) machines so that real photographers can afford them. Collectors of string instruments have driven their prices sky high. Those they collect run a gamut of national origins and relative antiquity. The prices for the finest old Italian, Cremonese instruments run into the millions. But...modern instruments, which have done amazingly well in blind listening tests, are affordable by professional players for whom they are work tools, albeit often gorgeous ones. Collectors generally leave them alone. Players don't.

 

[snegron]

Exactly!

I have and use both types: "Samural swords" (Leica M3, Canon New F1, Contax T3) and "Afirican Knives" (Nikon FM, Retinette 1a, Mamiya Press Universal). But now too many people are throwing out and giving away the "Afircan Knives" for nothing and I'm collecting them back so they can be used again.

I think what's really new and pretending to be the "Samurai swords" today are just as good as "Ginsu Knives" from some late-night TV ads programs a while back. It's a "You-can-make-10-easy-payments-of-29.99$" type of cheesy stuff.

But one more question: How come Nikon Fs' prices are coming down now, but not any of the Leicas except for the earlier R series models? In your views, which "knife" group do they belong to?

I agree with most of what you said except for the part about Nikon F prices going down. I have actually seen an increase in price over the past year, at least from reliable camera dealers (not ebay flukes or scams). For the past year I wanted to add an F to my collection (maybe even a fully functional metering FTN), but I waited month after month for prices to drop. Instead, I saw an increase in price and decrease in mint F availability. Luckily I was able to pick up a near mint F2A.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The Canon P and its ilk are as good as Leicas anyway - how else would Canon have made its name?

Lachlan

Then why are Leica still selling Leica RFs but Canon can't make a profit on Canon RF?

I've owned both and didn't have much difficulty in deciding which to keep.

Plus, of course, the M-mount.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Then why are Leica still selling Leica RFs but Canon can't make a profit on Canon RF?

I've owned both and didn't have much difficulty in deciding which to keep.

Plus, of course, the M-mount.

Cheers,

R.

Ah well, there was something called the Nikon F... the rest is history...

The F killed the Nikon SP/2/3 series of RFs too - probably the finest cameras they ever made - I don't like Nikon SLRs but I would love to use a Nikon S2 with 50mm f1.4 lens, but it is way, way out of my price range.

Ah well, better stick with the Pacemaker Speed Graphic...

Lachlan

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Lachlan,

Manufacturers seldom discontinue profitable lines. If Canons really were as good as Leicas, they'd still be selling.

Canon made neither the M-series nor the Nikon F. At the risk of starting a flame war I'd say that in the late 50s/early 60s Canon made second-best (or maybe third-best) RFs and reflexes.

Certes, I'd rather have an M-series than any RF Nikon ever made (and I have tried them). What is more, the lens mount of the Contax/Nikon/Kiev (yes, I know there are differences) is extremely limiting. The M-mount (and direct focusing) is a lot more versatile.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Dear Lachlan,

Manufacturers seldom discontinue profitable lines. If Canons really were as good as Leicas, they'd still be selling.

Canon made neither the M-series nor the Nikon F. At the risk of starting a flame war I'd say that in the late 50s/early 60s Canon made second-best (or maybe third-best) RFs and reflexes.

Certes, I'd rather have an M-series than any RF Nikon ever made (and I have tried them). What is more, the lens mount of the Contax/Nikon/Kiev (yes, I know there are differences) is extremely limiting. The M-mount (and direct focusing) is a lot more versatile.

Cheers,

R.

So... if a 60s Leica RF is first in terms of build quality, a 60s Nikon RF 2nd, and a 60s Canon RF 3rd, would you rate Leicas from the M4-2 onwards fourth? Doesn't make it a bad camera though! We're not talking about Lomos!

Lachlan

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Dear Stephanie,

I'd second the advice NOT to have new frames fitted -- too damn' expensive -- but I am completely with you on the batteries. This is however one of those points where the Battery Taliban will tell you that you are a Bad Person and deserve to lose your pictures if you do not always carry spare batteries with you at all times.

I'm also completely with you about 'something that feels right in my hands'.

Cheers,

R.

I won't need the other framelines right away and I may never need them, but I wanted to get an idea of how much it would cost if I did. I asked on RFF and found out and it isn't actually that bad. I mean, it is, but it's a number that I was expecting and not overly outrageous.

About the batteries. It's not just the running out of batteries, it's missing the shot when you realize they've gone out on you. I don't want to ever be cursing my camera because I've lost a shot when batteries go belly up on me at the wrong time.

 

[Claire Senft]

I bought one of the last brand new Nikon SP cameras available in the US..I am unsure but it was about 65/66 I believe. The Nikon SP had a light weight body and a very relable titanium shutter as well as a nice selection of framelines 28 in a LH window, then 35,50,85,105,135 frames as well as rangefinder in the other. The Nikon lenses, that I owned, 35,50,85,135, when used at moderate apertures were capable performers. I know I have read in Modern Photography, and Popular Photography that these lenses were better Contax and Leica lenses. sold at the same time..what a load of crap.

Even at that though the Nikon SP with the Voigtlander lenses would be very nice to use today.

 

[copake_ham]

I bought one of the last brand new Nikon SP cameras available in the US..I am unsure but it was about 65/66 I believe. The Nikon SP had a light weight body and a very relable titanium shutter as well as a nice selection of framelines 28 in a LH window, then 35,50,85,105,135 frames as well as rangefinder in the other. The Nikon lenses, that I owned, 35,50,85,135, when used at moderate apertures were capable performers. I know I have read in Modern Photography, and Popular Photography that these lenses were better Contax and Leica lenses. sold at the same time..what a load of crap.

Even at that though the Nikon SP with the Voigtlander lenses would be very nice to use today.

I now own both a S2 and SP (acquired used of course).

Nikon grafted a SLR view finder on an "adapted" SP body to create the F. The folklore I've heard is that at the time Nikon thought the F would be a "novely item" (particularly given how it was a top-heavy "adaptation" piece of gear) and was already working on an "uber-S" replacement RF code named the "SX".

This apochryphal SX was a super-charge SP that included, amongst other "creature features" a TTL-meter.

It took Cosina only 35 more years to create this camera - the R2S (I have two of them) so I can use my RF Nikkor lenses on a "modern" body. As nice as the R2S's are - they aren't "Nikon RF quality"....

 

[Roger Hicks]

I won't need the other framelines right away and I may never need them, but I wanted to get an idea of how much it would cost if I did. I asked on RFF and found out and it isn't actually that bad. I mean, it is, but it's a number that I was expecting and not overly outrageous.

About the batteries. It's not just the running out of batteries, it's missing the shot when you realize they've gone out on you. I don't want to ever be cursing my camera because I've lost a shot when batteries go belly up on me at the wrong time.

I like the description of the cost.

Your point about the batteries is the one that the Battery Taliban seem to miss. There have been plenty of times in my life when even a 2-minute delay in digging out new batteries and fitting them would have been too much, e.g. sunrise on the roof of the temple in Dharamsala at the Tibetan New Year.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear George,

The Bessas are arguably the opposite of Nikon Fs, namely, reflex cameras with the mirror box taken out.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Helen B]

Leitz and then Leica kept 35 mm rangefinders alive.

If that happened because of the collectors, then I'm grateful to them. When I bought my first Leica, there were no realistic alternative rangefinder models for professional use: if you wanted a rangefinder instead of an SLR, then a Leica was the only choice. The BS that surrounds Leicas does not attract me to them, but it is very easy to ignore. Or make fun of.

Best,
Helen

PS The answer to the battery problem is to change them before they die, or before an important job.

 

[John Koehrer]

I could just get an M6, too, but I figure that a user M2 + trip to Solms for framelines would still be cheaper than buying an M6.

You might be very surprised what the cost of changing the RF is