I HAVE a Leica!

[RalphLambrecht]

I play the piano Dan but the same thing applies if you own a Ferrari it doesn't make you a racing driver, great instruments only are great in the hands of accomplished practitioners.

I'm not a big Leica fan either but I'd argue that a great tool gets you on the road of success much faster.I always was suspicious of people who said:'it's not the camera ;it's the photographer'or 'a good photographer can make great images with any camera'Why is it then that all the people saying this own expensive cameras?I find it much easier to make good images with good cameras.

 

[Alan Gales]

I'm not a big Leica fan either but I'd argue that a great tool gets you on the road of success much faster.I always was suspicious of people who said:'it's not the camera ;it's the photographer'or 'a good photographer can make great images with any camera'Why is it then that all the people saying this own expensive cameras?I find it much easier to make good images with good cameras.

Yeah, but a bad photographer makes bad images with expensive cameras too.

It's more the photographer than the camera but good photographers realize that good cameras get out of their way and let them concentrate on the image. Good cameras tend to be expensive but not always.

My daughter use to pitch fast pitch softball at the Select level. I helped manage a team for 3 years. Most girls used $300.00 bats and of course some were not the best hitters. I've told parents that girls would be better off with $50.00 bats and some quality hitting lessons. Sure, the $300.00 bats were great and you could hit the ball a long way but the more you put the ball in play the better off you are. I'll take singles over strike outs any day!

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I play the piano Dan but the same thing applies if you own a Ferrari it doesn't make you a racing driver, great instruments only are great in the hands of accomplished practitioners.

If you are an enthusiast and know how to drive well, as opposed to being a commuter, you can make use of appreciate the Ferrari and its handling and performance. You don't need to be a racing driver to get more enjoyment out of a Ferrari than a Toyota.

Using a rangefinder camera involves a different style of photography; some people enjoy that a lot.

 

[Ai Print]

And by the way, Leitz Wetzlar, in the past, was an actual professional camera manufacturer, with widespread use among the pros. Now, they are just a niche player catering for the collectors, and rich amateurs (amateur in the sense of "person has a love of photography and thus cultivates it"). Canon and Nikon, on the other hand, were and still are professional camera manufacturers. They still manufacture pro cameras and pro lenses, which are still selling pretty well. The low-end is another business altogether.

Fascinating....I guess.

Couple of points of retort, you can easily swap one of your statements around to read ( professional in the sense of "person has a love of photography and thus cultivates it and gets paid damn good for it").

The other thing, I used to also be annoyed by the whole snobby Leica thing, then I tried a pair out for a special project. Bam! Now I see why my friends who shoot for Magnum, the NYT and other pros use them. When a slightly curved scalpel of unparalleled sharpness is in the master surgeon's hands, the result is beyond the judgement of the layman.

I use an M3, M6 and M240 in Leica and only have three lenses, a 28, 35 and 50. Say what you will but this is a simply brilliant system with photography being brought to bear in it's simplest path.

And to the OP, yes, once you give an M a proper try, Barnacks will make a make an exit for the door.

 

[flavio81]

Fascinating....I guess.

Couple of points of retort, you can easily swap one of your statements around to read ( professional in the sense of "person has a love of photography and thus cultivates it and gets paid damn good for it").

The other thing, I used to also be annoyed by the whole snobby Leica thing, then I tried a pair out for a special project. Bam! Now I see why my friends who shoot for Magnum, the NYT and other pros use them. When a slightly curved scalpel of unparalleled sharpness is in the master surgeon's hands, the result is beyond the judgement of the layman.

I use an M3, M6 and M240 in Leica and only have three lenses, a 28, 35 and 50. Say what you will but this is a simply brilliant system with photography being brought to bear in it's simplest path.

And to the OP, yes, once you give an M a proper try, Barnacks will make a make an exit for the door.

To each his/her own, if I was a rangefinder guy perhaps i'll love the Ms, but i'm a SLR/TLR guy. On the other hand, prime Canon and Nikon lenses already are able to use the full definition of good films like Tmax 100 or Delta 100, so no need for any improvement in optics.

Again, to each his/her own. If you are happy with the M system and 28/35/50 then great. In fact great, because you have not been seduced by the G.A.S. (Gear Acquisition Syndrome).

Me, my "simply brilliant system" is the Mamiya RB67 with the 50, 90, 127, and 180 lenses. And that's indeed a scalpel of unparalleled sharpness!

 

[cuthbert]

Leicas don't have any magical powers and as long as you bear in mind owning a Stradivarius makes one a Stradivarius owner, not a concert violinist.

Flawless logic.

Unfortunately a lot of people buy a Leica because they are convinced it has some kind of magical power (the infamous "Leica Glow") that will make all the pictures appear "different" and "better".

A proper comparison would perhaps be to compare a (very expensive) Gibson Les Paul Supreme ($5300) model to a Parker Fly guitar ($3500). The former is more "prestigious" than the other but the latter is as good as a guitar, or maybe even better, having much more modern material and technology. But in both cases, the quality of the sound will be limited by the player, not by the guitar.

As a guitarist I must say you lost any credibility comparing a Les Paul (by the way...the Supreme? WTF! I would have expected something like a Custom Shop Reissue R0, or a Custom R7 but...a Supreme?) with an horrid insectoid exoskeleton like the Parker!

Hit a high end tube Class A amp with the Paul and then plug the Parker and you will be ready to vomit in about 30 seconds.
The current Gibsons, Fenders are inferior when compared to the ones made up until the 1960 but still carry some of the original tonal charm and quality.
Same for PRS, after 1990 they race to the bottom.

You don't need to plug a Parker in my Vox AC30 to understand it's a crappy guitar, however I disagree with your statement regarding the "magic" of Gibsons and Fender produced until 1960.

First usually that date is used for Gibson because it was the year they discontinued the Les Paul (due to poor sales) and replaced with the "Les Paul SG" (today known only as SG), I played 1960 les Pauls and 1961 SGs and there is no difference in quality, the pickups are also the same (they were changed later in the mid 60s).

Usually the Fender "golden era" is considered over in 1965 when Fender sold to CBS but this also another date created artificially as the guitars from 1965 to 1970 besides the large head are like the late CBS. In 1971 they introduced the micro-tilt and the downfall started not because of that device (that was a Leo Fender idea) but because CBS boosted the production until in 1979 they made 400 Fenders per day.

The guitars produced in small quantity by Fender and Gibson from the late 80s to the late 90s are IMO as good as the old ones, then Gibson decided to cut the production costs and Fender...well they invented a factory within a factory that is the Custom Shop.

Sorry, guitar rant over.

 

[4season]

Have you noticed this about the Barnack Leicas: They actually produce larger-than-standard-35mm-sized images, clear out to the sprocket holes in fact. And frame spacing is tight too, as if they wanted to push the medium as far as it would go, a real hotrod! The M cameras don't do that.

 

[cuthbert]

Fascinating....I guess.

Couple of points of retort, you can easily swap one of your statements around to read ( professional in the sense of "person has a love of photography and thus cultivates it and gets paid damn good for it").

The other thing, I used to also be annoyed by the whole snobby Leica thing, then I tried a pair out for a special project. Bam! Now I see why my friends who shoot for Magnum, the NYT and other pros use them. When a slightly curved scalpel of unparalleled sharpness is in the master surgeon's hands, the result is beyond the judgement of the layman.

I use an M3, M6 and M240 in Leica and only have three lenses, a 28, 35 and 50. Say what you will but this is a simply brilliant system with photography being brought to bear in it's simplest path.

And to the OP, yes, once you give an M a proper try, Barnacks will make a make an exit for the door.

,

I have a IIIb, a M3, a M4-P and a M5, I challenge you to recognise which picture here has been taken with the M4-P and which one with the F-1N:

I can also post other images taken with Nikons and Pentax.

 

[Ai Print]

Unfortunately a lot of people buy a Leica because they are convinced it has some kind of magical power (the infamous "Leica Glow") that will make all the pictures appear "different" and "better".

They think that for a reason, Leica does have remarkable attributes that in the right hands, has helped make amazing images the best they can possibly be. What you are saying, great gear in the hands of the rank and file enthusiast, that can be said of most any camera.

Leica is legendary and there is no changing that. I can't understand why this is even up for debate unless all one does is look at Flickr all day.

 

[cuthbert]

They think that for a reason, Leica does have remarkable attributes that in the right hands, has helped make amazing images the best they can possibly be. What you are saying, great gear in the hands of the rank and file enthusiast, that can be said of most any camera.

Leica is legendary and there is no changing that. I can't understand why this is even up for debate unless all one does is look at Flickr all day.

You didn't answer to my challenge yet, I see.

However, I have more Leicas than you and more lenses as well, so I think I've more experience with that brand...and their owners that not often but sometimes can be annoying.

The smart ones tough always make appreciative comments on my Pentax LX, the two Nikon F2s I have and respect the F-1s old and new.

 

[Pioneer]

,

I have a IIIb, a M3, a M4-P and a M5, I challenge you to recognise which picture here has been taken with the M4-P and which one with the F-1N:

I can also post other images taken with Nikons and Pentax.

Porsche Speedster = F-1N

 

[flavio81]

Flawless logic.

Unfortunately a lot of people buy a Leica because they are convinced it has some kind of magical power (the infamous "Leica Glow") that will make all the pictures appear "different" and "better".

+1
Well said.

As a guitarist I must say you lost any credibility comparing a Les Paul (by the way...the Supreme? WTF! I would have expected something like a Custom Shop Reissue R0, or a Custom R7 but...a Supreme?) with an horrid insectoid exoskeleton like the Parker!

Then I made a good choice by switching to drums... LOL

 

[flavio81]

Leica is legendary and there is no changing that.

So is Nikon. (Nikon SP, Nikon F, exotic lenses)
So is Canon (50/0.95 lens, F-1, fluorite lenses)
So is Pentax (Spotmatic, 6x7 system, auto 110, LX)
...

As John Lennon said in "Instant Karma":
"What the hell do you think you are? A superstar? Well, alright you are! Well we all shine on..."

 

[cuthbert]

So is Nikon. (Nikon SP, Nikon F, exotic lenses)
So is Canon (50/0.95 lens, F-1, fluorite lenses)
So is Pentax (Spotmatic, 6x7 system, auto 110, LX)
...

As John Lennon said in "Instant Karma":
"What the hell do you think you are? A superstar? Well, alright you are! Well we all shine on..."

I think some people (especially SOME Leica customers) are still convinced that the camera makes the photographer and not the other way around, besides that for many Leica is not just a camera but a sort of status symbol, I'm not a great fan or Rockwell but this article makes me laugh because there's a hint of truth in his words:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/leica-man.htm

Said that I like my Leicas, especially the M5, the last "serious" camera they made to compete against the Nikon F and Canon F-1 in the 70s, then it became a retro' thing IMO. Some lenses are great (Summicron DR), some are Ok (Elmarit 90mm), some of them are mediocre (Summaron 35mm f2.8, my Soviet Jupiter 12 is a better lens in this focal length, but I can't say that because the Leica men get mental).

 

[trythis]

The gun looks like canon FD glass to me, no idea why I think that but it just looks like it.


Typos made on a tiny phone...

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Porsche Speedster = F-1N

Hmmm... I don't think so. The Speedster was a lightweight, simple car with a potent 4-cam engine. The New F-1 is large, heavy, and reasonably complex in what it could do (e.g. its metering and modes).

That's not to take away from the merits that each of those devices deserve.

I think Leica is the Speedster and the Canon New F-1 is a 928

Seriously though, is there any Leica snobbery among real people? All of this "Leica glow" and "Leica feel" crap is what I've seen only in magazines or read on internet forums. I don't know any Leica owners who act or feel superior or snobbish. I have two M3's and two M6's and no one ever sees or notices them when I'm out hiking or with a group. I don't care and nobody cares. I think it's a fabricated issue. I know some cultures might treat them as decorative jewelry and Leica does itself no favors with its silly commemoratives and rebadging, but that's the exception.

... and I'm sure I can't tell the difference between a photo taken with one of my Leicas and my old Pentax SP500.

 

[ColColt]

Leicas don't have any magical powers and as long as you bear in mind owning a Stradivarius makes one a Stradivarius owner, not a concert violinist.

I like this, well said. I had an M2 with two Summicron lens back in the late 80's to mid 90's. Superb little camera and what can I say about the optics? Simply superb. I'd love an M4 or M6 today but not at the prices I'm seeing.

 

[benjiboy]

I like this, well said. I had an M2 with two Summicron lens back in the late 80's to mid 90's. Superb little camera and what can I say about the optics? Simply superb. I'd love an M4 or M6 today but not at the prices I'm seeing.

I have nothing against Leica cameras, indeed I know they are first class instruments, but I don't fool myself (as many novices do) that owning one would solve all my photographic inadequacies.

 

[benjiboy]

Have you ever used one?

Clive I worked at leading U.K professional dealers who were Leica Professional stockists for around twenty three years, and have used and sold more Leica cameras, lenses, and binoculars than you've had hot dinners.

 

[flavio81]

Clive I worked at leading U.K professional dealers who were Leica Professional stockists for around twenty three years, and have used and sold more Leica cameras, lenses, and binoculars than you've had hot dinners.

I loved that response!

 

[flavio81]

Hmmm... I don't think so. The Speedster was a lightweight, simple car with a potent 4-cam engine. The New F-1 is large, heavy, and reasonably complex in what it could do (e.g. its metering and modes).

Not larger than a Nikon F2 (another really great camera), not heavier than it, and as for complexity, i'd say it's not complex. Switching between manual and aperture-priority modes, and knowing in which mode you are, is highly intuitive, since the whole display changes between modes. How to set aperture-priority? Easy, set the shutter speed to "A" (automatic). How to set shutter-priority mode? Easy, set the aperture to "A" (automatic). Of course, for the latter you need to attach the motor or winder, and for knowing this you need to read the manual. As for the metering, again, if you have not read the manual you won't know what metering mode you are in, since it depends from the focusing screen.

In fact, besides the switchable metering patterns and the special need for motor for shutter-priority AE, everything is really simple. Removing and re-attaching the viewfinders or screens, for example, is simpler than in the F2. Changing shutter speed and aperture is the same as in all cameras that follow the Spotmatic ergonomics. The stop-down lever is also very intuitive to use. Battery change surely is easy, unlike (say) a Nikkormat EL.

Now, i have been playing games, since the real competitor of the F-1N is the Nikon F3, which indeed is a smaller and lighter camera. And as easy to operate.

 

[Alan Gales]

I think some people (especially SOME Leica customers) are still convinced that the camera makes the photographer and not the other way around, besides that for many Leica is not just a camera but a sort of status symbol,

The Leica snobs? Yeah, I haven't run into too many of those. My friends working in the camera stores did though. Back in the day there used to be a lot of Nikon snobs too. They usually shot an FM or FE and thought they were it. A friend of mine who is in his 60's still to this day refuses to own a Nikon. He owns an early Leica though.

One thing most of the snobs had in common, their photography usually was mediocre at best.

 

[darinwc]

A Leica can be an outstanding camera or a completely useless camera; it depends on how/what you photograph. There's probably nothing wrong with you.

"Probably" being a keyword here.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Not larger than a Nikon F2 (another really great camera), not heavier than it, and as for complexity, i'd say it's not complex.

I didn't mean complex from a user's perspective - I meant that, compared to an all-manual M3, or even M6, the technology inside the New F-1 is more complex.

The Canon New F-1 is not larger than a Nikon F2? With AE finder? I did not know that. Where is Les Sarile now that we need him?

 

[Xmas]

Leicas don't have any magical powers and as long as you bear in mind owning a Stradivarius makes one a Stradivarius owner, not a concert violinist.

I'm reminded or Mitori Gto (age-14 and diminutive) at Tangle wood snapping E string on her 15/16 instrument continuing on concert masters full size, and snapping its E string, continuing on 2nd violins full size.

Don't think hers was a Strad... But still a bad E string day.