I have gone mental

[Gerald C Koch]

The proper alignment of the optical system of an SLR is visual where in a Rangefinder the alignment is on good faith of the manufacturer or the last technician who worked on it.

Not true. There are several things that can make the visual image in an SLR be different from what is delivered to the focal plane different. A misaligned mirror or view screen can cause problems.

As a reply to several posts may I say that it is a pointless exercise to try to say which is better a RF or an SLR. One is comparing apples and oranges. Each system has it's good points and bad ones.

 

[Tom1956]

I'm the one who chimed in about Leica being pointless. At the same time I know full well that the Germans really do make the best of the best. They make some junky stuff too, but all in all, when they make the best, it IS the best. As for me, I just don't see paying Leica prices. Being a poor man, there's a point of diminishing returns, and Leica prices have passed that point for me. If I won the lottery, which I don't even buy tickets for, I'd probably find me a mint M4 original. Right after I found a gorgeous 30 year old blond to marry.

 

[Lowly]

You certainly have your priorities right Tom. Although gorgeous blondes tend to take you for all you're worth, so maybe you should buy the M4 and hide it somewhere first...

 

[gone]

I used to have an old Leica M3 double stroke. I cannot imagine a more reliable and solid camera to save my life. It felt like one solid block of metal in your hands, and the film advance on the double stroke crank was just wonderful. The fact that it took Leica M and m39 lenses (w/ an adapter) was icing on the cake. But I prefer using a SLR because there's just something about seeing the image come into view in the viewfinder, and shoot Nikon SLR's now. Works out fine. I get to use Leica glass on them too if I wish, w/ an adapter. So why don't I have a Leica M3 anymore? Pure economics. All of my photography gear put together, including a fine old medium format Rolleicord, cost less than one Leica M3 body w/o a lens.

Canon and other makers made fine handling and reliable SLR's too, but I wouldn't compare any Japanese camera, even the Nikons, to the build point of a German Leica M. The fit and finish are not similar, and the fact that their old, cloth shuttered cameras still work like new when given a CLA speaks to their quality and superb design. I mean, these are OLD cameras.

I think the person who dies w/ nothing "wins". You cannot take it w/ you.

 

[Lowly]

Reading this thread everyone's experiences are different and that's what will form their opinion. I like to use both rangefinder and SLRs, but in my experience Nikon SLRs are very reliable whereas the legendary reliability and sturdiness of Leicas have been overstated.

I have an M3 and used it for years, then dropped a camera bag with it inside from about 1m. Mirror separated and viewfinder went black. I was then going to use it for wide-angles with an auxilliary viewfinder, but the shutter then jammed.
I have had an M2 shutter jam. Luckily disassembling the shutter release collar seemed to fix the problem and everything now works fine.
I have a Leicaflex Standard that had a shutter break (I think a string broke holding the shutter curtain).

3 x Nikon F4, Nikon F3, F90X and FM2n - no problems whatsover (and I am much less gentle with the Nikons).

Just an addendum to my post. In my frustration at getting my M3 working after a year, I banged it on the workbench a couple of times on the top and bottom. Suddenly the shutter release worked and I could cock the shutter. So it's true, you can use Leicas as a hammer - in fact you need to if you want them to work

 

[sangetsu]

I have owned half a dozen Leica M film cameras, all of which have been used, not fondled. Every single one has required service of some type. Two required shutter curtain replacments, all have required rangefinder adjustments, some have needed the shutter speeds tuned up.

My old Nikon F and SP cameras have seen far heavier use than my Leicas, my oldest SP was a newspaper camera, and has seen thousands of rolls of film, the anodizing was worn off the pressure plate. It has worked for 50 years without repair or adjustment. My oldest F has been used nearly as much. The slow speeds are a bit off on the F, but it has never required repair or adjustment.

I love Leicas, which is one of the reasons I continue using them, but the old Nikons are mechanically far superior.

 

[CropDusterMan]

There is no redeeming quality to a Leica whatsoever. Nikon is all you need, Leica is an absurdly expensive toy.

Come again? My cameras aren't toys. Good luck on the thirty year old though, that's something I agree with. lol.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The man that dies owning the most toys wins.

I am taking mine with me.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Old thread, but I still don't need Nikon, even for free. It is better build, lenses are way less expensive, yet, good, but I don't need Nikon. Or any other SLR. I don't need even Nikon RF .
My Leica M4-2 is at service after three years of daily use for street, reportage, portraits and travel photography. Now I'm using M3 DS instead (sixty years old), which is also will benefit from service and some worn out parts replaced.

Most recent print (one week ago) from negative taken with M3 earlier this month.




If someone is needed the unbreakable tank, Nikon it is. But do you drive tank on the speedway? No, it is special cars. And they need service often. By the time Nikon guy would just focus his lens, I'll be done and gone with my Leica.

 

[Arklatexian]

The Nikon dosen't say "STEAL ME" in 17 languages.

At the camera store where I worked in the dim past, we had a Nikon salesman call on us. He had personalized auto license plates which only had the word NIKON on them. His insurance company made him replace those plates. The reason? They said he was advertising to thieves that he had Nikon cameras (his samples) in his car. So, the moral is: "if it is there (and you advertise that fact), they (the thieves) will come"......Regards!

 

[Arklatexian]

I'm the one who chimed in about Leica being pointless. At the same time I know full well that the Germans really do make the best of the best. They make some junky stuff too, but all in all, when they make the best, it IS the best. As for me, I just don't see paying Leica prices. Being a poor man, there's a point of diminishing returns, and Leica prices have passed that point for me. If I won the lottery, which I don't even buy tickets for, I'd probably find me a mint M4 original. Right after I found a gorgeous 30 year old blond to marry.

I too am waiting to win the lottery, meanwhile I have and sometimes use my two "M" Leicas which I bought used many years ago and both of which not only can take better photographs than I am a photographer, but have increased in value (price). If I had been really smart, I would have bought all the used "M"s that I could as an investment. Now, I am 86. What is all this about a 30 year old blond? I would prefer to stay with the brunette that I married over 50 years ago and who still puts up with me......Regards!

 

[Chan Tran]

For some reason I have it in my mind that my ol' Nikon SLR's are more sturdy and rugged than my rangefinders (M3 and R3M). And that the VF's are more prone to misalignment even though I have NEVER had this happen. Please bring me back to reality so I can get back to my RF's.:alien:

I think you answer it yourself. The Leica is more fragile but it's very nice. You just need to be gentle with them besides they are your toys so don't play rough.

 

[wastelanded]

In over thirty years I have never had a Leica rangefinder adjusted, in professional and plenty of amateur use. I did always buy second hand examples that were accurate, and new cameras never needed it. They have bumped together, clattered into Nikon F's, and they just carried on working. It isn't impossible that I will need one adjusting in the future, on the basis that if it can happen it will happen, but it is a problem created in peoples minds more than in reality. And usually it is a problem created by internet forum's especially with newcomers. They are already nervous and learning a new camera, and the first advice they always seem to get is 'send you camera for a CLA' or 'set up a test chart' even before they get the hang of the rangefinder. Expectations are driven to fever pitch by comments like 'I can hand hold my Leica at 1/8 second', and 'l zone focus', or 'I always use my lens wide open'. No wonder there are so many out of focus and blurry images that worry the newcomer, but these concerns are transferred to the general ambit of Leica photography as yet more myth and things to worry about.

So if you have a Leica M use it, you may not be able to bounce it down the road like a Nikon F, but if that is the only good thing to recommend a camera you've got a more serious question to answer

Steve

Can this be pinned somewhere at the top?

 

[jgoody]

Not sure what all the fuss is about -- I have a two SLRs -- seem pretty reliable. Have two Canon RFs (a 7 and a P) -- if I am paranoid about the RF adjustment I focus at a fairly near distance that the lens has a marking for and check distance with a tape, then check infinity. So far no issues with RF on either one. So both cameras (or really all 4) seem pretty darn reliable. I had an OM1n that developed some shutter issue that was deemed "unrepairable" - after 30 or 40 years of use. So I bought another body (and a spare). Wish there was something else that reliable!

 

[Steve Smith]

it was my only camera

I can just about remember owning only one camera!


Steve.

 

[michr]

The Nikon dosen't say "STEAL ME" in 17 languages.

I wouldn't be too sure of that. I think Nikon and Canon have higher name recognition among non-photographers. But given the prices I see in thrift stores on those counterfeit "Cannon" fakes which look like SLRs, maybe non-users have a hard time distinguishing one camera from another. I wonder if people intending to steal wouldn't just grab anything that looked like an expensive camera and worry about the details later.

 

[Arklatexian]

I wouldn't be too sure of that. I think Nikon and Canon have higher name recognition among non-photographers. But given the prices I see in thrift stores on those counterfeit "Cannon" fakes which look like SLRs, maybe non-users have a hard time distinguishing one camera from another. I wonder if people intending to steal wouldn't just grab anything that looked like an expensive camera and worry about the details later.

+1