Leica IF, madness, or?

NorwayPhoto · Mar 8, 2016

Hi all.

After using a M2 with a 3.5/50 Elmar, happy with it, I am looking more and more to the older Leicas.

Yes, I know the I series was not intended to be used like the rest of the line, but there is something about them that makes me smile.

But, smiling is one thing......Am I dreaming?
Yes, I know I will need an external VF and an external RF, yes it will slow me down, look goofy and so. But, hey, looking goofy is ok with me.
I think a I series with a external VF and an external RF looks rather cool.

My use?
Well, they are compact, so I had in mind, a 35mm or even a 28 a vf, then I have a small, pocket camera, for whatever come up, maybe not the best set up for a hikking, backpack, fishing trip camera. It will be small, so I have plans on brining it with us, like a odd family camera.

But, what do you all say?

Anyone who use it like I am thinking?
Maybe a longer lense to, but then I will need a RF for sure.

Ko.Fe. · Mar 8, 2016

35 will be waste without RF. Even 28 at close distances is more effective with RF. IMO, If with RF and VF isn't really compact, and not so usable for hiking, fishing trip. But camera is sexy. So, skip 28 - tele range and just get one UWA. Like Russar or what is 21mm Leica made. Less expensive alternative is Cosina Voigtlander lenses. 21 and 25.
And get ready for half of the M2 price for single VF, if you want compact and good one.

darkosaric · Mar 8, 2016

Why not regular LTM with 50mm Elmar? They are cheaper, with view/range finder and equally pocketable. Right now there is one in classifieds for 200$ - really good price.

02Pilot · Mar 8, 2016

I would (and do) happily use screwmount Leicas with external finders, never looking at the RF, for street photography and some general use. If you're reasonably good at estimating distances, 35mm and wider lenses will be fine most of the time. An RF gives more flexibility, but at that point you might as well just get a body with the RF built in. If it were me, once I determined whether or not I expected to use anything wider than 35, I'd make my decision; a I-series with a 28mm and VF would be a very easy camera to carry around for general use.

Aleksej6 · Mar 8, 2016

NorwayPhoto said:
Hi all.

After using a M2 with a 3.5/50 Elmar, happy with it, I am looking more and more to the older Leicas.

Yes, I know the I series was not intended to be used like the rest of the line, but there is something about them that makes me smile.

But, smiling is one thing......Am I dreaming?
Yes, I know I will need an external VF and an external RF, yes it will slow me down, look goofy and so. But, hey, looking goofy is ok with me.
I think a I series with a external VF and an external RF looks rather cool.

My use?
Well, they are compact, so I had in mind, a 35mm or even a 28 a vf, then I have a small, pocket camera, for whatever come up, maybe not the best set up for a hikking, backpack, fishing trip camera. It will be small, so I have plans on brining it with us, like a odd family camera.

But, what do you all say?

Anyone who use it like I am thinking?
Maybe a longer lense to, but then I will need a RF for sure.

I think there so much 35mm cameras that are more economic with only galileian viewfinder, and with good optical quality like Ilford Sportsman serie, which I use.

John Koehrer · Mar 8, 2016

Focus by guess and by golly works OK and didn't Voightlander make a mini finder?

NorwayPhoto · Mar 8, 2016

Thanks for the replys all.
Ok, so a 35 without a rf is hard, maybe as sad here I need to look at a shorter one, lower than 28 also.
02 pilot, what lense are you using?
Well, maybe a 28 or 35 with a rf is an overall better set up.

blockend · Mar 9, 2016

Bear in mind many of Henri Cartier-Bresson's early pictures were taken on a viewfinder Leica and a 50mm lens, plus 100 ASA film. Numerous scale focus cameras were sold from the 1920s to 1980s which are regular cameras with set focus points, you could achieve the same with Tippex on a 50mm or 35mm lens. I regularly us a Voigtlander Bessa L (no finder) with a Kontur (projected image finder) on the hotshoe, and missing focus isn't an issue with a 50mm lens.

If speed of capture is a priority, a pre-focused lens will beat any rangefinder, SLR or autofocus camera.

darkosaric · Mar 9, 2016

blockend said:
missing focus isn't an issue with a 50mm lens.

This is true even more if you have f3,5 lens, or you use the lens on f5,6-f11. As long as you are not shooting at f2 and at close range - you will be fine. I use Leica M1 with elmar-M 5cm/f3,5 - no problem at all.

02Pilot · Mar 9, 2016

NorwayPhoto said:
02 pilot, what lense are you using?

I shoot in the street with everything from 50mm down to 28mm (and rarely 21mm), essentially never using the RF. Zone focusing at 3m/10ft and at least f/5.6 gives me the DOF I need to quickly shoot virtually anything I come across in that type of photography.

The reason I suggested 35mm or wider is that in your intended use you may want a bit more control; wider lenses offer you a bigger buffer if you get the focus wrong. If you're good at distance estimation, there's no reason you can't use a 50mm as well. To give the greatest flexibility, I'd say get a camera with an RF built in, but if you want a simpler experience, a I-series with a 35mm or a 28mm would be easy to use in most situations. (If you want something even smaller, the Rollei 35 offers a smaller and cheaper alternative with a collapsible 40mm lens and excellent quality).

blockend · Mar 9, 2016

It depends to some extent what kind of photograph you're looking for. If you want front to back sharpness in all circumstance, you'll need a 28mm or wider at f8 or higher, and a highish shutter speed. For most people this will mean fast film, probably pushed and you will need to get in very close, 1 metre or so if you don't want your subject to look like toys. That isn't the only kind of "street" photo. Last year I shot a pre-focused 50mm at f2.8 or f4 for most of the summer, but was aware of the sweet spot for action coming into my "zone".

Whatever you choose, if it moves you'll probably have missed it if you need to focus, so a rangefinder is never more than an assist to pre-focusing.

Ko.Fe. · Mar 9, 2016

Yes, 3m/10ft is safe distance for scale focusing with 50 3.5.
Question is if OP is going to stay at this distance. Sure, hiking and fishing often calls for AA kind of shots. If OP is going to limit him self with scienery it will be fine without RF with 50/35.
But it is very boring limit.
You could get much more interesting pictures with UWA lens starting from 28 and wider with closer distance, but wider view. And at 1m/3ft DoF is shallow even with UWA lens.

NorwayPhoto · Mar 10, 2016

Thanks all for helping me.
Well, what kind of photos I am seeking.
First, if I do need a RF, I got my M2.
What I like is a small camera, fast shots. Nature, wild life, scenery and also photo of the kids in the same situations.
Able to take a photo now.
That was when I idea of the I serie did come in mind, just the VF and take it from there.

But, for my use, will a 28 or 35mm lense be ok?

Thanks for looking.

cliveh · Mar 10, 2016

Have a look at the Leica IIIF.

frank · Mar 10, 2016

The heart wants what the heart wants. If there is no financial hardship, go for it. You can resell it if it doesn't scratch the itch.

02Pilot · Mar 10, 2016

NorwayPhoto said:
Thanks all for helping me.
Well, what kind of photos I am seeking.
First, if I do need a RF, I got my M2.
What I like is a small camera, fast shots. Nature, wild life, scenery and also photo of the kids in the same situations.
Able to take a photo now.
That was when I idea of the I serie did come in mind, just the VF and take it from there.

But, for my use, will a 28 or 35mm lense be ok?

Thanks for looking.

I think either would be fine. Personally I'd probably choose the 35, but largely because I have more experience with it. The Elmar 35 3.5 is really tiny, as is the Canon 28/3.5 - either would make for a very compact package.

Arklatexian · Mar 10, 2016

NorwayPhoto said:
Hi all.

After using a M2 with a 3.5/50 Elmar, happy with it, I am looking more and more to the older Leicas.

Yes, I know the I series was not intended to be used like the rest of the line, but there is something about them that makes me smile.

But, smiling is one thing......Am I dreaming?
Yes, I know I will need an external VF and an external RF, yes it will slow me down, look goofy and so. But, hey, looking goofy is ok with me.
I think a I series with a external VF and an external RF looks rather cool.

My use?
Well, they are compact, so I had in mind, a 35mm or even a 28 a vf, then I have a small, pocket camera, for whatever come up, maybe not the best set up for a hikking, backpack, fishing trip camera. It will be small, so I have plans on brining it with us, like a odd family camera.

But, what do you all say?

Anyone who use it like I am thinking?
Maybe a longer lense to, but then I will need a RF for sure.

I question your choice of an 1f Leica. Do you already own one? If not, and you are "dreaming" about buying one for the reasons you list. I suggest, before you dream too much, that you find what the current price of an 1f is? Some of those cameras miight be quite expensive with a 111f or 11f much less. I don't know this to be the case but I would find out before buying. Why would you need a RF for a longer lens? You can zone focus those just like you can shorter focal lengths......Regards!

NorwayPhoto · Mar 11, 2016

Why the I series? Yes, huh, good question.
I know a IIIF will be the same money or lower, be more modern/user friendly than a I series.....But, I do not know, there is something about the I series that makes me smile.
No RF, no VF, just a light tight box with a lense.....Then, add a VF and maybe a RF, if needed, and the hole thing looks super cool. To me.
That is why I am looking/maybe dreaming more, about a I series.

Use? As talked about in the post.

Thanks all.

Arklatexian · Mar 12, 2016

NorwayPhoto said:
Why the I series? Yes, huh, good question.
I know a IIIF will be the same money or lower, be more modern/user friendly than a I series.....But, I do not know, there is something about the I series that makes me smile.
No RF, no VF, just a light tight box with a lense.....Then, add a VF and maybe a RF, if needed, and the hole thing looks super cool. To me.
That is why I am looking/maybe dreaming more, about a I series.

Use? As talked about in the post.

Thanks all.

If you are looking at a 1f camera (flash sync. either red dial or black dial), they were made at the same time as the other sync. Leicas (either red dial or black dial). Screw-mount Leicas (again symc.) were sold, from cheapest to most expensive: 1f, 11f, 111f. Your M2 was part fo the same idea. M1, M2, M3. Most of the 1f and M1 that I have seen were used on Visoflex reflex attachments with either Telyt 200mm or Telyt 400mm lenses or bellows fitted with the lens-heads of 90mm, 135mm for close-up work......Regards!

blockend · Mar 12, 2016

If it's the simplicity rather than the antiquity that appeals, the Voigtlander Bessa L may be a good choice.

Ko.Fe. · Mar 12, 2016

I have tried L and T. Very convenient. But not Leica. You know, Leica feel and simplicity. Well... And quality...

blockend · Mar 12, 2016

Ko.Fe. said:
I have tried L and T. Very convenient. But not Leica. You know, Leica feel and simplicity. Well... And quality...

The advice was aimed at the OP. I also have a Leica, but sometimes the Bessa is the better tool for the job.

Ko.Fe. · Mar 12, 2016

blockend said:
I also have a Leica, but sometimes the Bessa is the better tool for the job.

Yep, it is less regrettable to drop it from fishing boat. In terms of OP, if you are so concerned.
L is dirt cheap these days. Well, even next to unused T, nobody wanted it here for sale under half price of I-series Leica.

blockend · Mar 12, 2016

Ko.Fe. said:
Yep, it is less regrettable to drop it from fishing boat. In terms of OP, if you are so concerned.
L is dirt cheap these days. Well, even next to unused T, nobody wanted it here for sale under half price of I-series Leica.

Bessa L is 1/4 the price, is lighter, has an external light meter, accurate shutter speeds, metal bladed shutter, much easier loading, and weighs the same as a compact camera. It doesn't say Leica on the top of course, but is simpler to take photographs with. It depends what the OP's interests are, collecting or photography.

Ko.Fe. · Mar 12, 2016

Exactly. If you are theoretical or random film shooter. But in regular use my R lost film plate, because it is on very thin plastic pins. My L shutter started to jam. And T has VF braket loose at second roll. And then ... No local service, no spare parts.
I have my M4-2 repaired in local camera store after I dropped it.
Where is the reason why Bessas are cheap. And it isn't because it is not Leica by name, but aviability of service or no service.

Leica IF, madness, or?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency