Leica photographers - the naked truth

[Don_ih]

I have demonstrated that one can post literally anything on this site and it devolves into the same sad, bickering scenarios

I like bickering, actually. It's more fun than just saying, "Uh, yeah!"

 

[BobD]

What do you mean it won't fire in dim light? ... If that's the case, then the camera is broken..

D'ya think?

 

[Huss]

D'ya think?

Well then I think you overpaid.

 

[BobD]

Well then I think you overpaid.

Even totally non-functional ones sell for substantially more than I paid. And, only the flash on mine is broken so the camera is still usable in daylight.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Good photographs are independent of equipment.

Give any of the "Greats in Photography" a pinhole camera and they would have produced great photographs.

What's that old saying..."The most important piece of gear is six inches behind the viewfinder".

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I have two Leica cameras, an M3 and a Z2X. In the last 8 years or so i've used the Z2X for one more roll than the M3, which would mean I shot one roll with it. Lol. Nice lens on that little thing too I have to say. Won't replace my Contax TVS but it is close. I am curious who made the Z2X. Minolta?

 

[NB23]

There's nothing like a ....Hasselblad!

Except a Rolleiflex. Hassy’s Daddy.

 

[NB23]

I guess everyone really would be fine with one of these:
View attachment 278538

Finally! Hcb’s camera.

 

[Radost]

I have a Leica AF-C1, and it actually is a very nice camera, just doesnt feel like a Leica.. Most probably because it is a Minolta that has been rebadged.
What do you mean it won't fire in dim light? The flash, or the camera itself i.e the shutter won't fire. If that's the case, then the camera is broken..

This camera actually makes me want to buy the Minolta version, and sell this one.

You are saying "minolta" like it is bad thing.
I actually like Minolta's rangefinder CLE a lot more than any leica. Smaller. Better designed. Electronic aperture. Gorgeous big, wide and bright viewfinder "arguably the best 28mm viewfinder"
And my XD11 is the only old SLR I still shoot.

I have no interest in leica cameras "as long as my 3 CLE bodies dont all die".

But trying out and purchasing the 28mm F2.8 Aspherical made me a believer in their ability to make an astonishing lens.

 

[NB23]

People with the best and most expensive cameras soon find out that owning a Stradivarius doesn't make one a concert violinist.

I’m not a violinist. But if I could own a stradivarius, I would.
And I would sleep with it. No, no sex. I’d sleep with it like I used to sleep with my teddybear as a kid.

I’m not a pianist. But if I could afford a Steinway, I would. I’d use it as counter on which I’d lay a few prints, my Leica and Rolleiflex of the day, and a few contact sheets with an expensive loupe.
There would also be a whiskey bottle on the steinway.

The velvety life.

I’d be such a total imposter. Steinway in the hallway, Stradivarius in my bed, a Leica on the Steinway. A loser, validated by expensive objects. Happiness.

 

[Radost]

People with the best and most expensive cameras soon find out that owning a Stradivarius doesn't make one a concert violinist.

I am not very good in bed and sleeping with a sexy top model will not make me great in bed... I sure will enjoy the hell of it. So it does not matter.

 

[BrianShaw]

Practice makes better. A lot more practice can make perfect.

 

[markjwyatt]

Practice makes better. A lot more practice can make perfect.

Did you mean Prakticas make better. A lot more Prakticas make perfect?

 

[benjiboy]

I am not very good in bed and sleeping with a sexy top model will not make me great in bed... I sure will enjoy the hell of it. So it does not matter.

If my wife told me I'm not very good in bed, I would ask her how she knows .

 

[Huss]

You are saying "minolta" like it is bad thing.
I actually like Minolta's rangefinder CLE a lot more than any leica. Smaller. Better designed. Electronic aperture. Gorgeous big, wide and bright viewfinder "arguably the best 28mm viewfinder"
And my XD11 is the only old SLR I still shoot.

I have no interest in leica cameras "as long as my 3 CLE bodies dont all die".

But trying out and purchasing the 28mm F2.8 Aspherical made me a believer in their ability to make an astonishing lens.

Not at all. I'm saying I like the AF-C1 so much that I'd get the identical Minolta version, and sell this one off and pocket the $$.

As far as the CLE? Disagree 100%. I had two of them, both in perfect shape. And they both failed - electronics of course. One I managed to get fixed by finding a tech that was willing to take it apart and clean every connector/connection. Time and oxidation gets to these things. That one I sold off the moment it came back, as I did not want to deal with that again. The other failed in the same way several months after the new owner was using it.
Better design? It is very nicely sized, but that small size means a smaller RF base length which results in less accurate RF focusing. Which only matters with big lenses and wide open, which this camera is not about.
The 28mm VF is delightful, only bettered by the .58 offering in some Leicas for 28mm.
Unfortunate implementation of the manual mode, where the meter turns off. Then again, it now just acts like a meterless Leica!

The small size does limit what lenses you can put on it. Anything fatter than the design brief (compact 28, 40 and 90mm lenses) blocks one of the rf windows rendering focus impossible!

 

[Radost]

Not at all. I'm saying I like the AF-C1 so much that I'd get the identical Minolta version, and sell this one off and pocket the $$.

As far as the CLE? Disagree 100%. I had two of them, both in perfect shape. And they both failed - electronics of course. One I managed to get fixed by finding a tech that was willing to take it apart and clean every connector/connection. Time and oxidation gets to these things. That one I sold off the moment it came back, as I did not want to deal with that again. The other failed in the same way several months after the new owner was using it.
Better design? It is very nicely sized, but that small size means a smaller RF base length which results in less accurate RF focusing. Which only matters with big lenses and wide open, which this camera is not about.
The 28mm VF is delightful, only bettered by the .58 offering in some Leicas for 28mm.
Unfortunate implementation of the manual mode, where the meter turns off. Then again, it now just acts like a meterless Leica!

The small size does limit what lenses you can put on it. Anything fatter than the design brief (compact 28, 40 and 90mm lenses) blocks one of the rf windows rendering focus impossible!

You are the first person I hear has electronics fail on a CLE.
Well that is why I have 3.
Also I can print some circuit boards if there are no more CLE on the market.
Focusing is great even with the 90mm.Rangefinder spread is good. The leica CL has smaller patch. But i nail focus with small voightlander range finder adapters and my folders. So who knows.
And the design: Yea.... Minolta destroys the leica. Much more sleeker. So much better in the hand. So much smaller it has lived in my pocket.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Finally! Hcb’s camera.

Except my father used a Mamiya C330 which I traded in for the Hasselblad when they prices were at an all time low in 2007.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I’m not a violinist. But if I could own a stradivarius, I would.
And I would sleep with it. No, no sex. I’d sleep with it like I used to sleep with my teddybear as a kid.

I’m not a pianist. But if I could afford a Steinway, I would. I’d use it as counter on which I’d lay a few prints, my Leica and Rolleiflex of the day, and a few contact sheets with an expensive loupe.
There would also be a whiskey bottle on the steinway.

The velvety life.

I’d be such a total imposter. Steinway in the hallway, Stradivarius in my bed, a Leica on the Steinway. A loser, validated by expensive objects. Happiness.

I could afford the Hasselblad when I started buy the system in 2007 and never looked back. I am not an imposter, I use the Hasselblads.

 

[Radost]

Not at all. I'm saying I like the AF-C1 so much that I'd get the identical Minolta version, and sell this one off and pocket the $$.

As far as the CLE? Disagree 100%. I had two of them, both in perfect shape. And they both failed - electronics of course. One I managed to get fixed by finding a tech that was willing to take it apart and clean every connector/connection. Time and oxidation gets to these things. That one I sold off the moment it came back, as I did not want to deal with that again. The other failed in the same way several months after the new owner was using it.
Better design? It is very nicely sized, but that small size means a smaller RF base length which results in less accurate RF focusing. Which only matters with big lenses and wide open, which this camera is not about.
The 28mm VF is delightful, only bettered by the .58 offering in some Leicas for 28mm.
Unfortunate implementation of the manual mode, where the meter turns off. Then again, it now just acts like a meterless Leica!

The small size does limit what lenses you can put on it. Anything fatter than the design brief (compact 28, 40 and 90mm lenses) blocks one of the rf windows rendering focus impossible!

DId you by anychance use a flash with the CLEs that died?

 

[Huss]

DId you by anychance use a flash with the CLEs that died?

No.

 

[Radost]

No.

You have extremally bad luck to have to boards die on you. do you still have the cameras? Are they for sale? I will buy them.

 

[removed account4]

Digital printing of film photography looks great.
Not as good as dark room enlargements but pretty close.

they look just as good, there is really no difference at all, its only people who insist there are differences that will claim there are. and its usually for boosting one's ego and putting other people down because that's the internet...

Photobooks are not optical printed

very true ! and most photographs when brought to the lab, most any lab, are not optically printed either.
there are a tiny amount of optically printing lab around, not many, and some people I guess pay a premium to get things printed there
( or at least suggest they do ). .. and you are dead on, most photo books are not photogravure or optically or tipped in image printed unless they are some sort of high end
book or artist book. some of us make hand made books, but most people can't afford them or do not appreciate them.
people might claim different, but they probably do not know or do not care what the reality of the situation is...
btw blurb prints some really nice stuff these days

It was just argument that film photos can be enjoyed many ways not just optical prints.

complete agreement !
I guess it is something most of us know and the population that doesn't know ( or claims they don't ) doesn't care

 

[Huss]

You have extremally bad luck to have to boards die on you. do you still have the cameras? Are they for sale? I will buy them.

Sold them a long time ago.

FYI the board did not die on the one I had repaired. All the oxidation in the camera had to be cleaned up. The second one was sold so I never found out what the new owner decided to do.

Why did you bring up failing boards? Is that something a CLE owner should be aware of?

 

[removed account4]

There is a saying that a bad workman always blames his tools. But if you have the best tools, there is only yourself to blame.

the great syndrome predicted this years ago ... everyone is well, you know. ...

 

[lobitar]

Good photographs are independent of equipment.

Give any of the "Greats in Photography" a pinhole camera and they would have produced great photographs.

What's that old saying..."The most important piece of gear is six inches behind the viewfinder".

Sorry, but I have to disagree. Camera and photographer works in symbiosis and sort of makes up one entity. Remember, they are both living entities? No offence intended for sure - only MHO.